I think one of the biggest mistakes people make with Walden is getting hung up on the simplicity angle. I know I did. I came into the book fully expecting Thoreau to be Mr. Independent, Mr. Anti-Social. When people realize that he's not, they get upset. He doesn't reject the world, he takes a step outside. He backs away from society, but does not abandon it wholly. I could understand a reader's disillusionment if Thoreau spent the book pretending to be self-sufficient or alone when he wasn't, but that's not the case. When he hires help to plow his field, he mentions it; when he buys a bag of rice, he doesn't hide it from anyone. In fact, he tells you how much he paid for everything. As for his solitude, there is no doubt he loves it, but, as with the railroad, he cannot ignore his company. He has visitors, talks with fishermen and farmers, and even takes the occasional trip into town (which was only a mile or so away). Just like with nature, I am sure Thoreau would take solitude over company any day, but he does sometimes talk with other people, and so he writes about that too.

Just as you wouldn't want to judge a novel by who kills who in Chapter 3, so I think it's important not to judge Walden by single sentiments. I'm finding the book to be infinitely more complicated than I expected. Not in a comprehension sense, mind you. It is actually pretty easy to get into, read and enjoy. What I mean is that it will not be pigeon-holed. I don't think it's fair to view it solely as a nature book or some sort of counter-culture manual. Thoreau was interested in more than either of those things. He was interested in life. He went to the woods to live deliberately, not primitively, not in perfect solitude, but deliberately. When a writer gives you such a clear declaration of intention, it's worth taking him at his word, at least for a while.