In his essay Nature, Ralph Waldo Emerson describes how humans have lost contact with nature and the importance of reconnecting with it in order to better understand themselves. Throughout the piece, he draws on transcendentalist ideology to prove his point, emphasizing the divine aspects of nature that “few adult persons” can see. Furthermore, he stresses the failure of science to identify a “theory of nature” and says that past attempts to do so have only resulted in further division and hatred amongst the human population. The crux of his argument is the idea that by immersing himself in nature, he is able to transcend  “mean egotism”, shedding societal values, preconceived notions, desires, identity, gender, race, nationality, and class in order to become one with nature. He takes the form of a “transparent eye-ball” and is able to see and understand all without being seen. He is above racial, religious, and other man-made distinctions.

Whereas Emerson is empowered by sight when he becomes a “transparent eye-ball”, many African American writers from this period and afterward seem to be burdened by sight — both in the ways that they are seen by other (especially white) people and in the ways they have started to view themselves as a result. They are seen as “object[s]” (Fanon, 257), as savages (Fanon, 261), as intellectually inferior (DuBois), or as pitiable (Hurston). Many of them describe the weight of having to exist on two or three different planes, of existing both as their true selves and as a black person in a racist society. Despite differences in the ways they describe and think about this issue, discrimination does contribute to the sense that they are being held back from reaching their fullest potential. In Fanon’s words “I am a master and I am advised to adopt the humility of the cripple (265), or, as Hurston sarcastically puts it, “It is thrilling to think–to know that for any act of mine, I shall get twice as much praise or twice as much blame. It is quite exciting to hold the center of the national stage, with the spectators not knowing whether to laugh or to weep.” (Hurston) Moreover, they are hurt by the internalization of these messages by themselves and by other black people. Fanon describes being rejected by other black people as they make efforts to assimilate or even become white, not wanting their efforts to be tainted by him. Even Hurston, who claims to “have no separate feeling about being an American citizen and colored” admits to feeling the effects of discrimination and of being seen as a race before being seen as an individual.

For these authors, empowerment then is found not in seeing, but in learning to unsee themselves in the narrative that has been forced upon them as black Americans. For DuBois and Fanon, that means discussing the limitations that have been systematically placed on black people and actively working to counteract them. For Hurston, it means shedding race entirely and refusing what she perceives to be sympathy over the slavery that her ancestors endured. However, for all of them, it means persevering, being successful, and proving racist Americans wrong through their success.

Emerson’s ability to become a “translucent eyeball”, despite his insistence that doing so extinguishes such distinctions as “master [and] servant”, is an ability largely and unwittingly based in his own privilege. It’s not that these types of experiences are inherently exclusive, but that it is easier for Emerson to shed his identity and ignore the tensions surrounding race relations in the United States as a person who is not only exempt from racial discrimination but benefits from it. Whereas Emerson and Hurston (in different ways) seem ready to move past the issue of race in the United States, for many people, such as Fanon and Dubois, examining race is key to achieving the type of understanding that Emerson seems to be seeking.