I'd only read quotes by Emerson and wondered what surrounded those quotes. It turns out they were surrounded by still more quotes. Like Elmore Leonard who has said he leaves out of his books the parts people skim over, Emerson leaves out the parts that can't stand alone as quotes. I can't imagine what it must be like to write like this. What did his first draft look like?

Reading it, however, was like eating an entire chocolate cake. It's delicious but there's something sickening about it. You think you want more but in the background you're nauseated. You've had too much and it starts to taste peculiar in an undefinable way. You understand the meaning of the phrase "too much of a good thing." But it doesn't stop there. Not even for a brief rest.

And then sometimes you're completely lost. What does it mean? It seems to mean something but maybe you just don't get it. There are contradictions but the opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth (I just googled and that's a misquote of Niels Bohr) and besides, didn't he say not to worry about consistency? Or only worry if it's foolish. And then you feel foolish. But then you don't because of what you just read and what you feel is that you were foolish before you read it. But also you weren't because he was just saying what you and everyone else already knew in their (shared) soul only they might not have known they knew it which is why he had to say it.

And that's why you have to say it to. Not what he said but what you know to be true and thus everyone else does too but you need to remind them. But what was it again? And is it really true? If you are doubting it, then like Descartes, you exist. What's it like to exist? And why do I need to ask you?