There are biographies of Henry David Thoreau, and there are literary criticisms about Walden and his other works. _Young Man Thoreau_ is closer to the former than the latter. It's a psychological analysis of his early pre-Walden life based on his own writings, records of his life, and remarks made by his contemporaries. Those insights are juxtaposed against Freud's theories and Erik Erikson's life-cycle model of human behavior. And the verdict is that Thoreau experienced a prolonged adolescence with a psychosocial moratorium that delayed the burden of adult responsibilities. His eternal search for a "great man" can be traced to his own family situation, which featured a weak father figure and a domineering mother, so of course the author brings Oedipus into the picture. Further discussion is held about the triangular relationship between Henry, his brother John, and their friend Ellen Sewall, who turned down both brothers' offers of marriage. Henry's reactions to his own accidental fire-setting to the Concord woods and the early death of his brother are also put under the figurative microscope. The result is probably as accurate an examination as we can get, given that the actual man is not here to defend himself or confirm the diagnosis.

And yet the fact remains that he *is* not present. So how can we tell if this analysis, though well researched, is the truth? If you have your own comfortable ideas about Henry David Thoreau, you probably would do well to steer clear of this book. Or read it with a discerning eye, knowing that you'll be shaking your head at some of the suppositions offered. Interesting but not essential.