I agree with most of the points in this article, but how she uses them to come to a conclusion is odd. Thoreau is undoubtedly misanthropic, however the quotes read in their full context makes it clear this misanthropy is what motivates his investigation of the natural world. Perhaps there is value in pointing this out to people who only casually know Walden through famous quotes, but devaluing the work entirely
because of this is malicious.
I think its interested that Schulz's judgement of Thoreau is ultimately about the value of individualism. Personal independence and self-reliance have long been part of the American national identity. That, however, clashes with the desperate need for social cohesion that the country is experiencing today.
Its a discussion worth having. But it'd be more honest to talk about the tension between past and present openly than to use personality as an excuse to dismiss an influential writer.