Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Woody Guthrie




The first thing that comes to mind is that Guthrie and Whitman's work has been twisted and misinterpreted to fit advertising. Like using Whitman to sell jeans or using Born in The USA and Springsteen to sell a Republican Campaign, Guthrie's song has been used to “sell America.” “This Land Is Your Land” is taken as a very patriotic song(played at probably every July 4th celebration) and I would argue that it is (dissent is patriotic), but as familiar as I am with the tune and words I had no idea that it included the lines, “In the shadow of the steeple I saw my people, 
By the relief office I seen my people; 
As they stood there hungry, I stood there asking 
Is this land made for you and me?Guthrie is questioning the values of America. Not of the people who he champions, but of the system.

Here is another verse that I think has been obscured:

As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!

Interesting that these are the two verses that no one ever sings or recollects.


A big difference between Whitman and Guthrie is their circumstances in life and how that may have shaped their political views. Whitman rambles and wanders because he can. The persona that Guthrie presents rambles because he has to; from job to job, for survival. A tid bit from his bio:

The Great Depression hit the Guthrie family hard and when the drought-stricken Great Plains transformed into the infamous Dust Bowl, Guthrie left his family in 1935 to join the thousands of "Okies" who were migrating West in search of work. Like many other "Dust Bowl refugees," Guthrie spent his time hitchhiking, riding freight trains, and when he could, quite literally singing for his supper. With his guitar and harmonica he sang in the hobo and migrant camps, developing into a musical spokesman for labor and other left-wing causes. These hardscrabble experiences would provide the bedrock for Guthrie's songs and stories, as well as fodder for his future autobiography, "Bound for Glory." It was also during these years that Guthrie developed a taste for the road that would never quite leave him.
(http://www.biography.com/people/woody-guthrie-9323949)

There is definitely a relationship between art and politics. Many use their art to express their political views. Whitman was so radical, he got fired from the Daily Eagle. Democracy and freedom are at the core of their work, though Guthrie's had a more critical view. He was incensed by the capitalist machine and what it did to the average American. He had been accused of being a Communist, which definitely surprised me considering the fact that up until about 10 minutes ago I thought “This Land had been a 'Yay America!” song. History has erased the radical(both the man and within the song); the protest is wiped clean from “This Land” and it has been transformed into almost a second American national anthem. Isn't Leaves of Grass kind of a type of anthem? Isn't part of what Whitman set out to do; to create a new American poetry?

Unfortunately, I do not think that we as Americans could be called unified at all. The division in this country is at an extreme and only getting wider. 

Thursday, April 26, 2012

The Book of the Dead"

The "you" functions very differently in Rukeyser's "Book of the Dead" versus Whitman's "When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd." Whitman only uses the word "you" once in the first 14 stanzas and when he does in the second stanza he is addressing "spring" as "you."  When he uses "you" again it isn't until section seven, stanza 15 and in this case "you" is "death." Later in the poem the "you" is used to refer to both the star and the bird. This is unlike Rukeyser's poem where the "you" is used in the first line and refers to the reader. The "you" in her poem pulls the reader right in and in a way holds them partially accountable for the tragedy. A main difference of the mourning in this poem versus Lilacs is that this tragedy was absolutely avoidable (The inspectors wore gas masks when they came to the construction site for short visits yet the men working there every day went without any protection. It wasn't a matter of ignorance to the danger; it was a matter of apathy.) While Whitman's poem is very personal, it is more personal to his own grief rather than inclusive of everyone's. He does write about the Nation mourning in section six, but largely the feel of the poem is of his own grief. Rukeyser's poem shies away from the sentimental and has an angrier tone. She takes the tragedy of of the Hawk's Nest Incident and uses it as a springboard to accuse America of it's "Nothing will stand in the way of progress" mentality. And rightly so in my humble opinion.

Obviously both poems are elegiac in tone and I can't help but wonder if Rukeyser had Whitman in mind when she wrote this. It not only reminds me of "Lilacs", but her style, the long sentences, the repetition, the painting a picture of America(albeit in a more negative light than Whitman,) reminds me a lot of other poems in "Leaves of Grass."

Whitman ends on a tone of honoring the fallen president though not naming him. His grief will go on, but he is able to manage it. There is transformation, but not a call to change. If he was attempting to do what Rukeyser did, then maybe there would be some mention of Booth, or a tone of anger that this terrible event wasn't thwarted somehow. Rather he focuses on the management of grief; finding a way to cope. By the end of the poem, "Book of the Dead"as dark as it is, there is a bit of hope in it as Rukeyser aims  to expose the lie of America, the "land myths of identity" and call for change. At least change is possible. She writes, "and you young, you who finishing the poem/wish new perfection and begin to make." 

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

National Tragedy


The themes that presented themselves to me after reading the 9/11 poems were time, and the people who are left/how we go on.

Time and our relation to it seems to always become so important in the face of a tragedy. In the poem “September Twelfth, 2001” by X.J. Kennedy the actual time is featured in the title and the last lines evoke not only emotion, but the sense that time is fleeting; not simply being whisked away on the wind, but violently disintegrating: “Alive we open our eyelids on our pitiful share of time,/ we bubbles rising and bursting in a boiling pot.”

These things that happen in the particle of time we have to be alive,” is a striking line from “War” a poem by C.K. Williams which tries to deal with tragedy by relating to human tragedy throughout the ages. Thinking about our history as a speck of time raises the question of how important or unimportant we are. This poem is ambitious and remarkable; it is hard to describe how the poet intertwines our “complicity, contrition, grief.”

Of all the poems I read, Szymborska's moved me the most. The attempt at suspending time for the victims plunging to their death was a noble elegy. The last lines were very beautiful and powerful,

I can only do two things for them-
describe this flight
and not add a last line”

However I think the most similar to Whitman's “When Lilacs Last in The Dooryard Bloom'd” is the poem “Try to Praise the Mutilated World” by Adam Zagajewski. Reading this I assumed that this poet wrote this with “Lilacs” in mind He writes of the “thrush,” he writes of “praising” the mutilated world, just as Whitman wrote of praising the universe and all it contains which includes death. Of “joyously sing[ing] the dead.” Zagajewski even writes of the “gentle light that strays and vanishes
and returns.” Just as the “western star” keeps returning to “hold” whitman, the grief unrelenting as the passage of time, the light in this poem functions the same way.

Zagajewski's poem also attempts to encompass more than just New York. Whereas many of the 9/11 poems in this online collection are presented as a snapshot, (perhaps because of the nature of the tragedy, the shock that set in would maybe allow for a narrow focus), Zagajewski's poem spans time and seasons. He is never specific in pointing toward New York as the subject, but the poem is one of loss which all people can relate to. Just as Whitman never mentions Lincoln, he attempts to heal with a more universal stroke of the pen.

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Project

I have been reconsidering my project and I don't think I really want to explore the theme of death in Whitman's poetry. Even though he does have a more zen approach I think spending that much time on that topic would be morbid and not too fun for me. The other blog that I had the most fun with besides the motifs one was "Whitman in pop culture." I would like to explore how Whitman is represented in the modern day. From all of the examples that the class shared the modern layperson would probably have a skewed view on what he was all about.

Specifically, I think it could be interesting to see if I can find anything more in pop culture relating to Whitman and his sexuality because two of the shows in the '90s that featured him heavily used Whitman as a springboard to highlight equality issues.

I think that comparing society's take/interest in Whitman's sexuality in our generation with that of his own generation and how it was examined and received would be interesting and would also allow an entry point into his poetry (i.e. where critics and public 1st saw homoerotic lines and passages.)

I am not sure how I want to present this project. Maybe in a multi media presentation including clips from Whitman in pop culture and writings from the past. Any ideas? :)



My other idea is quite different, but I think might be very inspiring. I loved finding favorite lines from Whitman and it was difficult to narrow them down to a favorite. I find this particularly interesting because (and with no offense) Whitman is definitely not my favorite poet, yet there are lines that are just so amazing they can take your breath away. I do think these can stand out on their own as well. I am curious about exploring a project based on writing a series of poems taking these as inspiration. For instance I could make a found poem using these favorite lines, and could write another poem using one line as a springboard, I could see if a majority of the favorite lines share a theme and write on that, or track if it's the certain images in the chosen favorite lines that seem to inspire me and write on that. This would be a particularly satisfying project for me because while immersing myself and learning more about Whitman's poetry, I would also be gaining valuable writing practice and perhaps, hopefully create a good poem or two. Since I'm working on my M.A/M.F.A in creative writing, and exercises based on response to other works/authors has always been an excellent method for me to generate ideas, I think this project may suit me well.

Thursday, March 29, 2012

I really enjoyed mapping the motif of speech in "Song of Myself"and I think would like to explore other motifs in Whitman's work. Death is a big motif featured in his poems and he has a unique viewpoint on the matter.  Death isn't presented as dark, finite and horrible like we generally view it. He has a much more zen approach to the subject that I find interesting, refreshing and hopeful.

How does the theme of death in "Song of Myself" compare with the theme of death in "Calalmus"

Does Whitman contradict himself in writing about the idea of death?

Peter Doyle


Peter Doyle was Whitman's longtime lover and some historians would say he was his muse as well. He certainly influenced some of Whitman's work, however it was Fred Vaughn (another of Whitman's lovers) that inspired “Calamus” and not Doyle. Doyle was born in Ireland and came to the United States as a small child. He served in the Confederate Army which was a surprising discovery since Whitman was obviously very pro Union. He was working class and supported his mother and younger siblings which, for some reason, made it impossible to live with Whitman, which Whitman wanted. Who knows if thats the reason, but that's what is cited in many articles. They were “out” to their families and friends as it seems that everyone knew the nature of their relationship. Very progressive for the time!

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

THE WHITE HOUSE BY MOONLIGHT

I am starting to think that Whitman might be a little bit of a stalker. After reading the Abraham Lincoln journal entry in Specimen Days I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, but now reading "The White House by Moonlight" it's becoming clear that he is a little obsessed. He ends the entry with a line that made me laugh out loud, "sentries at the gates, and by the portico, silent, pacing there in blue overcoats -- stopping you not at all, but eyeing you with sharp eyes, whichever way you move." Of course they're eyeing you Walt. They think you are stalking Honest Abe!

On a completely different note, I also liked reading this because it infuses the journal with the imagery of purity and potential, none of which I can see when looking at the White House and what it symbolizes, not for over a decade now. Whitman is very poetic in this journal entry, it is once again, not just a jotting down of thought. For example, he writes, "...the White House of future poems, and of dreams and dramas, there in the soft and copious moon..." Beautiful.  I envy his outlook on the White House and the Presidency, of America and what it stands for.

Whitman in Pop Culture


I focused on Whitman in Television. I found it interesting  that two shows from the 90's, Northern Exposure and Dr Quinn, Medicine Woman (I know, painful, I apologize in advance) focused on his Whitman's sexual orientation in a decade where gay rights and issues became more highlighted in the media and pop culture.  

In the third selection from the Twilight Zone the show questions love and being human as a robot is cast in the role of a grandmother. This one is titled, "I Sing the Body Electric" obviously pulled directly from the poem of the same name. The Dr. Quinn episode is titled, "The Body Electric" We see how motifs from Walt's actual life and his work (so closely tied) can be spun in different directions while deriving them from the same poem title. 



In case the link doesn't work:


Northern Exposure http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4W9SFmxtM

Dr Quinn, Medicine Woman http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70X50ttKA0

Twilight Zone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaH31jgqRl0

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Whitman's Critics

To start with I could barely stomach the narcissism spewing from Walt himself in his own reviews. I know this was for publicity, but have a little self-respect. Aren't you basically undermining yourself and your, albeit, brilliant work with this shameless self-promotion? With that said I decided to focus on two of the reviews that were the most balanced in their treatment of Leaves of Grass and the one that reiterated my own views as to Whitman's ego parade. It is so succinct that it makes its point very well and I thought I would just paste it onto this post. It basically gives him no credibility due to his self-promotion:

Under the title "Walt Whitman and his Poems," the United States Review recently published the following article. We take it to be a smart satire upon the present tendency of authors to run into rhapsody and transcendentalism; and therefore its main fault in a literary point of view—that it suggests the notice of a man reviewing his own work—is not of much importance. 1

 My god, even in the most fundamental poetry classes we are instructed not to explain our work. Let the words/the work speak for itself, never mind a complete stroking of the ego that Whitman does in "Walt Whitman and his Poems" and even worse in "Brooklyn Boy"where he spends countless lines just talking about his physical appearance. I know that his dress and healthfulness is imperative to the poem, but this going on and on is excessive and I would have stopped reading had it not been an an assignment for class. I believe that the review of Whitman's review printed above from United States Review was warranted and actually restrained. They could have really put him through the wringer for his excessive narcissism. 


I want to know how many "anonymous" reviews were Whitman himself writing. After all one of the anonymous reviews was even in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle. One such anonymous review, "A Curious Title" I enjoyed reading, whoever happened to write it, because it made allowances for people to either like or dislike it claiming that "respectable people would pronounce perfect nonsense, but which free-souled persons, here and there, will read and chuckle over with real delight, as the expression of their own best feelings." This is the most down to earth statement I encountered among the high literary prosody of the rest of the reviews.


I also enjoyed George Eliot's (is this the Eliot of Middlemarch? because it says "or George Henry Lewes." I'm confused, but if it is, how wonderful to hear from such a prominent author!) because it also took an intellectual, balanced approach. Rather than claiming him a genius or declaring the work as rubbish it very, very eloquently puts praise where praise is due stating that Whitman 


passionately identifies himself with all forms of being, sentient or inanimate; sympathizes deeply with humanity; riots with a kind of Bacchanal fury in the force and fervour of his own sensations; will not have the most vicious or abandoned shut out from final comfort and reconciliation; is delighted with Broadway, New York, and equally in love with the desolate backwoods, and the long stretch of the uninhabited prairie, where the wild beasts wallow in the reeds, and the wilder birds start upwards from their nests among the grass; perceives a divine mystery wherever his feet conduct or his thoughts transport him; and beholds all beings tending towards the central and sovereign Me.


At the same time this reviewer[s] holds him accountable for the more "uncouth" subjects he tackles, but rather than calling him perverse, he/she again eloquently criticizes (for isn't that what a critic is supposed to do, not simply ignorantly dismiss as does the reviewer who wrote "A Strange Blade") writing:


There are so many evidences of a noble soul in Whitman's pages that we regret these aberrations, which only have the effect of discrediting what is genuine by the show of something false; and especially do we deplore the unnecessary openness with which Walt reveals to us matters which ought rather to remain in a sacred silence. It is good not to be ashamed of Nature; it is good to have an all-inclusive charity; but it is also good, sometimes, to leave the veil across the Temple.


Nicely put!


Maybe that's why the the "Thrusters" were scratched from later editions, hahaha...

Thursday, March 1, 2012

UNNAMED REMAINS THE BRAVEST SOLDIER

This entry stood out to me because it seems as if Whitman were to just break the paragraph into lines, he would have a poem. This entry seems to be written in more poetic language and seems more than just a quick jotting down of a journal entry. What bothered me about it was that it glorifies war and dying and this seems strange to me since Whitman saw the war as terrible. How could one look at it any other way? This line in particularly, made me wince : "haply with pain and suffering (yet less, far less, than is supposed,)..." Really? I'd like to ask Whitman if he ever had ever felt what it was like to slowly die of a gunshot wound. On the other hand, I was also delighted by his use of language. For instance this last line of the entry is beautiful: "...the last lethargy winds like a serpent round him -- the eyes glaze in death -- none recks -- perhaps the burial-squads, in truce, a week afterwards, search not the secluded spot -- and there, at last, the Bravest Soldier crumbles in mother earth, unburied and unknown." Reading this again, I wonder if Whitman is using subtle satire here to express his views on the horrors of war as the serpent could indicate evil and the fact that these are our most wonderful men, yet they are "unknown."

Frances Wright

Frances Wright was an Scottish born, free thinker and radical who emigrated to the United States and attempted to set up a utopian society, the Nashoba Commune, for slaves transitioning from slavery to freedom. She advocated feminism and free schooling for all children. She was wrote books and lectured to this effect. There is some evidence that Whitman attended some of her lectures which seems appropriate as he shared all of these views as well. The difference is that she was an abolitionist and he was not though they both believed in equality for slaves.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Bowery B'hoys

The Bowery B'hoys started out as a the tough youths that hung out in the Bowery and then as time went on the perception of them seemed to shift to that of the ideal urban American. The spelling is used to evoke an Irish pronunciation as many of them were immigrants, though not all Irish. It is speculated that the "voice" or persona of "Song of Myself" comes from the voice/position/social standing of a Bowery B'hoy. I was surprised to have read this because I thought the voice of Song of Myself" was the poet, Walt Whitman, himself. I can see where the attraction to the Bowery B'hoys lies for Whitman. He tends to romanticize the working-class, common man way of life so the Bowery B'hoy certainly would fit the bill for this: "That ruffianly lower-class swell, the Bowery B'hoy—already a hero of the raucous popular theater frequented by Whitman—lent his outrageous swagger to "Song of Myself"" (1855)(whitmanarchive.org). But in taking it a step further it is interesting to see how it was one of Whitman's goals to go beyond class structure in "Song of Myself," to include everyone, and as the Bowery B'hoy evolved from ruffian to a representation of a middle-class New Yorker we can see then how the voice really matches the intent of the poem.

There is a lot on the net about the Bowery B'hoys online, but I found these two sites paricularly interesting:

http://books.google.com/books?id=2uTCiN347lMC&pg=PA67&lpg=PA67&dq=Bowery+b’hoy&source=bl&ots=cScBcz89Kh&sig=h0Q4QL6UW5ue4OLn7NZGpkyn5X0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ud5FT__ALZT1sQLZ9YHDDw&ved=0CHMQ6AEwDw#v=onepage&q=Bowery%20b’hoy&f=false

http://whitmanarchive.org/criticism/current/encyclopedia/entry_37.html

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

"Walt, Put Down the Pencil, and Back Away Slowly"





The most interesting revision to me was that Whitman strikes:

118   Thruster holding me tight, and that I hold tight!
We hurt each other as the bridegroom and the bride
         hurt each other.

from the blue book and it doesn't remain in the 1867 version. I remember reading that the first time through and thinking, “Whoa, that causes a pause in 2012 never mind in the mid 1800s.” I wonder why he decided to take it out. Maybe he thought it was crossing the line, though I doubt it considering all of the other sexual references presented in the work.


The other revision that stood out to me was the addition of "O, speech" to one of my favorite lines, "Do you not know, O speech, how the buds beneath you are folded?" This really clarifies the metaphor and it makes the meaning much more powerful.

Other than some sporadic changes like these two, in which I can't speak to Whitman's motivation of why he cut these lines or not, the only pattern I noticed in this revision is that of taking the “e” out of past tense verbs so that they only have the “ 'd” remaining. He also changes some words that normally would be capitalized and makes them lowercase. I am not sure why he does this. The first thing that comes to mind is that he wants it to sound more colloquial, more like the common man and as for striking down the uppercase letters: Maybe he is getting rid of hierarchy in the written word to match his belief put forth in “Song of Myself” that everyone is as good or bad as everyone else. Equality everywhere, even for proper nouns! Don't think you're so important! 

Personal pet-peeve: Why doesn't every edition of Leaves of Grass have line numbering? (I am looking at the two editions I have, the original 1855 edition and the “Death-Bed” edition.) That would make everyone's life a lot easier for comparing since Whitman seems a bit OCD in changing his work over and over and over again. There is something to be said for over-revision. Maybe a poem shouldn't be treated like a series of new software releases.

I think that despite completely chopping certain sections, for the most part Whitman makes minor revisions; punctuation changes and the small detail changes mentioned above. The feel of “Song of Myself” remains the same. The heart of the poem, what it intends to do, works equally as well in all of these editions.  

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Oneida Community


I think that what Whitman and the Oneida Community have in common is that they both had radical views for the time and were not shy to express them. I believe the most obvious and important connection would be that of their views on equality. No one is more than an another and no one is less either. Whitman strongly believed this view and expressed it often in “Song of Myself” with regards to the status of women and slaves, etc. In the Oneida Community women held important positions in their businesses and they were not looked at as inferiors. The Oneida Community developed a different type of dress for women that was less restrictive as well. I think Whitman would have liked this, but probably would have taken up a notch and said to lose the clothes all together as he advocated stripping bare so that one could experience the “touch,” that one could “know” the world around him. The Oneida also had the not so popular idea that Jesus had already come back to earth in AD 70 so they had the view that we are not just waiting around here and suffering in our earthly existence as a pit stop on the way to heaven, but that heaven is on earth, that we must have pleasure in this life as well. Whitman definitely thought that experiencing pleasure, that loafing, were beneficial which did not fit with traditional Christian views.   

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Abraham Lincoln

We can really see how infatuated Whitman was with President Lincoln from this journal entry. He says that they would bow to each other cordially in passing. Did Lincoln know who Whitman was at the time?

It is interesting that Lincoln did not like the calvary of security that accompanied him when out riding. This seems to fit his humble persona, yet Whitman does mention that he saw the President riding alone with the first lady. It is difficult to imagine security not always accompanying the President and it is even more difficult to imagine them brandishing swords on horseback. With all of the tension leading to Civil War, I would have expected that he would have been heavily guarded. Where were his men at the Ford theater? I guess it was just a different time.

On a nicer note, I feel like only a poet or an artist would have noticed that,  "None of the artists or pictures has caught the deep, though subtle and indirect expression of this man's face. There is something else there. One of the great portrait painters of two or three centuries ago is needed."  Interesting assessment.


Thursday, February 9, 2012

Whitman's Peers

In "Hunters of Men" Whittier addresses the issue of slavery. At first the reader is led to believe that the "hunters of men" are being exalted for their noble job. Later we see that the voice of the poem is sarcastic especially when we get to the line, "land of the brave and this home of the free." Whittier highlights the evil of enslaving those whose only "sin/Is the curl of [their] hair and the hue of [their] skin!" He makes his point by taking the tone of the slave catchers and those who favor slavery by echoing a sentiment that nonsensically must have been used a lot to advocate slavery:"What right have they here in the home of the white,/Shadowed o'er by our banner of Freedom and Right?" This is ridiculous logic since the whites were the ones who forcibly brought the slaves here. He makes the reader see that our notions of being a land founded on freedom were totally hypocritical. Whitman was obviously against slavery so the two poets have that in common and that they use their art to further their beliefs and influence others. I believe Whittier wrote this in iambic hexameter and the rhyme scheme is aabbcc and so on. This is a marked difference from Whitman who wrote is non-rhyming free verse in "Song of Myself."



In "A Dirge for O'Connell" the common thread between Lynch and Whitman is patriotism (albeit Irish rather than American patriotism,) though I don't know if Whitman would have been so quick to praise battle and fighting. She exalts the dead which Whitman does in his poem "Song of Myself" though for different reasons. She writes that O'Connell is a king though not born royal and I think that the merits of a person rather than the class hierarchy one is born into would have appealed to Whitman. He was against the rigid class structure of Europe. Again this poem is written in formal meter, quatrains of iambic trimeter and the rhyme scheme is abcb making this a ballad. This differentiates it from Whitman because he was writing free verse. I think he aimed to make a new type of poetry, one breaking away from the formal constraints of English and Irish poetry.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Broadway Sights


I really enjoyed reading the selection, “Broadway Sights” from Specimen Days because it brought up memories for me about growing up in New York. Going to Poe's House on the Grand Concourse, visiting the Van Cortlandt Mansion, and the Trinity Church graveyard, among other places, were memorable experiences. It also made me look into the origins of theater on Broadway, the connections between Astor and the arts and his connection to Poe. I now have a great little piece of useless trivia: The lions (Leo Lenox and Leo Astor ) at the NY public library were named after Astor and James Lenox because they founded the library. It must have been incredible for Whitman to see Edgar Allen Poe, James Fenimore Cooper and Charles Dickens, among others (I am focusing on the writers) as a young journalist and writer. I started to think about the celebrities I have seen or met there: Tom Hanks, Bernadette Peters, and Carol Channing and what an influence that had on me as a theater person. This seemed like a straight-up journal entry from Whitman and I am not sure exactly how it connects with Leaves of Grass except for the fact that New York itself certainly had some influence on his work, but it definitely took me on a trip down memory lane, which is funny since he lived SO long before my time. 

Barnum

http://books.google.com/books?id=M3D8ei8zhVkC&pg=PA233&lpg=PA233&dq=Whitman+interviewed+Barnum+for+the+Brooklyn+Daily+Eagle+in+1846.&source=bl&ots=gjApxp9Gxe&sig=OW86g5z2AUKbdbUvy3JmiGGzkZE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZkszT8LyKIWnsQLA75SzAg&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Whitman%20interviewed%20Barnum%20for%20the%20Brooklyn%20Daily%20Eagle%20in%201846.&f=false

This is the web address for a google books website that has a quote regarding Whitman's ties to P.T. Barnum. (It wouldn't let me cut and paste the quote.)

Whitman interviewed Barnum for the Brooklyn Eagle.The connection between the two men seems to rest on nationalism. We know that Whitman was a patriot and transformed American poetry so it makes sense that he would ask Barnum, after returning from a trip to Europe, whether there was anything in Europe that would make him love America less to which Barnum basically replied that Europe was stuffy and dead and America was vibrant and alive. I'm sure Whitman would have enjoyed that answer.

The other thing that ties them is their stance on secession. It seems that Barnum got a lot of heat from the Copperheads as well as the Unionists. It was probably a Confederate who burned down Barnum's museum as the Confederates had hatched a plot to burn down New York. Seems like he walked a tightrope concerning sectionalism. Obviously Whitman was against slavery, but he got some heat for his positions too, (just look at our blogs) was anti-abolitionist and it seems like having a stance wasn"t as clear cut as it would seem to us now,considering the political ramifications.

http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1901&context=wwqr&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dwhitman%2520and%2520sectionalism%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CCMQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fir.uiowa.edu%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1901%2526context%253Dwwqr%26ei%3DmmYzT467CYfniAKUqpiZCg%26usg%3DAFQjCNExX-b0AJAE9JivcaL8pCmZFVuNcw%26sig2%3D73vdpdVTRtFb2LW83zfrPw#search=%22whitman%20sectionalism%22

Another interesting site.

Whitman and Barnum also looked down upon the European social class heirarchy which could tie them together. 


Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Where Language Fails



One of the motifs I found interesting and complex was that of “speech.” Whitman wants the reader to listen to what he has to say. He goes to great lengths with words to convey his message. He even states, “My words itch at your ears till you understand them.” However part of his message is that language/ talking/ speech is not enough.
Never fear, Whitman has his disclaimer: “Do I contradict myself? 
Very well then I contradict myself, 
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)”
With that said, I've broken the quotes into two lists regarding Walt's stance on speech:
YAY
Section 26
I hear the sound I love, the sound of the human voice
Section 25
My voice goes after what my eyes cannot reach,
Speech is the twin of my vision
Section 47
It is you talking just as much as myself, I act as the tongue of 
you, 
Tied in your mouth, in mine it begins to be loosen'd.)
My words itch at your ears till you understand them.
NAY
Section 52
I too am untranslatable, 
I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.
Section 47
And I swear I will never translate myself at all,
Section 25
Writing and talk do not prove me, 
I carry the plenum of proof and every thing else in my face, 
With the hush of my lips I wholly confound the skeptic.
you conceive too much of 
articulation, 
Do you not know O speech how the buds beneath you are folded? 
Waiting in gloom, protected by frost, 
The dirt receding before my prophetical screams,
Section 48
No array of terms can say how much I am at peace about God and 
about death.



The first of the quotes to really stop me in my tracks was: No array of terms can say how much I am at peace about God and
about death." Yet it seems this lengthy poem is an attempt. It reminds me of a story about trying to discover the name of God. It is not possible; it is the thing that one can feel is on the tip of the tongue, but can never be uttered. It will never be tangible, like Whitman who becomes intangible by the end of the poem. Both are things that are there, but that cannot be grasped or deciphered. So no amount of terms, no amount of words would do justice. Perhaps that is why he references sound so many times, like early on with, “Only the lull I like, the hum of your valved voice.” It is more animalistic, it gets to the nature, the essence of the thing better than words. Whitman also says, “I too am untranslatable, I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.” He cannot be deciphered either and I think that's interesting considering that he believes God is within the self. Speech will never fully succeed in explaining him as he says, “Writing and talk do not prove me, 
I carry the plenum of proof and every thing else in my face, 
With the hush of my lips I wholly confound the skeptic.”
BUT
Speech is important. It is compared to the “vision” which clearly Whitman takes quite seriously. Speech is the “twin of my vision” he states. Also his “voice goes after what [his] eyes cannot reach.” Clearly speech is important; he's a poet so of course he loves words, but also as we can see by looking at the type of language he uses. It is not full of poetic diction. It is an American style of speech. It really separates itself from the more formal language of his predecessors and that wasn't accidental.
Back to “sound.” Maybe “song” is so important to Leaves of Grass because it combines these two views. Song is like a compromise. A song weaves the words or the libretto with the music, and music is universal. It is something we can all understand regardless of what language we speak. It transcends language. So maybe he is not contradicting himself. Maybe it is that marriage between words and sound that becomes profound.
Strange, but all of the thinking about howling and yawping immediately made me think of Peter Pan and the Lost Boys crowing to let out their emotions. The primal cries we make are not well thought discourse. And that would fit with the motif of the child as well. The child is closest to our true nature. The failure of language can be seen when thinking of it in terms of the child. A child without a mastery of language skills still experiences the world, but in a different way. I would argue and I think Whitman would argue, more sensorily, more purely, than adults perceive the world.
Speaking of crowing, Whitman uses onomatopoeia for describing this type of action saying “I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.” Words like “yawp” and even “howl” mean what they sound like. We can get the meaning from the sound. It arouses in us a feeling beyond just knowing what the word means. Early on in the poem he speaks of “howls restrain'd by decorum.” I believe Whitman breaks those restraints by the end of the poem by announcing his yawp, by effusing his very self to the world around us. Ginsberg, years later, answers the call as well.
Regardless of the vehicle, Whitman is/we are always seeking to convey our truths and to understand those around us. The seeking, the need to pursue that journey is the important part and this is my favorite example of that, the lines are constructed so beautifully, the civilized and the primal so nicely juxtaposed:
Do you not know O speech how the buds beneath you are folded?
Waiting in gloom, protected by frost, 

The dirt receding before my prophetical screams

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Favorite lines from "Song of Myself"


“This minute that comes to me over the past decillions,
There is no better than it or now.”

-(Song of Myself, section 22, line 38-39)


It is difficult to choose two favorite lines from “Song of Myself” but these two lines speak to me because it is something that I strive to recognize in life as well. The runner up was, “I exist as I am, that is enough” (Song of Myself, section 20, line 36) which also echoes the idea of presentness. Living in the present moment is too achieve freedom. After all, this is all we have, the past is gone, the future is uncertain. This is a very Buddhist belief and it strikes me that Whitman entwines these beliefs with a very biblical and Jesus-like tone throughout “Song of Myself.” One might think that the two are opposing.

He begins with, “And what I assume you shall assume,” (Song of Myself, section 1, line 2). The structure, repetition and instructional quality make this line seem like it came straight out of the Bible. The same could be said for section 21, beginning, “I am the poet of the Body.” The rhythm, word choice and repetition in this section really mirrors biblical quotations from Jesus. There are a lot of vocative verbs beginning lines in the poem. For example, “Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the/ origin of all poems, (Song of Myself, section 2, line 33-34). Also, the whole 1st stanza of section 19 seems to espouse Christian like goodwill or Jesus-like humbleness and humility toward those who are typically shunned or looked at in a negative light.

The the poet as a spiritual teacher straddling the lines of Christianity and Buddhism could be looked at as enlightened or as hypocrisy. It certainly strikes an interesting balance. Whitman asks “Why should I pray” (Song of Myself, section 20, line 12). That would be blasphemy at the time. Here he is again stirring things up, because he questions something that most people would say should just be accepted. I believe he is more spiritual by grappling with these ideas.

The intertwining of Judeo-Christian and Buddhist ideals in this poem is fascinating to me and I'd like to explore it further. Ruminating on this subject only raises further questions for me:
-Is the tone intentional or a by-product of being raised in a Judeo-Christian society?
-Does the Jesus-like sentiment point to a grandiose sense of himself? Or is it unifying because it is a manner of speaking that people would be very familiar with at the time; that might actually be comforting?

Specimen Days selection


SPIRITUAL CHARACTERS AMONG THE SOLDIERS
I don't know if this is what Whitman is talking about when he describes a certain characteristic, a calmness in some of the soldiers he observes, but I often see this or have experienced this among those people who are the least fortunate in life. In some ways they don't seem aware of this or maybe they measure happiness with a different ruler, but they carry themselves with a quiet pride, a contentedness and a peace that I can only be a bit envious of. I wonder where that kind of calm strength is gained from. Where can I learn that? Walt wonders about “whatever circumstances” lend to the nature of these “different” soldiers he is speaking about. It was the men from the western territories, who probably faced more hardships than those living in the civilization of the east, who probably lacked an education or had very little at least, that were the ones who exhibited this nature. This is similar to the people that I have seen exhibit these precious qualities in this century. Maybe not the same details, but very similar circumstances are shared between these groups of people.
These “different” soldiers are the ones who are also “apt to go off and meditate and muse in solitude.” Something that Whitman advocates and which he does in “Song of Myself.” He contemplates himself and his connection to the world around him. Need I mention “loafing”? He brings up the idea of awareness, how others perceive these men and the idea of self-awareness, even asking, “as to that, who is aware of his own nature?” It is difficult to assess oneself, to see oneself as others see you and to figure out what you believe to be your nature, let alone before considering others' perception of yourself. Nowadays everyone thinks they know exactly who they are, just look at facebook, blogs and dating sites. Mostly people are “awesome-sauce,” while struggling for a legitimate, comparable adjective that could sum up just how cute and clever they are. Perhaps shunning modesty in Whitmanian fashion they list and proclaim their wonderful qualities in a public display of ego masturbation, yet the idea of getting to nature and quietly observing, practicing introspection is completely avoided all too often in the modern day.
I thought it was refreshing that Whitman takes the idea of not knowing oneself as commonplace and normal. I think it is the opposite of our views now, where we seem to feel that we have a grasp on ourselves or even if we don't it is scary to admit, and we'd rather go on pretending we know ourselves inside and out. It is refreshing to see proclaimed as fact, in a rhetorical question, “ who is aware of his own nature?” It is nice to see the idea of musing and meditating advocated.
The idea of self is certainly explored in Leaves of Grass. After all, one whole large, significant portion is titled, “Song of Myself” The idea of self spans to that of the reader and beyond that to everyone in this poem. And it doesn't stop there. Whitman proclaims that we all share the same atoms. He even exalts the dead because (for one reason) they are part of the cycle, they feed the earth, and the earth and nature are equated as part of us and as god, just as we are part of all of it and thus part of god as well. Pretty Zen Walt!

The Wilmot Proviso and it's relation to Whitman


Wilmot Proviso, 1846, amendment to a bill put before the U.S. House of Representatives during the Mexican War; it provided an appropriation of $2 million to enable President Polk to negotiate a territorial settlement with Mexico. David Wilmot introduced an amendment to the bill stipulating that none of the territory acquired in the Mexican War should be open to slavery.”

-http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0852373.html


The Wilmot Proviso was a hot button topic, one that also had a hand in leading to the Civil War. It should be noted that David Wilmot was trying to protect the interests of the white worker seeking a wage who obviously couldn't compete with free labor, rather than trying to stop the proliferation of slavery based on moral grounds.

I find it interesting that Whitman was critical of abolitionists and merely an anti-extentionist (as Fanny brings up in citing the David Reynold's article "Politics and Poetry: Whitman's Leaves of Grass and the Social Crisis of the 1850s") when that seems to contradict his view toward slavery in “Song of Myself.” Didn't he say that we are all the same? Whitman is way ahead of his time in regarding women as equal to men: “I say it is as great to be a woman as it is a man” (Song of Myself, section 21, line 7) and his passage about the “runaway slave” would have been incendiary in the time especially in the South, but not much less in the north, I imagine, as well. He is actively taking part in a criminal activity by harboring a slave and he professes this, encourages this as it is the moral thing to do. 65 “In all people I see myself, none more and not one a barley-corn less,” (Song of Myself, section 20, line 17-18). That is pretty straightforward so one has to question his poetic proclamations next to his practical, public views. In this poem he is definitely advocating that everyone should be equal.

So where's the divide? What happened? Wilmot proviso was 1846, Leaves of Grass in 1855, I can only assume that tensions increased at this time since the Civil War began in 1861. Is it simply a timeline thing? Does Whitman shift his opinions as the years leading to the Civil War pass? Whitman effuses such across-the-board equality, not only equality but almost buddhist like connection in “Song of Myself”; that we are all part of one another and share the same atoms. This idea is so important he begins the poem with it saying, “For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you,” (Song of Myself, section 1, line 3) Why does he profess this in the poem when he didn't back up this view in the political landscape? Especially when he had some amount of influence in his position as a journalist.