Final Project! and Evaluation.

Here is my final project, the cento poem regarding the perspectives of slavery, the west, and the Free Soil Movement. I used lines from Whitman's Calamus poems, William Cullen Bryant's 'America' and 'A Northern Legend', John Greenleaf Whittier's 'At Port Royal 1861' and 'Song of the Negro Boatmen', Langston Hughes' 'A Dream Deferred', and various quotes from Whitman and the Free Soil Party.

The Cry of [the] Free Man
[for the protection of the liberty of whites]

O western orb sailing the heaven,

OH mother of a mighty race,

I will escape from the sham that was proposed to me.

Like a raisin in the sun

every wrong shall die

by the lone rivers of the West.

[Like] the joy of uncaged birds

shall sit a nobler grace than now

where field and garner, barn and byre.

Labor must not be degraded.

[It] must shape our good or ill,

drop strength and riches at thy feet,

[give] power, at thy bounds.

The thronging years in glory rise

for the starved laborer...

[So with] a hand like ivory fair

Fight on and Fight ever

[For] sea-winds blow from east and west

[but] the clouds are coming swift and dark.

Class evaluation:

I'm not sure if I have many quarrels with how the course was ran. I really enjoyed how each class was led as more of a discussion than a lecture for it got me to think more critically about Whitman's work and learn new perspectives [from fellow students] that I would have never been exposed to if the class were set up any differently. The course load did seem a bit overwhelming at times since we had to respond to the tweet of the week, specimen days, and a poem, but over all I learned a lot and enjoyed meeting online as well as in the classroom. 

Whitman: The Dude

Prompt #1

Of the few movies I have seen by the Coen Bros, it seems like the contents in which they explore all tend to gravitate around the idea of taking average, common day people and putting them in extraordinary situations they would never normally find themselves in. The Big Lebowski for example, The Dude is the epitome of your run of the mill guy, unemployed, part of a bowling league, does the same thing day in and day out.. but gets mistaken for a millionaire lebowski and has to be part of some heisty situations, people start dying, people shit on his rug etc. In Burn After Reading, the same thing happens except replace the dude and his friends with a couple of gym employees and the mistaken identity is a swap of a bag or the handling of an important CIA disc (can't remember exactly). In a very rough, simplistic analysis, it seems as though the Coen Bros are trying to elevate the hopes and status of the average person by saying we are all privileged enough to be in these situations. OR it could just be a very good formula for entertainment: put someone in a situation they know nothing about and watch them run around like a chicken with their head cut off.

In relation to Whitman, he is doing somewhat of the same thing. Celebrating the average american by trying to elevate them to a status worthy of 'poetry' and 'scholars.' What the Coen Bros and Whitman are saying is that we are all worthy of entertainment topics, to say the least, so when we see ourselves up on the big screen or in the latest Whitman poem, we feel acknowledged, accepted, privileged, special etc. One good example would be Whitman's Song for Occupations: he literally lists occupations, and it's almost like we're going through a list, searching for our names, as if wondering "did we get accepted?"

One difference I must mention though is that in the Coen Bros movies, the average guy tends to get fucked over, so in a way it's saying we can't handle high rolling. Let's just stick with the reasoning being to make ourselves feel better about or current status.

Ginsberg!

For starters, Ginsberg has free form, lengthy lines, no rhyme, little structure, similar to Whitman. Hearing Ginsberg read Howl, it seemed he was taking on a preachy style. The same in which Whitman was interested in: not so much the content but the breath and rhythm of the poem.

With themes and imagery, in Howl, there is the juxtaposition of the great minded youth paired with the corrupt institution tearing them down. Whitman wasn't as explicit as Ginsberg, maybe that's just the difference in language over time, but he clearly was against the institution as well. Speaking against the scholar, the typical poet etc. In A Supermarket in California, Ginsberg definitely takes on the voice of the lost American youth, "Where are we going, Walt Whitman?" that Whitman addresses as well "I contradict myself." This piece specifically remins me of section 20 of Whitman's Calamus poems. The one where he is speaking of the tree he saw in Louisiana that stands alone. Whitman looks to it for answers, or at the very least admires it for what it stands for. I feel that in Supermarket, Ginsberg is taking on the role of Whitman the speaker in section 20, and Whitman becomes the tree, the one with the answers.

'the man' vs. 'the poet' : I think who 'the man' is defines who 'the poet' is. I see a correlation between Whitman and Ginsberg in the sense of them representing, or attempting to, an identity, an American identity. But they do so through the medium of a more specific identity, Whitman the average American worker and Ginsberg, American, disenfranchised youth. When I listened to the reading of Howl, after this line "who vanished into nowhere Zen New Jersey leaving a trail of ambiguous picture postcards of Atlantic City Hall," people laughed. I didn't get it.  This seemed to be because maybe it was very colloquial and particular to New Yorkians, have to experience it to understand. This is similar to Whitman. A New York man. They're trying to speak to a whole but can't help but speak to particular part as well. In thinking of Song of Myself, many images specific to the times and the place of Whitman, but it is still able to stand the test of time and relate. The same happens with Ginsberg. I think maybe a little more obscure and particular, but same idea. There will always be these types of people and it will call to a certain youth of every generation. SO in relation to the man... it is where they come from, their specific experience, that pathes the way for the poet. The poet borrows from the man to inspire and create the work of art. By getting specific, can be universal.

Whitman's Presence in 9/11

Hum
by Ann Lauterbach This poem uses a tactic of remembrance of better days. It looks to the future to remind us that the mourning will not last forever and that we will move on to beautiful days. "The days are beautiful./The towers are yesterday." This reminds me of the symbolic song in Whitman's poem being the ever present reminder of death, but by the end, as a whole, we are able to move on.

As that powerful psalm in the night I heard from recesses,

Passing, I leave thee lilac with heart-shaped leaves,

I leave thee there in the door-yard, blooming, returning with          spring.

I cease from my song for thee,

Lauterbach's poem differ from Whitman's in that it doesn't take time to settle in the death. In the first line, it is already addressing a time where death is not present. Whitman, even though he moves on, still addresses that death will always be there. He's just leaving it for now. This makes me see that Whitman uses a more realist approach in his poetry than any other.


if bin laden read dr. seussby markk


This poem uses a tactic of common hate. He takes the confusion held by America as a whole and uses it to address a bin laden, making a common symbol of hatred that can bring everyone together. This also reminds me of Whitman's symbolic song. Both poets are using an object or symbol to identify the common emotions threaded through the people experiencing the tragedy. Also, even though markk uses hate and confusion for his tactic and Whitman uses love and memory, markk takes a "Whitman-esc" approach to ending his poem, wishing well for bin laden. 

tonight you will dream of lambs& flutes & calm nectars fromfruited vines, because i will it so& that white light you see is myshadow. open yer heart man, havesome green eggs, i know you don'teat ham, & i'd like you to meetmy friend sam, yes, sam i am

Photograph from September 11

BY WISŁAWA SZYMBORSKA


This poem takes an entirely different approach to national grieving by exploring the moments right before death through the eyes of a few individuals. In fact, the poem never even reaches death 

They’re still within the air’s reach,within the compass of places
that have just now opened.

Although, I believe this has a similar end result to what Whitman does in his poem for it is making the reader experience what brought on this death, triggering a grieving process. For me, Whitman's entire poem is about the grieving process. This makes me see that Whitman, in his poem, is trying to ease the reader into death, which makes me feel that his poem can work for 'similar historical ruptures and disasters."  

Project Expanded

So I am attempting to understand Whitman's views on slavery and how that relates to his peers as well as the common American of the time. I am slowly realizing that there really wasn't a common thread belief throughout the people, hence the separation of the North and the South. I am discovering though that there was a common desire to believe in something. When reading an article about Whitman's relation to pro-slavery and how he was marketed to the south as "the rage" as a strategy to get his work out there, Van Evrie, the editor of the Day Book, a pro-slavery newspaper, was compared to Whitman in their reader and who they appealed to

"socially insecure whites in search of a sense of identity that could help make the existing social and economic systems more tolerable.”

 I think what I want to do now is find that voice within Whitman and his peers and capture it in the Cento poem I am creating. In order to do so, I will research further about the Free Soil movement, something Whitman was said to be apart of, and artists on both ends of the slavery spectrum such as William Douglas O'Connor, John Townsend Trowbridge, Franklin Benjamin Sandborn, Van Evrie etc. I will also search through newspaper articles that these people were featured in such as Commonwealth, an anti-slavery paper, and Day Book, a pro-slavery paper. I am hoping to find a common thread as mentioned earlier having to do with a search for an identity.

Peter Doyle

Peter Doyle was an Irish Immigrant that came over to the Americas in the early 1800s. He landed in the South, D.C. and then Virginia and voluntarily fought against the Union in the Civil War. He met Walt Whitman later as a streetcar driver where they "felt to each other at once." It is said they became lovers for the last years of Whitman's life, inspiring Whitman's Calamus poems if not directly but in reassurance of the feelings portrayed in them. Doyle was also a witness to Abraham Lincoln's death in which Whitman is said to draw from his experience in his infamous poem "O Captain, My Captain."

There seems to be a shift in Whitman that I noticed in the Calamus poems. He is less preachy and confident, and more a love's servant, commenting on the beauty of nature and death and love and turning the reader away from viewing him as a teacher of sorts. Although in the end he eludes to those doubts as a test, he doesn't directly take on the role he held within Leaves of Grass as a guide for the reader. I think this has to do with his association with Doyle and new found appreciation for Love. Doyle changed Whitman as a man, more concerned with his lovers and friends, commenting on how often he thinks of them. I believe he also states somewhere that he doesn't revel in his previous beliefs on America and his appreciation for it as often as he used to. When thinking about it, maybe Doyle was to Whitman as Yoko was to Jon Lennon, still an artist but that's when he started spouting 'All You Need Is Love' and focusing on world peace and what not. In the biography in the Walt Whitman archive, it is even said that Doyle might be the reasoning for 'O Captain, My Captain's' rhyme, which was not at all Whitman's preferred verse at all.

Whitman may also have broken from his own poetical tradition and adopted rhyme to make the poem more appealing to the limerick-spouting Doyle. Interestingly, Whitman's first draft of "O Captain!" is not rhymed, but rather written in free verse.

 Oh, what things people do for love!

Project: To Enslave or Not to Enslave?

In light of our conversation about Whitman being anti-abolitionist while still trying to explore the experience of the runaway slave, I want to rethink my blog, The Stupor Passes, based on a Specimen Days entry addressing the First Battle of Bull Run during the Civil War. I made the statement

maybe [Whitman's] state was a common one for an American of the times.. One that was confused and torn between sides, and the issues with slavery: in theory supporting the abolition of it, but patriotically supporting its continuance because of America's history and commonality of slavery.

This makes me wonder the answer to this eluded question: did the common American of the times feel torn between abolition and pro-slavery? Was it a state of confusion? To try and answer this question, I will attempt to research the works, speeches, and literature of prominent literary figures of the times. I will then create a Cento, or a poem/compilation of lines from these figures and advocates that will try to provide the multiple or common views held on this issue. A bonus with this project would be finding out the African American or non-white perspective on White abolitionists. How did they interact? Did they try to work together? Or was there a disconnect similar to the one expressed in our class the other day by the student who felt Whitman had no right to take on the voice of the runaway slave? I will also try very hard to keep my opinions from entering my poem because I really want to understand the perspective of Whitman's time.

Tupper!

Martin F. Tupper was an English poet and philosopher whose most famous works included Proverbial Philosophy, which included "rhythmic" proverbs on how to be a proper Englishman.

While Tupper and Whitman are both associated with their free form, causing remarks of egotism by many reviewers, and some content as seen in the discussion of the sublime etc... They seem the most similar in regards to their social standings, public opinion, and how they represented something more than just what their poetry had to say. In many English reviews, as Whitman first started out, he was compared to Tupper, most often in a negative light. While Tupper associated with the elite, upper class advocating the Anglo Saxon race, and Whitman associated with the lower, working class advocating equality and popular opinion, they were both seen as outlandish insults... So says Matt Cohen in his essay "MARTIN TUPPER,  WALT WHITMAN,  AND THE EARLY REVIEWS OF LEAVES OF GRASS:"

 To most of  the s e  pape r s ,  then,  Whi tman and Tuppe r ,  r epr e s ent ing the  wor s t  of  both worlds, were happily uni t ed by a coinc idenc e  of  form.

 Even in America, Tupper was frequently pictured as an embarrassing Englishman, appearing drunk and rambling about England's superiority over America. Whitman was similarly seen as an ignorant egotist, trying to represent a country that didn't want him.. which indefinitely they did.. Whitman even recognized this association and used it to us his advantage, riding off the coattails of Tupper and his current celebrity [1860ish], re-publishing all the reviews in which they were compared.

For me, they seemed to be two figures in which their homelands loved to hate, only momentarily for Whitman though... which in turn sort of did what Whitman hoped for, a means of unification. They seemed to represent a change that was taking place in poetry, that old English scholars didn't want to accept, as seen in their negative reviews. While Tupper represented more of what was associated with the typical poet of the times, stuffy, political, white wigged, conservative... He did relate to Walt by going against the grain. Maybe it wasn't his desire to be that way, but that is how the public viewed him. They both offered something different than the status quo.. which Whitman seemed to recognize for he reviewed Tupper as "one of the rare men of the times."

Youth in the Homestead

Specimen Days: The Maternal Homestead

Whitman logs the memories stirred in his mind when he visits the site where his mother's home and where he spent a good portion of his childhood in. He finds it mostly gone, with only a few remnants left, over taken by grass and weeds. Many generations lived in that home, seems like 3 or 4, so it's interesting to note that it stopped at Walt's generation.

The image of the 29th bather comes to mind, yearning to swim with the 28 men in her home. The home could somehow represent the confines of the woman, that have finally been torn down and all who inhabited the place are now dead, bathing with the others, or swaying in the wind in the very blades of grass and weeds that grew over the place.

The memories Whitman recalls seem very romanticized. His grandparents take an archetypal characters: the jolly grandfather and the sweet old grandmother... The lineage of horses raised with the family... It makes me think of how we tend to gloss over our memories of childhood and associate them with 'better times' or 'ignorant bliss.' Maybe the house represented some sort of innocence for Walt that is now shattered in adulthood, metaphorically represented by the run down house, even the 'copious old brook and spring... have mostly dwindled away.' This is a theme Whitman explores throughout all of his poetry, and seems to be a great hardship in his life, the losing of innocence. America, as a country, seemed to have gone through that phase during Whitman's lifetime as well... trying to unite and ignoring the problems of the times, but couldn't and broke out in a civil war. America too yearns for those simpler days, which probably never existed in either case, Whitman or America or for anyone in fact, it's just that shield youth brings about that what is truly missed.

The Wit of Walt Withstanding the Test of Time

Walt's words inspired a beer! His description of a Philadelphia sunset inspired a Philadelphia Brewing Company to craft their own beer in a taste similar to what the words are describing.

"...a broad tumble of clouds, with much golden haze and profusion of beaming shaft and dazzle"

 In one review, a person describes the beer as "Spicier, the ale brings quite a bit to the table." 


It seems as though the brewing company captured Walt well in this beer, representing his multi-faceted nature and desire to appreciate all aspects of the world and the people and things that inhabit it. I think Walt would appreciate this certain influence he had as well for he meant his appreciative nature to transcend into mass culture. What better way to do that than in beer form? In today's culture, beer is a symbol of unity. It brings people together! 

Beer Review 1

Beer Review 2

Walt's image and words is rumored to have inspired the Bram Stoker's [1897] infamous character, Dracula. Stoker believed Whitman to be a "father, brother, and wife to his soul"which the vampire captures well within its character. Not only does his image relate, the "long, white hair,  heavy moustache, great weight and strength..." his poetry explores the intermixings of death and love that Dracula embodies as well. Song of Myself absolutely comes to mind for Whitman as the narrator lives on forever, enticing the reader to join him in this immortal death. And what do vampires do? The same thing! Whoa! It all makes so much sense.

Looks Pretty Similar To ME!

Dracula!

Walt Whitman has also made his way into British Film! The poem "Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking" makes its way into the 2001 movie L.I.E. when the protagonist Howie, a 15 year boy who has 'lost everything' and is in the process of 'finding himself' quotes a few lines. I have not seen the movie, but it seems as though the lines represent the current state of the boy, losing his innocence associated with growing away from childhood, especially in the line "Never again leave me to be the peaceful child I was before what there, in the night..." Once again, Whitman's lines are able to capture a common American life, and represent a coming of age process for this boy... withstanding the test of time in that his words still associate with the common process or life of the American.

The scene in which Howie recites Whitman

L.I.E. Synopsis

Review on Reviews of Whitman

It is amazing how people can consume the same product and recognize the product in the same exact ways, but have entirely different judgments of them. This was most apparent within the three reviews I read, Leaves of Grass New York. 1855. London. Horsell., "[We have before us]." The London Weekly Dispatch, and  "Studies Among the Leaves." The Crayon 3. 

All three focused on the topics of Whitman's work as:

-appreciative of Nature's beauty

-lacking of form, rhyme, or any typical features of 'poetry'

-simplistic language

-Whitman as a 'new-comer'

-representative of the modern man

The first review, Leaves of Grass done by Horsell in London, received these topics in an EXTREMELY negative light. One of the questions for this assignment asked if there were any over-reactions and this is most definitely the case. They even went as far as to say 

"Walt Whitman is, as unacquainted with art, as a hog is with mathematics. His poems--we must call them so for conveniance--twelve in number, are innocent of rhythm, and resemble nothing so much as the war-cry of the Red Indians."

Whoa! Since Whitman lacks form and rhythm, Horsell believes his piece of work shouldn't even be considered art or poetry. Horsell goes on further to say that Whitman

"talks like a man unaware that there was ever such a production as a book, or ever such a being as a writer... who gives us slang instead of melody, and rowdyism in the place of regularity... a man who calls his free speech the true utterance of a man: we... call it the expression of a beast...deserv[ing] nothing so richly as the public executioner's whip."

 So, not only is Whitman not an artist, or poet, but he is not even deserving of the title 'writer' but instead punishment via whipping. And this is all due to his simplistic language, use of slang, and addressment of topics outside of the elite scholar. This makes me think that the American Poet was very much assumed to be reflective of the English Poet, one that speaks the finest of languages, addresses only matters of the wealthy, and looks and acts reserved. Horsell mentions that Whitman appreciates nature but in the perspective of an animal... so it seems as though one must not only discuss certain things for a work to be considered poetry but they must only do it through a certain perspective... This makes me think of our discussion about the hierarchy of senses and how sight is reflectant of the privileged while smell as we see in Horsell's words is indecent: "Is it possible that the most prudish nation in the world will adopt a poet whose indecencies stink in the nostrils?"

Horsell's review also makes me think of Barnum and how he would promote negative reviews of himself for it would bring an audience with the intent to see for themselves the reasoning behind the bad reviews. It's like when mother's in the late 80's or early 90's disliked the 'satanic' music their children were listening to, metal, and pushed for a parental advisory sticker on the cd's that had the most outlandish lyrics and threatening instrumentals. This turned, though, into a positive thing for a record's sales for if the album didn't get a parental advisory sticker, it wasn't worth one's time to listen to for it wasn't 'metal enough.' Maybe Whitman wanted to be, in fact I'm pretty sure he did, rebellious and representative of what was considered 'un-civilized.' He wanted to redefine what was poetry, and probably appreciated these negative views for it got more people interested in what he was doing and opened their minds in the realm of literature.

The other two reviews by the London Weekly Dispatch and The Crayon 3 don't have as drastic views as Horsell, and both illude to Whitman's work as having potential, but needing work in order to become the great poet they knew Whitman could be. The London Weekly mentions also mentions that Whitman's lack of standard poetic-ness may be seen as a negative, his

"strength of expression...fervor, hearty wholesomeness...originality, mannerism, and freshness...appropriate to themselves alone... and his poems in time will become a pregnant text-book..."

The Crayon 3 also says that

"...the rude, vigorous, and grand if chaotic thought of Whitman...[is] imperfect only from want of development...not yet having attained its parts."

While these two reviews recognize the standards of poetry, they predict the growth not only within Whitman, but the reader of poetry. They know that it's ever changing and should be representative of the times, not stuck in the old English ideas of poetry that it was to serve a particular instead of the whole that Horsell believed in. I think this must reflect the ideology of the American people, they seemed desperate for something new and more relatable that Whitman was about to make happen.

I agree with this idea of poetry representing the times, or just representing anything. People need to get over the idea of poetry or literature as a habit of the elite and just accept it for its intent, content, or just for the words itself.

Loco for Workingmen

Frances Wright was a scottish-born immigrant to America who advocated feminism, abolitionism, as well as the working man's rights. Her ideas weren't based in simplicity though, and much like Walt Whitman, were grounded in basis of American ideology: opportunity. For example, Franny believed one couldn't just free the slaves for it would illegitimize the slave owner's right to property. Whitman also felt slaves couldn't be freed simply for it would uproot the very foundations of America. One needs to think of the good of the whole rather than the part as these two seemed to believe.

How they are more directly connected is through the influences of Franny's ideologies had specifically on Walt and his father. Walter Whitman Sr. was a member of the Locofoco Party, a radical wing of the Democratic Party localized mainly in New York that backed the workingman and state banks, monopolies, paper money etc. They distrusted any small organizations that had large control over the masses. This makes me understand Walt Whitman a little more because it seems to me that it didn't really matter WHAT people wanted for him... as long as the wishes of the larger population were granted that was okay, and I think that's what Franny was trying to say as well. And this matches the culture of America for it's not necessarily equality in content but equality in opinion. It's okay that the President and the Prostitute have their unequal places in the hierarchal society, but they are equal in the sense of being a person and having opinions, the only difference comes from how they got to where they ended up, it doesn't make them any less or more of a person.

Walt's First Reading!

My First Reading-Lafayette

Whitman recalls a few moments of his childhood, meeting General Lafayette of the American Revolutionary War at the opening of a library in Brooklyn, one that Whitman frequented with reading many books and poetry, the first reading he heard by Elias Hicks, one of the better known preachers of the Quakers that in fact had a lot impact on Whitman, as well as working in an office, learning how to read and write.

The way Whitman speaks of these events doesn't give them any importance. The only judgments we get are on his "nice desk" and the books and poetry in which he read: Arabian nights being an 'amazing treat' and how he ''continue(s) to enjoy novels and poetry to this day.) What is the point of this style? I know that Elias Hicks had a large impact on his beliefs and preaching styles, why not mention his influence? We know that Whitman was chosen out of very few by Lafayette to be picked up and hugged. Why do we have to find this out from John Burroughs? Normally Whitman is very long winded in his descriptions... in Song of Occupations he goes on for 2 pages describing occupations of average Americans. Why not do this for himself? 


I think this shows Whitman's commitment to the modern culture, leaving his individual history out of the picture so he can focus on whats good for the country and public as a whole. This even is reflected on the certain memories he recalls, meeting a famous American General, hearing a reading by a man that advocates equality, learning the medium in which he later uses to convey the importance represented by these two men. It's interesting that he does in fact only comment on books for they are creations by other people. In fact, Arabian Nights tells 1,000 stories representing common moral among humanity, what Whitman tries to address throughout the entirety of his body of work.

Whitman For America!

Born On a Sunday, On Thursday I Had Me a Job

The poem initially carries on the same format of SOM as addressing the reader in a way that the poem is written for them. This mirrors the content of the poem in that it gives ultimate credit to all things, culturally existing, to "you."

The sum of all known value and respect I add up in you whoever you are.

I believe this to be an exploration of the ideas presented in SOM but a in a more specific way, addressing the actual constructions of society such as the Constitution, Congress etc. It also more explicitly states the value Whitman places in the nature of the self over the culture. While in SOM Whitman may express the joy of the nature of one's self such as sex: 

"Thruster holding me tight and that I hold tight!

We hurt each other as the bridegroom and the bride hurt each other."

In SFO, specifically states the same natural act's value over culture: 

"Will we rate our prudence and business so high?....I have no objection,

I rate them as high as the highest....but a child born of a woman and man I rate beyond all rate."

Now on to the revisions...

OH MAN. 

As the poem is revised, I believe Whitman tries to be even more explicit and direct with his message. This reminds me of our discussion in class maybe last week, that with each revision, Whitman's audience grew larger, so he had less control over their interpretations of the meaning. While poetry is meant, at least I feel, to be open ended and allow for multiple interpretations, Whitman seemed to want more control as seen in his revisions. 

Even from 1855-1856, we see more line breaks and punctuation changes, creating less ambiguity in the breath of the poem. And from 1856-1860, adding phrases that address the reader as ' Male and Female!’ and ‘American masses!’ and ‘Workmen and Workwoman!" On top of this he adds more occupations to the list [although later cuts a lot of them out but for the same reasoning I am about to give I believe] as well as more colloquial terms or terms emulating common dialect such as 'outlawed' to 'outlaw'd' or 'reckoned' to 'reckon'd them for, camerado?' With this, Whitman is really trying to rial up the American! Represent the common man! In their speech, in their identifications with their careers, etc. He wants to really make sure he is getting his point across that the average American really is accountable for the great state of the country. I believe this is his reasoning behind the admittance of certain political stanza's such as "The näive, the simple and hardy, he going to the 

         polls to vote, he who has a good time, and he 
         has who a bad time" 
and other stanzas that mention slavery, the mexican, the indian, etc. In a way, he is being less controversial in order to cause less strife amongst readers... in a way hiding the negatives, mistakes, problems of the country in order to create almost a false sense of unity for the reader. 

With the last three versions, well really two since there aren't any changes between the '82 and '92 versions, we see even more directness with the cutting out of the first 4 stanzas. With the opening of "a song for the occupations..." the reader receives the point right away, this poem is about me, is about my role and its importance, is about unity, blah blah blah. While this may be affective for Whitman's intentions of the poem, I feel as if it is not affective for the poem as a whole... In fact, I almost wouldn't call it a poem anymore, but a persuasive journalistic essay. Straight and to the point, with the most important information in the beginning and becoming less important the further one reads on. I want to see  beautiful imagery, the art of language and metaphor etc. But I suppose the benefit of all these revisions is that I have the option to relate or prefer one over the other. 

Whitman: Half B'hoy Half Man

The term Bowery B'hoy originated from a popular gang in mid 19th Century New York called the Bowery Boys. They presided in the area of Bowery, New York; promoting ideas of nativism, hanging out in saloons and brothels, and generally just kicking some ass. As popular writers began to explore the gang within their literature or plays, a B'hoy became a certain character archetype in the modern culture of the times. A 'rough and tough' person of the lower, working class that looked something like this:

When considering his voice for 'Song of Myself,' it is said that Whitman considered the B'hoy in contrast to the business, broadway type of man. I read a segment of Donald D. Kummings' book, A Companion to Walt Whitman, and he talks about the B'hoy representing "the great middle class of free life under a republic of which they are the types and representatives," despising the upper class of  business owners etc. As we talked about in class, Whitman's poem juxtaposes the modern culture of America, idealizing the business man and strong work ethic, with a narrator that does the opposite: loafs in the nude, connects with nature and surroundings etc. It doesn't seem as if the B'hoy would get naked and run through the forest, but these two personas represent an alternative to the average, a clash to the main stream ideals of the upper class. 

To stem from that idea, I read in a wikipedia article addressing the "B'hoy and G'hal" that as the archetype became popular to use in modern day plays, there was a transfer of upper class citizens to lower, working class roughs in the theater. 

“

the boxes no longer shone with the elite of the city; the character of the audience was entirely changed, and Mose, instead of appearing on the stage, was in the pit, the boxes, and the gallery. It was all Mose, and the respectability of the house mosed too. -A complaint by William Northall at the Olympic Theater

This reminded me of Whitman for he was all about the modern pop culture as opposed to the elitist interests of the times. He must have been pleased if/and when he found out this information. In fact, he could have even been sitting along side those 'Mose's' in the theater!

Revision Confusion

I must admit, that I could not find 'Song of Myself' within the 1860 version for about 30 minutes. I looked up and down everywhere, except for the tag 'Walt Whitman' of course, searching for words within song of myself through the computer. I guess I either looked over 'Walt Whitman' or just assumed it wouldn't be in there. So to turn this confusion into feedback on Whitman's revision... it is interesting that he changed the title from 'Song of Myself' to 'Walt Whitman'. I feel that it takes away from the universality of the poem, combing you and i with everything in existence. It puts a specificity and individuality into it that I don't think Whitman was going for in the original piece. To comment on the actual structural changes, what I noticed most was that he played around with the syntax... of everything, not only 'Song of Myself' but throughout the whole Leaves of Grass. Changing elipses to dashes and using parentheticals when he hadn't before, capitalizing and uncapitalizing things that weren't so before. I believe this could have something to do with the idea that Ed Folsom and Kent Price brought to our attention: how 'Song of Myself' maybe wasn't such an audio/speech based narrative, but an experiment with print. Elipses look almost unprofessional... sort of mash everything together into one idea or statement, where as dashes and parentheticals are very precise, they get the point across very easily. While Walt's content surrounds ideas of oneness and concepts mashed together, maybe he wanted his message to come across more clear. For example, in 'Song of Myself,' he capitalizes the word Soul in the 1860's version, where it was never capitalized before. Maybe Whitman really wanted to drive the idea of one's Soul into the reader in a way that he felt wasn't showing importance in the 1855 one.

Now to comment on the revisions from 1860-1867, the most penciled in revisions on the 1860 edition had to do with the structure of the lists and recognitions he makes to people of certain professions etc. as well as the dedications he makes the poem is for. Again, I think it has something to do with being more straight-forward in that he wants to cram as much as he can in one small area while making it legible or understandable for the reader. He's playing with the structure really more than the actual content.

Oneida Community

The Oneida Community was a religious commune that believed Jesus' Second Coming had already happened, so they were free to live without sin and delve into the pleasures of the world. They practiced things like 'Free Love' and 'Communalism' [what's mine is yours].

While researching the connection to Whitman, the only physical documents I can find that simultaneously mention both the community or the founder and Whitman are accounts of Whitman and friends of the community, or a reference to the Oneida Circular, their newspaper, that one of Whitman's poems must have been in. So in drawing my own connections, I would have to say that the Oneida Community must have been at the very least a contemplation of Whitman for he was a poet of the modern times, and one cannot ignore something such as the Oneida Community in that it was a popular ideology and practice of Whitman's times. I believe that they had similar beliefs, equality for all, everything 'belonging' or being presentable for everyone. Certainly, Whitman practiced free sex.

I also think of Whitman's religious affiliations. He did not commit to any certain practice, but he had family ties in the Quaker community. Although they weren't as free spirited as what the Oneida Community sounds like, they did practice equality for women and revolve around a sort of utopian environment as well.

THE STUPOR PASSES -- SOMETHING ELSE BEGINS [Specimen Days]

This entry is regarding one out of the two days Whitman remembers the most clearly during the Civil War. This day, following the First Battle of Bull Run, marked the status of the war in that it wasn't a quick fight to be won by the North, and that the entire country was in it for the long haul. One might assume that a resident of the north's recollection of this moment might recounter it in a negative manner, but it seems as though Whitman recalls the memory with much excitement:

"Then the great New York papers at once appear'd...with leaders that rang out over the land with the loudest, most reverberating ring of clearest bugles, full of encouragement, hope, inspiration, unfaltering defiance. Those magnificent editorials!"

I can't help but think back to the Wilmot Proviso and how Whitman was against it, not because he was pro-slavery, but because he was anti-abolitionist - or against the idea of change for the country. If the North had won this battle and the war would have pretty much been over before it started, the Northerners would presume their feelings of hierarchy over the South, creating a divide in the moral amongst the American people. Whitman, above all else, was for equality, so in what seems to be some sort of backwards ideology, he thought positively of the Southerners, the pro-slavery side, winning this battle and putting the Northerners in their humbling place.

For in the humiliation of Bull Run, the popular feeling north, from its extreme of superciliousness, recoil'd to the depth of gloom and apprehension.

I feel as if there must be some other motive behind his reasoning for this... Or maybe his state was a common one for an American of the times.. One that was confused and torn between sides, and the issues with slavery: in theory supporting the abolition of it, but patriotically supporting its continuance because of America's history and commonality of slavery. It is like one who is raised with a certain religion, but grows to question the science of it... do they follow what has been engrained in them by their community/family/authority? or do they follow their reason and individual morality? Whitman seems to have his individual morality, disagreement with slavery, but overall desires to keep the beliefs of his community/family/authority, common moralities of America, in tact.

My Interpretations of Whitman

Audio Interpretation

Visual Interpretation

"

I think I could turn and live awhile with the animals . . . . they are so placid and self-           contained,

I stand and look at them sometimes half the day long.

They do not sweat and whine about their condition,

They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins,

They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God,

Not one is dissatisfied . . . . not one is demented with the mania of owning things,

Not one kneels to another nor to his kind that lived thousands of years ago,

Not one is respectable or industrious over the whole earth.

So they show their relations to me and I accept them;

They bring me tokens of myself . . . . they evince them plainly in their possession.

I do not know where they got those tokens,

I must have passed that way untold times ago and negligently dropt them,

Myself moving forward then and now and forever,

Gathering and showing more always and with velocity,

"

Whitman's Peers

The content of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's The Village Blacksmith is similar to Whitman in the study and exploration of a character that seems to represent the average American life. One who works day in and day out and earns an honest living:

"His brow is wet with honest sweat,

 He earns whate'er he can"

He contemplates death:

"He needs must think of her once more,

 How in the grave she lies;
And with his hard, rough hand he wipes
 A tear out of his eyes."

But most importantly, he is a continuos contributor to society, putting forth efforts and thought in a daily regimen.

"Toiling,—rejoicing,—sorrowing,

 Onward through life he goes;
Each morning sees some task begin,
 Each evening sees it close"

The intent of the poem seems to create a look into the average life as a way to relate and almost feel good about one's own status and ethics as an American reader. It embodies the current moral of the time, capturing the American dream. "If you work hard, you will succeed." Although, this aspect opposes Whitman's ideology. He would agree with the uplifting nature of the poem, but not that it came about from good work ethic. Whitman would rather the reader spend thought through appreciation and understanding of their surroundings. Not hammering away at the same job day in and day out.

The rhyme and form of the poem seems to mirror this intent to portray the hard American worker. The fact that it is in any form at all ties into the willingness to conform to the ways of society. The ABAB structure resembles the day in day out idea of work ethic, the monotonous lifestyle lead by the average American. "Each morning sees some task begin/Each evening sees it close." On the other hand, Whitman's free form reflects his idea of the inward and outward-ness he desires and feels for existence. There is nothing containing his words or thoughts as there should be no containment for the human. In fact, Whitman doesn't even feel that his Song of Myself is poetry. In fact, he wants the reader to forget all poetry for it is "looking through the eyes of the dead." - some old dude that wrote something that isn't relevant to the times anymore. He wants us to understand the world and not be confined by the words on the page or how they're arranged.

In Elizabeth Oakes Smith poem The Incident, she takes on the incident of an eagle dropping a quill as a sign from above, or sort of message from the bird. This relates to Whitman's idea that one can interact with nature and their animal surroundings, that they have some innate knowledge within them just as us humans do. The difference is that the narrator in Smith's poem wonders the reasoning behind the eagle's action. Why did they do this? "O noble bird! why didst thou loose for me/Thy eagle plume? still unessayed, unknown..." If this were to happen to Whitman, he wouldn't question or even worry about the meaning, but appreciate the interaction and see the face value of it. He would admire the appearance of the quill, maybe rub it on his face a little.

The form or rhyme of the poem is a little looser than Longfellows, but still keeping to the ABAB structure, ending in AA. It does though seem to have a steady beat throughout the poem, one that I feel I could clap my hands along to. Maybe it goes along with the flap of the eagle's wings or something.

Thomas Bailey Aldrich's poem I vex me not with brooding on the years contemplates death and what inhabits it. While the narrator goes back and forth questioning what will happen after life, the ending is hopeful: "Still lovelier life awaits thee. Fear not thou!" Maybe Aldrich is trying to address a common fear amongst the reader and attempting to settle it. This relates very much so with Whitman for one of the biggest themes within Song of Myself is death, and I believe one of his intentions of the poem was to calm the reader of the anxieties attributed to the idea of death. Both Aldrich and Whitman are trying to make the unknown, known. And the thoughts on the actual afterlife aren't far off from one another, Aldrich questioning a previous life where he questioned the same things, hinting that maybe that death from this life merely leads to another one. Whitman doesn't hint but explicitly states pretty much the same thing. That death is merely a transformation, that death isn't really death or and end to anything, but the continuation of the self amongst others.

The form is even freer of the other two poems. While they were quite noticeable in the other two, having almost as big of a part as the content, Aldrich's poem allows the words to speak for themselves in a way, which relates to Whitman. He doesn't care about the how so much as the what. What is the poem saying and what is it doing for the reader?

Specimen Days: Answer to an Insisting Friend

"I have often thought of the meaning of such things -- that one can only encompass and complete matters of that kind by exploring behind, perhaps very far behind, themselves directly, and so into their genesis, antecedents, and cumulative stages."

---

Whitman is journaling about the insistence of material, genealogy etc, of Whitman's history in order to understand the context of Leaves of Grass. It is interesting that he is willing and able to collect such data and hand it off so easily. I assume records, at that time, were sparing, but maybe Whitman didn't put much value into the actual documents. His background has already affected him and found meaning on its own, minus the papers describing it, and will stay with Whitman whether or not he has the copies. 

I assume at this point, he is some what of a celebrity because his friend is asking for such information. This adds another interesting point to Whitman's willingness for the celebrities today seem to, or at least try to be extremely private and secluded from the rest of humanity. This just shows Whitman's perceptions on the equivalence he feels amongst people. The "what's mine is yours" mentality is here, encapsulating the mentality of Whitman's Song of Myself.  I mean, if we're all going to dissolve into the air, or ground, and end up being stuck on each other's boots, why feel of any importance over others? Why find importance in records or documents? We are all products of our past and are in this present one in the same, so everything should be shed and enjoyed.  

Tweet of the Week-Barnum and Whitman?

Upon my research of the association of Barnum and Whitman, I discovered that Whitman interviewed Barnum for the Brooklyn Diary Eagle as well as recorded accounts of at least two visits to the museum in the newspaper. Whitman was fascinated by museums and they apparently impacted his poetry and study of the human quite profoundly. He would sometimes sit at the Barnum American Museum and "positions a chair in front of a window, where he can watch the passing traffic, “the busiest spectacle this busy
city can present.” [Barney Walt Whitman: 19th Century Popular Culture] Barnum was a major part of culture during Whitman's times, so it was something he could not ignore in his study of humanity. In fact, Barnum's autobiography The Life of P.T. Barnum came out the same year as Whitman's Leaves of Grass.

Barnum and Whitman were both interested in the culture of humanity, and what struck them and what unified them. They both wanted to influence vast amounts of people, although Barnum for ticket sales while Whitman for understanding or even creating a common thread among people. In order to do so, they both realized the importance of advertising. They both took out ads in papers etc, themselves, making commentary on their own work and showing it in a positive light. Barnum would start up controversy about his own exhibits in order to boost ticket sales, while Whitman would post various ads, talking up his most recent publications.

These two seem to be worlds of different, but in fact they interacted and had some strong connection in their time because they both had a strong desire and curiosity to understand and associate with humanity. 

Come Bathe With Me

Motif: bathing/wetness

2. "Knowing the perfect fitness and equanimity of things, while they discuss I am silent,
and go bathe and admire myself." [2]

"I pass death with the dying, and birth with the new-washed babe....and am not
contained between my hat and boots..." [5]

"The runaway slave came to my house and stopped outside...
[I] brought water and filled a tub for his sweated body and bruised feet..." [7]

"Twenty-eight young men bathe by the shore,
Twenty-eight young men, and all so friendly,
Twenty-eight years of womanly life and all so lonesome." [7]

"Where are you off to, lady? for I see you,
You splash in the water there, yet stay stock still in your room.

Dancing and laughing along the beach came the twenty-ninth bather,
The rest did not see her, but she saw them and loved them.

The beards of the young men glistened with wet, it ran from their long hair,
Little streams passed all over their bodies..." [7]

"They do not think whom they souse with spray." [8]

"This is the grass that grows wherever the land is and the water is,
This is the common air that bathes the globe." [11]

"This is the tasteless water of souls....this is the true sustenance," [11]


"You sea! I resign myself to you also....I guess what you mean...
We must have a turn together...I undress...hurry me out of sight of the land...
Dash me with amorous wet....I can repay you." [15]


"Parting tracked by arriving....perpetual payment of the perpetual loan,
Rich showering rain, and recompense richer afterward." [21]


3. "Knowing the perfect fitness and equanimity of things, while they discuss I am silent,
and go bathe and admire myself." [2]

In this two lines, it seems as though bathing is a chance or activity for Walt to be with his body and soul in order to admire it. He realizes the depth of the quality of things, fitness and equanimity, but does not want to explore this knowledge. Instead he accepts it on a surface level and decides to enjoy the appearance of things. He is silent while bathing, meaning has no opinion or judgment-just admiration.



"Where are you off to, lady? for I see you,
You splash in the water there, yet stay stock still in your room.

Dancing and laughing along the beach came the twenty-ninth bather,
The rest did not see her, but she saw them and loved them." [7]

I combined these four lines because together, they fully capture the act of bathing and what it means to this 'lady' or 'twenty-ninth bather.' She is trapped within her home, for her womanliness etc, but is still interacting with the twenty-eight bathers, albeit in her imagination, through the activity of bathing and splashing in the water. The water here is supposed to represent an escape or release from the societal boundaries one is contained by. And again, the activity is associated with the body. She is finding joy and 'love'... 'dancing and laughing' by using and manipulating her body, not her mind.


"This is the grass that grows wherever the land is and the water is,
This is the common air that bathes the globe." [11]

The main motif in these lines is grass, but the action connected with the grass is 'bath[ing] the globe.' The grass is seen as a commonality between humanity, something that conjoins everyone and everything together. Here the conjoining is represented by bathing. Our similarities and oneness cleanse all of existence, and bathing is seen as bringing to light those very similarities and togetherness.


"You sea! I resign myself to you also....I guess what you mean...
We must have a turn together...I undress...hurry me out of sight of the land...
Dash me with amorous wet....I can repay you." [15]

This seems to be a somewhat sexual moment between Walt and the Sea. The act of 'dashing' Walt with wetness is a gift of pleasure given by the sea. He is naked, so it almost reminisces an act of baptism or cleansing. The sea is washing the sin or societal constraints, 'hurry me out of sight of the land' from Walt, giving him that freedom and equanimity as mentioned earlier. The lines also reflect an inward and outward motion or connectivity for Walt wishes to repay the sea with a dash of amorous wet in response.

4&5. As discussed in class, with this poem Walt is trying to converge the I with the You. This idea of unification seems radical for the time of the poem, and even now, for everyone was/is stuck in the contraints of society with the focus being on that of the individual-self provision etc. In order to get his point across, Walt could not have simply stated, "We are one. So start acting like." There needs to be a transitional period, a cleansing of the self from the past ideologies and prohibitors, in order to allow the reader this transition into the new, connective self. The act of bathing seems to be the act of that transition.  It is a physical activity, one that allows you to admire and appreciate the self. It is a pleasureful activity-the feeling of water, the rinsing of dirt, the clearing of the mind. It is one that can be done with others as seen with the 29 bathers. And water is also a natural ingredient provided by the Earth, a common factor that has a part in all our lives. The act of bathing is used by Walt to cleanse the reader of the past constraints, the house, intellectualness, the scents, the division, and transition into the future of freedoms, the ocean, the use of body, the connectivity. 

Specimen Days: Home-Made Music

"And there sweetly rose those voices up to the high, whitewash'd wooden roof, and pleasantly the roof sent it all back again."


Whitman conveys the motions of inward and outward within this simple log of a choir of nurses. It is like the breath of the voices brings security or.. relief in the patrons watching the performance by moving through them. I don't think he finds it coincidence that one of the soldiers he was watching, that was severely injured, happened to feel at ease that night. Maybe this outlook or mood wasn't true for the setting, but Whitman's perceptions of the night seem to relay similar ideas of appreciation, seen in Song of Myself.

The orchestra whirls me wider than Uranus flies,
It wrenches unnamable ardors from my breast,
It throbs me to gulps of the farthest down horror,
It sails me...I dab with bare feet...they are licked by the indolent waves,
I am exposed...cut by bitter and poisoned hail,
Steeped amid honeyed morphine...my windpipe squeezed in the fakes of death,
Let up again to feel the puzzles of puzzles,
And that we call Being.


When speaking of the opera within the poem Song of Myself, Whitman describes his body as convulsing, throbbing, sailing, steeping, squeezing, whirling... all because of this inward movement from the voices. It portrays the up and down heaving, continuous motion. At the end of the verse he defines this motion as "that we call Being." I think he finds some sort of liveliness, not actual living things but what keeps us living, within certain moments like this... or maybe in every moment. Something that is always present that he is able to appreciate, that keeps us continuously moving up and down, back and forward, in and out... Maybe it is brought out the most by the vibrations of the voice. Maybe he believes we are most human and alive when we express the vibrations of the body, or act through our bodies and not our minds. It almost seems to reflect some sort of religious belief of some sort of constant presence like God, but... it's more than that. The feeling of almost death or fake death.. like morphine.. seems to be the highest form of pleasure here. Maybe we are the most alive when we feel as if we're dying. 

Favorite Song of Myself Lines

"Hot toward one I hate, ready in my madness to knife him;"
"You must habit yourself to the dazzle of the light and of every moment of your life."

The first line is not necessarily a favorite, but it sparked the most obtainable thought while reading the poem. As a writer, a current fear of mine is not being able to capture humanity in... any way. Here, Whitman reveals an understanding of the human race: that we obtain the emotion of hate. It would be easy for someone upon writing a poem about, to put it lamely, acceptance to only address the good and civil side of humanity and nature in order to persuade the reader toward some sort of opinion. Whitman isn't trying to persuade anybody, and we see that in this line. He is trying to reveal his ideology behind existence, and in doing so, does not deny the human as a whole. "...ready in my madness to knife him;" What a startling frame of emotion, but very real. And the placement of the line is what I admired the most, for it is part of a vision he sees, I believe to be his perfect reality, or dream existence, which he is basically saying already exists.

The second line is one of those cheesy, self-inspiring favorites that is used to motivate etc. One could take it on a surface level of 'follow your dreams' or 'start living your life' but I think Whitman isn't trying to advocate change here. He is trying to say that we must make it a habit to enjoy what already exists in our lives. Everything "dazzles" the way it is, it just takes attention, "the light," to appreciate and find it. Open up to the possibility of greatness. If we really are all the same and connected.. then we are as great as the greatest person we individually believe to exist, so the 'greatness' is already there, we just have to pay attention to it and understand.