[Anonymous]. "[A curious title]." Life Illustrated  (28 July 1855)


This anonymous author seemed to be more focused on Walt Whitman as a man more than anything else. In this review "Anonymous" talks about the title, Whitman's portrait, he discusses Whitman as "the perfect loafer", he continues to talk about the preface, then offers a replacement title: American Life, from a Poetical Loafer's Point of View, and wraps up his review by marveling over the fact that Whitman did not care about sales, but rather wrote just for the joy of it all. This author hardly mentioned the actual poetry of the book and merely called its lines "utterances (we know not what else to call them), unconnected, curious, and original." This author obviously cared a lot about the man behind the work, as he intrigued him just as much, if not more than the actual book. This isn't too different from a modern review. Walt Whitman is just as striking as his poetry, and he is studied right alongside his poetry. To attempt to understand and fully grasp Leaves of Grass, one must begin to understand Walt Whitman in all of his loafing glory.


[Anonymous]. "'Leaves of Grass'—An Extraordinary Book." The Brooklyn Daily Eagle 15 (15 September 1855)


Once again Whitman's poetry is described as an utterance in this piece. I feel that at the time, there was no better way to describe Whitman's style of poetry. My second observation (which is more of a side note) is that the author of this piece called him Walter Whitman. This isn't too out of the ordinary, since that is his name after all, but I just found it funny since I had never seen it written as such. 


This review gave me some difficulty. At some ends the author seems to enjoy Walter for the beauty of his imagery and command over words, but then seems to loathe him for his vagueness and lack of traditional poetic style - He even goes as far as to name all of the different poetic styles of the ages, just to prove his point. This author is quite indifferent towards Whitman while leaning more to the negative view of things, it seems. The book "staggered" the author beyond judgment or criticism, though his own negative judgment certainly seems to slip through the cracks of his own indifferent review. 


Whitman, Walt. "Walt Whitman, a Brooklyn Boy." The Brooklyn Daily Times  (29 September 1855)


Here is Walt Whitman at his finest, praising himself in a third-person point of view. He talks about egotism, questioning, "What good is it to argue about egotism?" The egotist admitting to his own egotistical review, classic! Whitman gloats over himself saying that nearly every aspect of his life has purpose (most notably his writing). I really like Whitman's praise over the fact that no other author's spirit had touched him. His writing was that of genuine genius and genuine inspiration. This may be true, it also may not be, only Whitman would truly know. What's funny about that is the fact that Whitman is praising himself over his genuine style when the biggest problem many critics had was his "lack" of style. Here is Walt saying that it is purely him, his poetry, no inspiration required, his poetry IS Walt Whitman in every aspect. One of the most positive reviews about Whitman was that of his own hand. The character of Walt Whitman that the first reviewer I discussed praised continues his enigmatic and curious legacy by reviewing his own work. 


And one more that I just could not resist!


[Anonymous]. "A Pleasant Quiz." The Albion, A Journal of News, Politics and Literature 14.36 (8 September 1855)


HA!! I needed to add this review for the sheer hilarity of it all. "that it suggests the notice of a man reviewing his own work—is not of much importance." Sorry Walter... Though it's not like this stopped him as he continued to review his own work multiple times.