[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. 

Tweet a week: Frances Wright

Frances Wright was a radical woman(and I mean that in every sense of the word).  Hailing from Scotland and visiting America in her youth she was a very outspoken young woman, believing in equal rights for women, sexual freedom for women, emancipation of slaves, free education and various other things. She was an author, writing both books and editorials in her own newspaper. Her works made her very popular in the literary world as well as the activist world. 

Of course Walt would take interest in Fanny and find inspiration in her words. She was outspoken just as he was and their political views seem to be quite similar. Their views on slavery are similar as well, though Fanny seems more radical in her views on matters than Walt does. Her writings (from the snippets that I've read online) seem to be more direct than Walt's as well. Walt seems to tell more of a story with his words, depicting his issue in a poetic vision, whit Wright is a lot more straightforward in her word usage. 

A Song For Occupations - "This is Unfinished Business With Me"

I found this poem striking as it differs from Song of Myself in that it uses less of Walt's classic me, me, me talk and focuses more on the YOU. I suppose in a song FOR the occupations it would have to be more about the you anyways, since Walt's favorite occupation was, of course, loafing.

Throughout the course of the poem's career the name was changed several times. It started out unnamed, and then evolved into Poem of the Daily Work of the Workmen and Workwomen of These States in 1856, Chants Democratic in 1860, To Workingmen in 1867, Carol of Occupations in 1872, and finally A Song for Occupations in all subsequent editions. But the title was not the only change made to the poem throughout the various years of updating. The poem itself underwent numerous changes as well. First of all there are the various punctuation differences: the addition and subtraction of various dashes, the addition of parentheses around lines. These changes add to tone and style, making the poem mean different things to each reader as they are able to pause and reflect at punctuation marks as they please. But the punctuation almost seems unnoticeable when comparing the first version of the poem to the last.


When looking at the poems side by side you would notice that the words in the poem change drastically. While the 1855 edition opens with "Come closer to me" a warm embrace from Walt asking you to heed his gentle call, some of the later editions begin opening with, "A song for occupations!" which demonstrate Walt's call to arms almost quickly and fiercely grabbing reader's attentions. But he isn't just calling to any reader, he is calling to the working class. I also found it interesting that Walt is not only calling to the working men, but the working women as well. While the earlier of the versions of the poem seem to be subtly calling to the working class to lightly embrace Whitman, the later versions he is calling more specifically to certain workers in less of an embrace, but more of a "wake-up call." 

Rinse, Lather, Repeat, Rinse...

Looking at the various versions of Leaves of Grass is quite interesting, entirely entertaining, and at times overwhelming.

At first glance of the 1860 edition compared to the 1855 version, the most obvious change is the immediate addition of a new poem: "Proto-Leaf." While the first edition of LoG wasn't very successful Whitman kept editing and revising - adding and subtracting. The addition of this cleverly titled first poem seems to hint at a reintroduction of Whitman to the masses. His way of saying here I am, and here is my first leaf, my proto-leaf. Thus with this poem Walt Whitman starts his new revision with a new/first leaf of grass. After this first poem, LoG jumps into the first poem of the 1860 version simply titled: Walt Whitman. Once again this revision hints at Whitman saying something along the lines of, "Here I am, here me roar (or rather, watch me loafe.)" Rather than having an unnamed poem in a collection of nameless poem, Whitman starts with several bangs, opening peoples eyes to the power and enticement of his poetry. It worked as this version was wildly more popular than the first. But Whitman was not satisfied with his work still and continued to edit.

Fast forward to 1867. Whitman has a new version published and there are many revisions yet again to his work of endlessness. We, being resourceful scholars of 2012, have been so graced to have the internet and access to Walt Whitman's own copy of the 1860 version of LoG complete with pencil annotations, revisions, and notes. It's truly amazing to be able to see Whitman's own process of deconstruction and reconstruction in his poetry. In the 1860 Blue Book it can be seen that Whitman work mark out several passages and rewrite them as shorter more coherent lines, or sometimes add to them as well. Also, it is seem that he would change the spellings of words, thus simplifying them. This can be seen in this changing of words such as dropped to dropt, or his omitting several e letters from words changing words such as entered to enter'd. I have two ideas as to why Whitman would have done this. One, because he was a man who well understood language and changed the spelling of his words so that the spelling matches the way the word is said. My second idea is to simply make the piece sound and look more poetic. Though this is my less favorable of the two ideas. Still it is interesting to be able to ponder over these questions. We may have Whitman's own copy, but we still don't know his exact thoughts and reasons for changing certain things.

Whitman revised his masterpiece until he died. Like any great artist Whitman was probably never happy with his own work and continued to try to make it better. Had he continued living, there would probably be several more editions of this great work as Whitman would have continued to analyze, destroy, and recreate LoG. Making a new poetic masterpiece each and every single time.

Another Midnight Stroll

For this week's Specimen Days post I decided to read Nights on the Mississippi. I really enjoy these late night strolls that Whitman seems to take quite frequently. I enjoy reading about his wanderings of the night because I too like to soak in the nature of the night.

The thing that struck me about this particular piece was Whitman's admittance of loving the view of the bridge. As a man enamored with nature I would've pegged him to loathe something such as a giant man made structure like a bridge. He's proven me wrong again!

Other than my confusion over the bridge I found this piece to be quite peaceful and enjoyable. Whitman never ceases to amaze me with his clear and concise descriptions of nature. He's quite good at painting the picture in my mind of exactly what he's speaking of.

"Wait a minute... This sounds like Rock and/or Roll..."

In my readings about The Oneida Community I resisted the urge to drink any Kool-Aid and continued along with my research of this tantalizing cult. Rather that mimic what my wonderful and brilliant fellow students have already explained about The Oneida Community, I will take this opportunity to jump straight into my thoughts about it. I was baffled by their ideas of Jesus' return having already happened and their Garden of Eden that was to be created. They were just about 120 years to early for In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida to be their theme song. Creating Heaven on Earth or something even better? You'd need to be something out of this world to think that you could achieve that. All of my reading left me with bad tastes in my mouth as I read about Complex Marriages and the attempts to breed "perfect" children. I was wickedly reminded of Warren Jeffs, Jim Jones, and all of the other Religious commune, cult, "for-the-good-of-man" leaders out there. And I posed the same question that I always ask... Why would anyone in their right mind follow along with this?

Today, this question has gravitationally pulled me in the direction of Walt Whitman. As I swam through my thoughts and re-examined various lines of Song of Myself I came to my own conclusion that Whitman would have been disgusted with The Oneida Community. WHile I couldn' find any definite answers for myself on the internet I stand by my own views that Walt Whitman would have set himself apart from this community. While he may have agreed with some of its views such as free love and being free of sins in a perfect type of world, he would have been against various other views in the community. One  view being the one that grosses me out the most: the introduction of sex to immature males and females by overly matured males and females. I Don't believe this would have been cool with Whitman as he would have seen the obvious wrongness in this. This was something very impure and most certainly would have repulsed someone as self-proclaimingly pure as Whitman. While the idea of being married in a large group as a joined one would have been captivating to a man of the world like Walt, the fact that the marriages were only between man and woman would have thrown Walt off. This does not signify unity and oneness, but rather adds to the divide between male and female. I think this would have been a major turn-off to Whitman.

And so as I close another blog post and close my various opened tabs on my browser I say to you that while Whitman wrote of purity of mind and soul and being one with nature and one with each other, the ways of The Oneida Community are not what he meant. Had Whitman been alive throughout the decades from his time and ours he might be telling us to "Turn on, tune in, and drop out" and sang about A-Gadda-Da-Vida rather than his triumphant Song of Himself. Perhaps Whitman's idea of Paradise contrasts The Oneida Community's and his writing of Song of Myself is his way to display this. 

Iron Butterfly even seemed to have a cult following with their hit as can be seen by the sweating and manic citizens of Springfield. Their cult: I-Ron Butterfly!

Youtubing Whitman

Please excuse my slight tardiness with this assignment. I was have trouble with my camera, but finally got it recorded and posted.Enjoy!