Hello, Whitmaniacs! Having emerged relatively unscathed from our first encounter with Mister Whitman, here are some general conversation contributions:

Having read two reviews of Whitman’s work, one utterly scathing and one glowing, and then reading Whitman’s poetry right after, I’m inclined to say that neither review is entirely correct because while Whitman’s poetry isn’t my favorite, I don’t count it as unreadable. It’s just sort of there. Do you think either of these reviews are accurate and in what ways? Do you think the identities of the authors, one a man and the other a woman, have anything to do with how Whitman’s work revolted/appealed to them?

(May I just say the paragraph “…it is impossible to imagine how any man’s fancy could have conceived such a mass of stupid filth, unless he were possessed of the soul of a sentimental donkey that had died of disappointed love. This poet (?) without wit, but with a certain vagrant wildness, just serves to show the energy which natural imbecility is occasionally capable of under strong excitement” is absolutely hysterical.)

Whitman (very…very liberally…) uses the free verse to its fullest potential. He repeats beginning words or phrases often, follows no particular rhyme scheme, and his line sequences seldom follow a pattern, if ever. I think it’s interesting that his poems deal so much with freedom and the style itself is called free verse. He speaks of everyone from every walk of life, even unto death which he still hails as some sort of freedom. What is your take away from that? Is there something about his conversational style of poetry and free verse that sounds distinctly “American” in tone to you? (To me it kind of does, and not in a derogatory sense.) Or on the other hand is it just patriotic delusion?

And lastly, how do you think it is that Walt Whitman is able to connect so easily with everyone and everything in his poems, particularly Song of the Open Road? Is it his identity? Love for his country? His poems are broad and sweeping, and it’s almost like he’s a conductor and everyone on the open road is some sort of symphony but then he’s also part of that symphony. Does that make sense? I’m especially curious to know what you guys think of this in particular!