Whitman's+Critics



Whitman's Critics:
 * Provide a better understanding of society's views towards him
 * Value his writing that breaks tradition
 * Realize that any English speaker can relate to his writings
 * Criticize his literary value
 * Are merely voices in the crowd
 * Supply both positive and negative critiques

Reading reviews about Walt Whitman written during his lifetime provides a better understanding of the initial attitude of society towards him and the popularity of his ideas among the public and critics. The critics were exploring Whitman while he was still a fresh sensation, so they did not have previous biases that critics and students may have today. Today, Whitman's lasting contribution to American society is appreciated in full. On the other hand, critics of his time were experiencing Whitman’s concepts and styles for the first time, and one critic wrote that Whitman “is chaotic and fragmentary…" Before Whitman was widely accepted as an icon of poetry, his ideas were unknown to the literary world. When Whitman popularized free verse, many people criticized his poetry as lacking rhythm, structure, and proper organization. At the time, many people challenged his new ways of thinking, whereas today most people recognize his opinions because they have already been exposed to them. Besides demonstrating the contradiction of Whitman’s ideas, the critiques also show that he eventually became considerably famous. As one critic notes, his writings are “much over-praised, as well as greatly underrated,” showing that Whitman did enjoy widespread recognition during his writing career, as opposed to only achieving fame posthumously as many other artists did. By reading critiques of Whitman from when he was beginning to receive recognition for his poetry, modern readers can learn more about his initial reception in society, its relation to Whitman’s image today, and the state of literature during his lifetime. The reviews detail the beginnings of Whitman’s career as a writer and his varied reception.

A review of //Leaves of Grass// from the //Westminster Review// describes Whitman's work as representative of "a moral disorganization in the States" and a "waste of rhetorical verbiage," but recognizes that his radical change to free verse "will result in a broader and clearer life" for future poets. The critic abhors the roots of this revolution, but realizes that the value of his writing extends beyond the themes of the poem. Free verse gave future writers the medium to express their thoughts unrestricted, allowing them to use the structure of their poetry to convey meaning as well as the words. While the roots of this change are described as "painful" and "nauseous," the critic trusts that writers will eventually hone this style, living up to the precedent Whitman set by instituting this change and eventually realizing the realm of creativity that free verse offers.

Additionally, the critical views of Whitman's time insisted that poetry requires a form of rhythm and the lack of this jeopardized Whitman’s position as a poet. Critical views allowed readers to form their own opinions of Whitman and decide whether or not Whitman’s poetry should be scorned or admired. Poetry does not require a form of rhythm or meter; it is the flow of words, thoughts, and ideas that make up poetry. He is criticized for his simplicity and is called an embarrassment to America for the lack of eloquence in his “art of utterance." Poetry requires emotion and passion and Whitman does just that to get his point across. His critics may have considered Whitman’s political stance, his support of the Union soldiers, and his strong democratic beliefs therefore judging him based on his political impact and not on the poetry itself. Still, even his contemporaries cannot deny that “the poet conveys to the heart certain emotions which the brain cannot analyze, and only remotely perceives.” He may have been called a “cumberer of the earth” and a “devil of reasonless, hopeless, all-defying egotism,” but even his critics acknowledge his strengths and his impact on American literature.

Walt Whitman's reviews show the mixed reaction of Whitman's early audience. Though 21st century scholars read Whitman’s poems, they were originally written for people of the 1800’s, especially those in America. Thus looking at a March 29th, 1868 review in the London Sunday Times titled “Walt Whitman: Second Notice” provides a firsthand account of these responses. Not only did his poems appeal to American readers, but to any audience where the “English language is spoken." Though Whitman’s works appeared “wild, disorderly, and extravagant” to critics, they merely personified the changing, divided environment that Whitman found himself part of. The author of the review of praises Whitman further by saying that “he knows nothing of old-world notions and conventions” yet English readers can still view his poems “without being shocked”. This review best shows the receptiveness of audiences worldwide to his writing. Whitman was not simply an American author, but a worldly writer as well. His words are so powerful that people who have never met him or seen him can realize that “comradeship is his motto” and “men who work and love like he are his brothers." These reviews depict Whitman as the worldly and timeless writer he was.

As well, Whitman gave poetry a whole new meaning after the publication of his various works. He changed the way it was viewed in countries as far as England as a result of his newer and more creative style of writing. In fact, //Lloyd’s Weekly London Newspaper// knew him to go “on about matters fleshly, spiritual, and mixed” when first seeing his collection of works titled “Poems”. Here, Whitman presented different outlooks on life through his Transcendentalist teachings, which were uncommon to society. One of the most unusual aspects of Whitman’s poems was that there was no rhyming; his poems were written in free verse without a rhyme scheme. This idea was very unheard of in such current society’s perception of poetry, but seeing Whitman’s work allowed them to experience new forms of poetry and reject the sole ideas of traditional poetry of earlier times. Also, Whitman presented new ideas about nature in his poems. Through his Transcendentalist influence, Whitman portrayed a loving and nurturing side of nature. He was perceived by this same newspaper writer in London to be “in ‘communion with nature’” because of the admiration he showed for this universal force in his poetry. In addition, he was able to revolutionize other society’s opinions of nature and several aspects of it. For example, Whitman’s hymn “To One Shortly to Die” was thought to “be seen with what brilliant novelty the poet can handle the grimmest possible of all earthly and spiritual subjects”. However, in this hymn Whitman congratulates the person about to die and encourages happiness in becoming an absolute part of nature at the end of his/her life. This great contrast shows that the opinion in places such as London haven’t known the idea of death positively but are now able to understand another point of view. Whitman was truly able to open their eyes and take them away from the narrow-minded approach they had taken on in the past years of their society. The same critic saw Whitman was "always mystical-always democratic" showing praise for his revolutionary yet fair new form of poetry. He saw Whitman's poetry as a perfect balance between crazy and conservative. Through his poetry, Whitman not only revolutionized the way poetry can be written through his use of free verse but also allowed places as far as Great Britain to notice a new perception of the cycle of life. All can now know that “Mr. Walt Whitman is beyond all question a poet” who has made a great impact on our today's society.

William D. Howells’ criticism on the poem “Bardic Symbols,” reveals that Walt Whitman’s poetry was perceived with disdain among the majority of the public, but at the same time, a minority of individuals admired and even praised his work. Howell first discusses how Whitman returns with “Bardic Symbols,” and poem that is “more lawless, measureless, and rhymeless and inscrutable than ever” (Howell). Whitman’s poetry is filled with a free verse structure, along with an easier command of the English language. However, this lack of rhyme scheme and established beat in the poetry is likely to find “no favor with the public,” because “people suspect and dislike those who nullify venerable laws” (Howell). This makes sense, because even today individuals in society shun something new and unknown. The people of Whitman’s time had been content with the rhythmic and rhyming nature of their poems, and therefore they would naturally fear anything that comes their way from the unknown.

Walt Whitman’s contemporary critics offer non-poetic insights into the occurrences of the 19th century, and describe the reception of his works during a time of political upheavals and the search for one’s true identity. In the critical entry “Independent,” written on 7 December 1865, the author "offers traditional opinions and comments in regards to poetry, and does not display great acceptance of Whitman’s idealistic form of writing with mentions of the goodness of the natural world amidst the uprisings of American society." His account is evidence of the difference in perspectives among citizens of the same country and political union. The author relates Whitman’s poetry in his various series to the **“**poetry of the clouds-formless, voiceless as they are," serving as an attack on his style which does not conform to the popular rhyme schemes, typical line and stanza breaks, and rhythm. His description of Whitman’s work as voiceless is not only insulting to the format of his writing, but also to the subject matter of his literature. Speaking of the need for man to break free from the established doctrines of society throughout a majority of his poems, Whitman offers an alternative view of the world: a place of natural beauty and solace. This is not the perception, however, that all of Whitman’s contemporaries had of this time period. Being the era of the Civil War and the Industrial Revolution, the American lifestyle was one filled with financial, political, and emotional struggles. In his wishful and somewhat outlandish ideas, Whitman causes his poems to be viewed as “destitute…of any intelligible utterance” due to their lack of “rhyme or reason." Not only does this critic offer disagreement with the author’s bold thinking, but he also scorns his writing because it does not follow traditional poetic style. Instead of respecting the free-thinking Transcendental views of Walt Whitman as an aspect of the Revolution, this critic, along with many others, remained bound to his traditional knowledge of formulaic poetry. As Walt Whitman progressed as a non-conforming poet preaching of the quest for one’s self through the beauty of the natural world, his reception by differing critics displayed a new America: a joined union of torn views.

Although many of Whitman's critics did see him as "chaotic and fragmentary," some critics actually praised Whitman. According to "Democratic Vistas," Whitman has "mastered the lessons of the past as much as any man, and scanned the present with a remarkably keen eye, he has turned his mental telescope on the future and sees visions there that we trust will by and by be realized." Although this particular article praises Whitman, it praises him for all the wrong reasons. The heavily Transcendental nature of Whimtan's work stresses the importance of living in and for the present moment. The critic's misunderstanding of Whitman's work offers a possible reason for so many negative review. Even though Whitman was rarely praised for his unique voice, in this particular case, Whitman was praised for a total misunderstanding of his views and beliefs.

Interestingly enough, Whitman's critics, regardless of whether they offered positive or negative reviews, did not contribute any notable literary works of their own. They acted merely as the thoughts and voice of the contemporary public (in most cases. In the review "Bardic Symbols", the critic, William Howells, praises Whitman's book of poetry by the same title, but states that the public had a negative opinion of this book). It was interesting to see how ready people were to judge the artistic work of another when they did not share the same talent. People are quick to judge when they do not understand another's ideas. Without controversial subjects covered, art is merely restated material, and without the progression that people like Whitman offered, there can be no growth.

When Bartelby states “important” the site is referring to the ability to contrast modern views to those of the past. Critic reviews provide a glimpse at this nation thoughts, or at least those of the press, about art. This allows a clearer view on the development of society in the U.S., and the differing receptivity of modern audiences. Walt Whitman is hailed as one of the U.S’s most outstanding and revolutionary poets. His writing has become something that is unique to the country. Though popular now, Whitman was not always praised. As a modern culture, the U.S appreciates diversity and promotes new ways to perceive the world. In the past Whitman’s poetic revolution of writing is anything but appreciated. The Cincinnati’s Daily Commercial in 1859 spatters that leaves of Grass is “vulgar”. They doubt whether Whitman’s new work should even be mentioned as a poem as they refer to it as “so called." The newspaper believes he lacks a “spark of poetic Faculty," as he breaks common rhyme scheme and rhythm. They patronize him by mocking his “originality," which he is currently praised for. Instead of trying to accept his poems, they “endeavor to find out the reason of its being written” and find themselves without a “clue” for its existence. They mock him for not clearly purposing an idea. Instead, they claim his ideas are enveloped in catacombs of words. Critcs were unable to see the meaning behind his work due to his variance to classic style, leaving them blind to his true ideas.

Whitman was not always praised. In his past, we learn that the father of American poetry was not always hailed in this way. The Cincinnati’s Daily Commercial in 1859 spits at Whitman and declare that Leaves of Grass is “vulgar”. The poetic essence of child reminiscence is challenged when they state if Whitman’s new work should even be mentioned as a poem as they refer to it as “so called”. The Cincinnati believes his writing is lacking“spark of poetic Faculty”, as He breaks common rhyme scheme and rhythm. They patronize him by mocking his so called “originality”,. Instead of trying to accept his poems, they “endeavor to find out the reason of its being written” and find themselves without a “clue” for its existence. They mock him for not clearly purposing an idea. Since the critics have trouble delving into Whitman's maze-like poetry, in which his ideas and thoughts are hidden, the Critics shrug their shoulders and continue to downplay Whitman's poetry as they have trouble understanding it.

During this era of turbulence, some critics were having trouble finding the meaning and reason for Whitman’s style because they had never been exposed to it before. One critic states “Mr. Emerson has much to answer for, and will in reputation dearly pay for the fervid encomium with which he introduced” (Westminster Review). Because Whitman addresses Emerson as his biggest inspiration, his readers feel as if they will be reading something similar to Emerson. There is no doubt that Whitman’s writing has elements of transcendental beliefs, but he embraces a new movement—the Movement of new literature. Whitman’s critics all agree “Leave s of Grass are the symptoms of a moral fermentation in America, which no doubt will result in a broader and clear life—but the progress is painful” (Westminster Review). It is important to recognize that Whitman took a brave step, and because of this, he created magnificent and original poetry which was something that American needed because it had been reading the same thing for years previous. Another critic thought “some of these passages we do not believe that a parallel could be found even by ransacking the worst classical poets” (“Leaves of Grass”). Whitman was brave for stepping out, and being differing, which mirrored the situation that America was in during the 1860’s. Although Whitman’s poetry may have been difficult for some to understand due to his style, it was different and it turned the writing world in a new direction.

One critic, A. S. Hill, believed that Whitman had “real excellence”, however, all of his talent remained hidden behind an “absence” of structure, which were the “limitations that aid in the development of beauty”, and the only thing that “stands between him and the fame he predicts for himself” (Hill). Whitman’s style was so revolutionary that some of his peers did not accept it to be real poetry. The public had a set idea of what poetry should look and sound like, not necessarily on the message or emotion it tries to convey. Another problem was that Whitman thought “all objects and fancies” were “equally worthy of a poem”, yet he did not have “the manners and speech of a gentleman” to properly describe common items in poetry (Hill). For the readers of Whitman’s time, it was not suitable to use poetry for random objects; rather, people expected deeper subjects. His raw and informal language shocked the public and coincided with the roughness of his style. Despite a controversial writing method, Hill writes that Whitman’s works “show genuine sensibility” and ends his review with an excerpt from one of Whitman’s poems that he admires (Hill). A. S. Hill wanted everyone to know that deep underneath a coarse exterior, Whitman’s poetry was beautiful. By ending with a fifteen-line excerpt, he passed on his favorite poem for others to enjoy. Whitman’s poems could have fascinated more of his peers if the public would have noticed the underlying message and the value of self-expression rather than the formalities of rules.

Although some view negatively of Walter Whitman’s writings, others praise and honor his influence on literature. Some disagree with his writings because it is considered offensive; however, “he is not a man to be easily dismissed”. Whitman created uproar among society, because of his disputed views and opinions on life. His writings caused people to reflect upon their own views on life, and how society can affect an individual’s perception. Whitman’s writing reflects his way of life in America because “American air has saturated his lungs”. By revealing that American way of life, Whitman is able to capture and question the true essence of human nature and the society around. Some critics praise his work and believe “his voice will one day be potential or magisterial wherever the English language is spoken” because it is so powerful. However, other critics completely disagree and find that his writing does nothing of the sorts. Those reviews towards his writings have helped to popularize his work by making it known to the people. Also, the reviews allowed society to question his beliefs and reflect them onto themselves. At the time, his ideas were new and different. Some people find that stimulating. Others, however, challenge that difference because it can change a whole thought process or way of thinking. By considering those views towards his writings, even presently, readers are able to go back and re-read and reapply his thoughts onto another level and towards modern day society.

"Democratic Vistas." __Sunderland Times__. 21 May 1872. 8 Jan. 2008 &lt; [|http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/dv/sunderland.html&gt;.]

"Drum Taps." __New York__ __Saturday Press__ 27 Jan. 1866: 3. __The Walt Whitman Archive__. 26 Dec. 2007 .

"Drum Taps." //Round Table 2//. 11 November 1865. 147-8. __The Walt Whitman Archive__. http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/drumtaps/roundtable.html

Hill, A. S. “Review of Drum-Taps and Sequel to Drum-Taps.” North American Review 104 January 1867: 301-3. The Walt Whitman Archive. 2007. [review of Drum-Taps and Sequel to Drum-Taps]. 6 January 2008. < http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/drumtaps/nareview.html>

Howells, William D. "Bardic Symbols [Review]-the Walt Whitman Archive." The Walt Whitman Archive. 28 Mar. 1860. Daily Ohio State Journal. 7 Jan. 2008 <[|http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/bardic/ohiostatejournal.html>.]

“Review of ‘Leaves of Grass.’” //Westminster Review// 1 October 1860. Ed. Ed Folsom and Kenneth M. Price. 2007. Walt Whitman Archive. 28 December 2007 &lt;[|http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/leaves/leaves60/westminster.html&gt;.]

“Walt Whitman: Second Notice”. __The Walt Whitman Archive__. 31 Dec. 2007. http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/poems/times.html

“Poems by Walt Whitman”. Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper (19 April 1868).”. __The Walt Whitman Archive__. 7 Jan. 2008. http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/poems/lloyds.html

"Bardic Symbols". //Daily Ohio State Journal.// 28 March 1860. p.2. __The Walt Whitman Archive__. 28 Jan 2008. [|http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/bardic/ohiostatejournal.html

Folsom, Ed, and Kenneth M. Price. "Criticism." The Walt Whitman Archive. 1995. 2 Jan. 2008 <[|http://www.whitmanarchive.org/criticism/reviews/index.html>.]

"Walt Whitman: Second Notice." London Sunday Times. P. 7. 7 Jan. 2008. 29 March 1868. 