final project

Project Proposal:

Originally, my project entailed the evaluation of critical reviews of Leaves of Grass and how they matched up to current reviews and academic appreciation of Walt Whitman’s life work.  While reviewing some of the reviews, many were harsh and quick to deject the material as obscene, rubbish and not worth reading nor considering. However, after looking over and meditating over his work, as well as acknowledging the magnitude of influence LoG has had on American culture, we know better. There was no way illustrate this dichotomy, and really I wanted to provide some artistic expression of what I learned and assimilated into my college learning and appreciation of literature. (I’m sorry, this is sounding like an essay.)

I wanted to create a commentary of what I thought of Leaves of Grass by writing a creative piece that reflected upon Whitman’s work, and what I learned from it. I wanted to include some of the various motifs and themes, while modernizing some of his ideas into a language that we could all understand readily (because we all know Walt loved the sound of his work.) More so than anything, I wanted to twist the poem a little to cast a reflection of what America is dealing with now and how it relates to some of the issues Whitman was trying to comment upon. I decided to reference A Song for Occupations.

Occupy

there is a smile that you see but cannot feel, that you pay for

and accept with my services. you look down and in your gifted vehicles

demand for my offers, and I offer with my smile, which is caked thick

there is willingness and there is reluctance and I give you both

the thoughts you have of what you know and what you’ve heard

are amazing to most, but not to me. they land upon me like pox of pollen

and though you spread your consciousness electronically for strangers

to acknowledge the nakedness within your metal shell, you become entranced

by the chirp of birds which flees from your Ambercrombie pockets.

and there is nothing more naked than

your privacy, which is taken and sold by those

that provide for you a means to communicate in complete isolation

I don’t want to be one with you, or anyone.

No one truly knows anyone, if they are struggling to find themselves

and from zygote to infant as you spring from the womb, and crawling

into a crooked stature, old and useless, you’ll make your claims to

having established something of a legacy. And though you’ll fight to

deconstruct cliches, you’ll become: dust in the wind, swirled into heaven

dragged across the cosmos, passed into the negative space and into the red sun.

there are equals and there are those that serve you as they rule over you,

bending you backwards until the back of your head is pressed against your heals

and they’ll stamp their coaster on your stomach and slam their drink hard in laughter

who knew running a country involved running a ranch of sheep, or stumbling through

ninety rounds of golf, while the elderly read VOID on pension checks and their unborn

children are buried with a debt they must pay, though they could never witness

your digital hancock stamped with your print on some god awful election.

you are still going to crack your jokes about the world costing twice as much, even though

tears spring up beneath your eyes, poured within your cheeks and roll down your throat, because you sold children further and further into financial slavery.

And beckoning for an answer which you might find if you bruise your knees on a cedar pew

and karate chop your nose with eyes clenched shut, or demand it from the other ninety nine beggars, who are asking the questions, you might hear them murmur a word if you tug on a robe and have faith like a man who believe solemnly that there is only an artificial God.

those caked in their liberal propaganda hold hands with gun-toting fascist and speak a word that can be said but never spelled nor heard or accepted: education.

But you thought educators were never worth paying nor admiring, they worked a job and though they drilled shreds of recycled knowledge, praying for change, you fastened to hope that they would live better through easier means, that American opportunity, would hunt them down and beg them to be found.

and even though you sold it long ago, for some comfort and a few spoken words which soothed your old man colic, you will demand it for your children though you know that, like the cake, it is a lie.

we live in a America where old fellows working at farms are illegal beings

if anything. You shower rumors of freedom and civility though you pelt them with pejoratives and douse DDT and ignorance upon their offspring. They have no rights, as you own them, through the produce you stir fry  and clothes you wear assembled in humid shops buried within third worlds

and though you will fight for them, occupying a land you stole from several others, you will stomp on their very necks, jabbing the share-the-wealth picket in their eye socket, and you might notice, though you won’t.

Class Evaluation:

This class was not only very immersive in discussion and lecture, but also technically impressive. I’m not one to flatter, but I was honestly impressed by the way you involved Google docs, blogger and twitter. The structure in which all of the assignments were well organized and provided an avenue for honest reflection of the course material while also maintaining focus of the subject at hand.  Another thing that I found highly useful while delving into Whitman were the resources you allocated via various links. The only issues I had with this course were merely personal, as time management is a problem that I am still working on. I’ve never been fond of twitter and some streamlining with the mother blog would have eased the complications of navigating another web media for an assignment. All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed your class and only wished I could have given it my 100%, because it was honestly the most technically impressive class I’ve taken thus far. Thank you for making Whitman enjoyable Professor Hanley.

Peter

guthrie, and the birth of holy protest music.

I hate protest/political music.

It is a genre which weaves the sentiment of few, and establishes that it is the view of all.

Stating this, not all music fall into this category, simply if they reference war or lack of wealth. I believe that the some of the greatest musicians of our time, (which sadly fall between the early 60s to late 80s) have learned to hone their art and establish a subtlety that implies a struggle, but grants the listener an invitation instead of a jarring metaphor meant to 'rock our core.' Now, i'm not one to judge musicians, or poets or anyone that include politics and current events into their art. And really, i'm not sure what my beef is with political music. I guess my issue is that most musicians that are doing it today perhaps in r and b and alternative music are just trying to hard to be clever, and attempt to teach the listener about what is 'really going on in the world' as if they don't know and care.

Now, that maybe an asshole think to say. but consider that most music that can be recognized by most americans for their familiarity and relations to politics are done well, and establish the musician as a seer of great importance. Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Janis Joplin, etc. Even if you haven't listened to their music, you know who they are. Sadly we live in a world where there are kids who do not know the importance of a man named Sir Paul McCartney, or even Sir Elton John. Consider that. And think, do you think Lady Gaga will live on as an activist for anything? What about Adelle? What about anyone who works in the music industry. I think about Green Day and how they sold out to the i hate bush mantra. We get it, you hate Bush. Why? Because he brought us into a war where people died for no reason. Really? Every fucking president has been in some war in some distant country whether we know about it, or it is kept under wraps funded through illegal means such as the the contra war of the late 80's.

the dude abides

3) Just as Whitman catalogues all walks of life in “Song of Myself” and “Song for Occupations”, the Coen Brothers seem to create remarkably diverse characters in each of their movies. How might any given character of a Coen Bros. movie fit into the Whitmanian ideal? Would Whitman be able to easily relate to/connect with other Coen characters besides The Dude? Why are these characters so relatable to Whitman?

 

As i was reading this prompt, i got a surge of various characters that were rather mundane and ordinary, but resounded with complexity and striving character development that well, i'm still flabbergasted and a bit lost from this prompt still. A film that is technically not a Coen film, though it is what made by them, was No Country For Old Men, a novel penned by Cormac McCarthy.

 

So this tough as nails handy man stumbles on a bag of money and does what any normal man would do, take it and run. However, after his conscience irks him to return, with a jug of water for a dying man, he is chased relentlessly by the drug cartel, a brutal silent assassin.

 

Take the money and run.

 

Whitman, though quite the isolated and deranged character in reality, is man whom, in fiction, establishes himself as bard of America, a man who has made it his duty to recount the dreams of our country, the wishes of it's people and the destiny of its occupants. More so, he establishes a mantra where we are all connected, all one, all encompassing, in hopes of establishing a society where kindness and compassion abound, where the ordinary man, is no longer just ordinary but great. But not greater than others. 

 

Whitman, could quite easily slip into a Coen film as an archetype, which in the Coen universe could be anything of anyone. But most importantly, he would be yearning for something, at the expense of others, though quite shrewd in realizing it, with a hint of macabre humor, and death. Someone always dies, even if it's Brad Pitt in burn after reading. But what establishes the plot, is that there are many players in this rat race, and many things aren't spoken and when words are spoken, they are sardonic and brilliant. Look at True Grit, words are spoken (mostly unintelligible) but the story is motivated by the singular character who wants revenge but seeks unlikely help (a drunkard)

 

These ordinary people do great things, and part of the entertainment is that we can relate to this great people because we encounter them all the time or we have been in similar positions though not as preposterous. What makes Coen Films and Whitman so great is that we can easily slip in via osmosis and enjoy the story.

Levin, Curmudgeon?

Can't Stop.

Robocop?

My favorite work experience was a few years ago at my current job, innout. Some big kid came in and ordered a cheeseburger with thirty slices of cheese. And we melted a block of cheese onto his cheeseburger. We all watched as he scarfed this monstrosity in front of his gf. She must have barfed in her mouth several times, within that sitting.

Levine

The man's tone is brilliant and sharp though quite sardonic. He never wastes an opportunity to quip about what people are taking for granted while, introducing imagery that captures the entirety of his message. In What Work Is, he places the reader in a situation that is common, to those familiar with lack of work. (everyone) and forces to look at the possibility that we don't know what work is, or rather what it is to search and not find or wait, knowing that the opportunity is no longer there. Levine is not afraid to jar the reader and grasp their attention, or literally shake the shit of you as you try to come to grips with what he is trying to convey. However, as great of a writer he is, he seams to polar Whitman's kind demeanor in terms of outlying his ideals and beliefs. Levine knows that were all on the same page, but still feels the need to berate us. What an asshole.

In essence, Levine captures the stark reality, often defeatist that sometimes we know but most of the time we don't, yeah i'm sure that doesn't really make sense, bu in comparison to Whitman who frills and weaves beautiful language with ease and simplicity that we are often drawn into this imagery, well, Levine understands that reading work aloud and writing it are to different sciences, that require our attention, and the man has mastered both perhaps, but at the expense of compassion.

Now lets look at Lilacs and What Work Is, and both poets are trying to convey moments that familiar to us both, in ways that are different though effective. What Work Is presents a scenario and addresses the reader, as if presenting observations he has seen while viewing our lives, and though it may not be true, we understand what he is trying to say, that though we contemplate the lives of those that we love, we never step out and greet them or address them, until it is too late. Whitman relies on expansive motifs, that capture mourning, sadness and death, in examples that are enthralling and immediate to us.

book of the dead

Rukeyser's poem, The Book of Dead, contains some beautiful diction and references to the creation of modern america, and references the blood and sweat that was used to keep it together. I found it impersonal. though this might just be be. What i found most moving about Whitman's Lilacs... was that he introduced the personal emotions of turmoil and disappointment he felt at the death of lincoln and allowed us to relate.

Establishing motifs and elaborating on the mourning and gloom of death and those it affects, there was nothing force or implicit. Death is, and we must deal because we have no choice.

In Rukeysers poem, there's a hint of judgement and blame that I felt almost like fingerpointing because of the death of those that worked to establish our industrial society. She brings to light questions about society and construction and death and the values of life. People die because they're made to under certain circumstances and situations which can be easily averted if ppl weren't so greedy and selfish.

And I don't want to here that judgemental shit because me and whitman are mourning the death of our loved ones and we blame no one because shit happens.

Seriously, I feel like death is #death. Trending. Best friend passed away, a childhood friend passed away to heart failure, my gfs cat is dying and we just found her pet rat, trillion dead in her cage. Death happens. And we just have to deal.

Adam and Eve.

There was quite the disaster long ago. Several nations not only destroyed themselves in a nuclear holocaust, but released hazardous chemicals in the air to not only eradicate themselves but their enemies. This was a behavior most unusual of any living organism, as nothing on this earth had reached the climax of advanced technology and science of the homo sapien, and destroyed it self so quick.

Imagine ants dividing themselves, divisible from battalions to platoons to militia men to a (____) crew of random ants. Now imagine those ants killing each other and then themselves. Fucking weird right?

Now after exactly 24 years, a young man who scowered the ruins of his forefathers, stepped onto this healing earth and grabbed a handful of filaments which were all to similar to the locks of his hair though brittle and fibrous and green.

My Specimen Day

I've been obsessed with every detail of my life today because for once I have a perspective that is different and unique. I've been searching for answers in every potted plant and closet. To be fair I'm _________. But whatevs. I'm sure that this is the right way to figure out everything afterall.

Granted, I don't think whitman ever had the opportunity to take advantage of modern pharmaceuticals (I'm sure he would smoked a lot of herb) he wouldn't frown upon it given that it harms no one but himself. And that's pretty righteous. I think.

Michael Mcclure

For some reason, i felt compelled to blog about Michael Mcclure. One of the prolific writers most established from the Beat Movement. (and probably the only one still breathing) Michael Mcclure is a man who seems to emulate Whitman without really knowing him. Now. What i mean by this is that i don't recall reading Mcclure being influenced by Whitman, though he might have, what i particularly noted was the meticulousness[sic] of his craft. Spacing on a typewriter, centering, symmetrical form. He truly exerts control over his craft and in doing so provides not so much a revision, but a metamorphosis and transformation, with poems that preclude interjecting themselves in following poems, weaving motifs and moments together.

I recalled Tran's secret embarrassing situation where poems were duplicated withing an anthology.

Though it was unintentional, it forced readers to confront meanings and desires which readers might overlook on first readings.

And that is perhaps the connection i see between the two. Their fixation on revision and transformation was perhaps compelled by their prophetic vision to make us understand while retaining the beauty of their writing.

Now, i don't believe whitman would ever recite poetry to lions, but then again, whitman didn't have the luxury of psychedelic drugs. :)

Of Lilacs.

The narrative in Whitman's When Lilacs Last in the Door-yard...

is quite sweeping in it's ability to evoke isolation, mourning and sadness. It captures various facets of grief and death and though it stumbles in certain areas to keep me in cue with the tune, i find it magnificent in the manner it captures so many things, a spewing prose of death and gloom.

Scanning through various poems, which i couldn't feel compelled to copy/paste, i found that their were some vague similarities between Whitman's poem, in the manner in which it delves deep into isolation and gloom by increasing detail and emotion within a single motif, though i found Whitman's manner was more effective. The imagery in Lilacs was most powerful in evoking something in me, though the even that occured so recently in history recalls emotions that are more genuine.

Death is different to those who have and have not experienced it.

Stating this. When Lilacs.. captures death in various moments, those that grieve and mourn as well as the passerbyer(sic) And though all these elements are common and still recognized today, the manner in which they are included in the poems i have read are dull and tend stir up political tension, and politics i fear i what ruins most of these poems.

I get it you're middle eastern in a world that hates the middle east. I get it, it was all about money, or it was a government conspiracy. I don't want read about how it was America's fault, that America brought this upon itself.

And that is why i found Whitman's poem so soothing in that it captures, everything, while leaving out everything. It allows the reader to slip in and experience with their emotions devoid of exterior stimulation. None of that political bullshit.

Whitmans Legacy

What fascinated me was the project that considered the original reviews about LoG by some of whitmans contemporaries.

I want to study the contrasts between some of the early reviews with some more modern reviews in an effort to understand how a certain era or consciousness of literary review will percieve a creative work.

As a writer, I want to understand if maybe people will read my work and hate it and possibly recognize it as something more perhaps later. I don't know if I am wording my interest carefully...

I'm thinking about marking up 4 reviews that are negative marking negative and harsh statements with some commentary and comparing them to modern reviews and outlining compliments and statements which remark on whitmans genius.

Giving it much consideration....

I think that the project that I will elaborate on will be the the comparison of critical reviews concerning the first edition LoG to reviews relevant to the current edition.

Something that fascinated me was the vehemence and disgust critics felt towards the book and the misconceptions they carried towards obsenity and poetry. I want to look at the most brutal reviews and compare them to more secular reviews that not only grasp the material fairly, but genuinely appreciate the piece for what it is, the masterwork of America's greatest poet.

Some of the issues I will encounter would be procuring these reviews and the reviews of current time as well which editon of LoG to consider when pulling said review. I also don't have a great idea of how I will approach the project in general.

Mr. Doyle.

They met on a fateful winter night. He was a horse carriage driver, cabbie, whatever you would call them in those days and Whitman was his only passenger. He claims that they were very familiar with one another at once and knew the type of friendship they would have when he placed his hand on his knee.

Now this all seems very tame, but this statement was rather brave considering the times in which it was confessed.

Now, Mr. Doyle, though marginally literate, proved to be a man quite different than Whitman. He was not a politically versed person, nor an artist or a writer, but in this he was the very man that Whitman sought for in a companion. He was the everyone man, the uneducated who was worthy of friendship, without adversity.

Most interestingly, he served on the confederate army opposing the north which Whitman so admired.

A companion for nearly thirty years, his frequent visits became less and less so as Whitman's health waned. There was an obvious conversation between the two where his concerns were brought up and whitman immediately understood. I imagine that he might have started a family or perhaps whitmans caretakers had become a nuisance, whatever reasons there maybe doyle loved the man and allowed a trusted friend to edit and publish personal letters.

Calamus is not based upon doyle and were written years prior to their relationship. Interestingly enough, certain sexually implicit lines were dropped during their relationship in later editions. (Will investigate.)

I personally believe that though peter doyle did not have a direct influence on LoG, he made Whitman happy which allowed him to open up considerably about his sexuallity and personal life.

Tupper

A composer of didactic moralisings. Martijn Tuppers writing was first recognized as a failure within both his home of great brittain, and our US. However, thirty years after their release in 1837, they quickly gathered steam and sold nearly forty various editons at home and a million copy in the states.

His style was one of prose and verse, disected and presented in snippets like proverbs to teach a lesson or a present a moral issue in poetic fashion. He would later fall into obscurity

In relation to whitman, his writings though didactic in nature provided an example of legacy and the fall and rise of a poet. It can also be said that they would share similar careers, difference being whitman would remain and iconic poet of our nation.

Whitman was not appreciated until the early 20th century and even then, his writings were considered either complete rubbish or the crazed profanities of a loafer.

Specimen Day.

Provided a snapshot of his family homestead and the history behind them, what stands out is the imagery presented within the text: the slaves huddles on the floor, the men drinking cider and the solitary almanac read during harsh winters. Most importantly the work that both men and women contributed to the household.

There is an emphasis on the strong women on both sides of the family, women that were capable riders and able to run their household when widowed. Spoke to me about his perspective on women since he never frowned upon them or used typical description to atone tomboyism of any sort.

The sound of the ocean was another thing that stood out and let me visualize a house/barn which was not to far from the ocean. Not close to hear the crashing of the waves against the beach, just close enough to hear the faint whispers of the sea.

No Whitman in Walking Dead. :(

Im sure that Whitman and various excerpts of his work appear in their various forms either in their entirety or in bits. Youtube is an awful tool when it comes to searching for the Whitman in mass media. However, when you know what youre looking for, you might strike gold.

Northern Exposure, a sitcom series from the nineties was among the various collections that belonged to my girlfriend. I say collections because she has a tendency to love sitcoms and television series that have been cancelled. In this episode, the radio dj of the aforementioned little town recites a little whitman, but comments on his questionable sexuality. This offends the town mayor as he taken Whitman as a representation of the everyman. In capable of hearing his hero's sexuality bashed on the air waves, he not only kicks the radio dj off the air of his show, which the mayor owns, but the kicks his ass as well.

In Breaking Bad, Walter White has cancer, and he himself is considered the everyman that struggles to survive while doing good. Having to break bad, he sells drugs to amass a trust fund of sorts for his family the moment he passes away. In this episode, their is an attempt to establish a personal connection between Gale and Walt. Walt is impressed by Gale's recitation of the learn'd astronomer, most importantly because it represents the scientists wonder in creating or achieving scientific wonder.

Last but not least, Leaves of Grass. Actually last is least. At first i brushed this film aside because it looked like another movie about pot. But it turns out the director and edward norton attempted to make a film not only about weed, but in a way that represents whitman's free style verse. The movie was absolute shit raking in a paltry 100,000 in month.

Van Helsor Hole in the Ground.

What is it like to go to a place so personal and familiar and finding just a hole in the ground, which marked the least important place of a landmark? The house's asshole?

He traveled home and found his mothers legacy ploughed over and demolished and replaced with bland exterior decoration.

Whitman most likely drew the comparison as the destruction of material legacy and the claims humans have on what is left when they perish into the earth. Do we ever leave anything behind? What he attempted to do was leave something worth noting and saving. A real heir and legacy that was not only astonishing but a representation of his personal self. And he succeeded.

What they thought.

[Anonymous]. "[Review of Leaves of Grass (1855)]." The Critic 15 (1 April 1856): 170-1.
 This gentlemen read it and didn't get it. He scrutinized the form and not the substance, but then again, what could be expected of someone who could refer to an american as a yankee? He throws some mighty hooks at Whitman, claiming that he is not only a miserable spinner of words but going as far as claiming that he barely learning to write. Emmerson's judgement of the narrative is cast aside as commentary out of pity.

 [Bagshawe, Henry Ridgard]. "[Review of Leaves of Grass (1855)]." The Dublin Review 41 (September 1856): 267-8.

Disgust, profane and completely belligerent and not worthy. They found the book not worthy of any commentary which is evident in their pathetic review.

 [Anonymous]. "[Review of Leaves of Grass (1855)]." The Washington Daily National Intelligencer  (18 February 1856): 2.

Analyzing the character of Whitman they percieved the writing as an introduction to the man and drew comparisons to great thinkers though he probably had no knowledge. It was cutting edge to them though a little rough (paradox) however they said that no one could get away without be struck by how fantastical the writing could be.

In general the reviews are different in what they state, claiming either he is illiterate or a rising poet. Their reaction is different. Pertaining to the time, they are conservative in their observation, noticing the profane verses and implifications and often times assassinating his character as someone trying to write poetry in the worst way possible.

After decades of analysis and review, we know the better that perfection and the fantastic come in different forms, ranging from the visual to the audio to the written in mass forms of medium that even when recognized as amazing, will be noticed by a few.

How many of us have read the catcher in the rye as a child and stated this was bullshit and boring?

This is the comparison i am trying to draw between people in our time against those in that era. They are knowledgeable of their own era of writing but blind to the future and this is a cycle that we will most likely repeat, rejecting the new for the old and familiar. What i found most interesting are the different ways in which they claim the different is uncomfortable and awful.

1855 Destruction of Classes.

In reading the songs of occupations, it brought forward ideas of class struggles that are reiterated through it history from serfdom, to slavery, to children in the industrial revolution to now. What is the now? To me, the struggle is not so much rich between poor because whether or not he has a dollar more then me, there will always be a difference in wealth. The struggle i see, remains between the citizens of our country and those in politics and they main use the conflict or idea of classes to promote a party system. Party system in place, the striving for equilibrium creates a hierarchy of people with not only wealth, but power to manipulate the laws to their own benefit. And that my friends is everyone who works in washington.

More so, that bullshit aside, Whitman is preaching more so about tearing down all walls and picket fences that separate one neighbor from another and this fence can most easily identified as a class struggle, though any difference whether it by style of clothing, to occupation, anything that creates a niche or club or group, that is what he is trying to bring forth.

"Were all educations practical and ornamental well displayed out of me, what would it amount to?
Were I as the head teacher or charitable proprietor or wise statesman, what would it amount to?
Were I to you as the boss employing and paying you, would that satisfy you"

These lines say what the hell does it matter what i do or you do or how smart you are compared to me, (because this man was obviously brilliant and divine.) He is trying to break down these invisible walls so we can all hug and smoke a cigarette together and shoot the shit. And most importantly not shooting the shit against anyone.

In comparison, to various iterations of this poem:

Workmen and Workwomen!

Were all educations, practical and ornamental, well          displayed out of me, what would it amount to?

Were I as the head teacher, charitable proprietor,
         wise statesman, what would it amount to? 

Besides evolving elipses to dashes and lines to verses with enumeration, his vision evolves with the zietgeist of the times. Versions tend to include the struggles of those that are becoming more apparent more rejected. Whether it be women or native americans or immigrants, he includes these in revisions so that they encompass all. Kind of like building a wiki up more as things are brought to light. yeah. like that. 

Watching over Ancestors.

Its very interesting how the tracing of certain routes or streets or restaurants bring back memories of an old girlfriend, a great day, a bad day, a day where great food followed great sex and so forth. Standing over the land of his forefathers, he is standing on them, probably the remaining legacy of his family. (i might be wrong, eddie) I thought to myself: i have no ancestors, no family graves to visit, nothing.

What does that make me? Most importantly, Whitman is returning to a  land where he was born and raised. I have experienced these changes, visiting parks i was taken too, houses that i lived in, and now as a young adult i appreciate them and draw the ties as they lie buried in their locations and there comes the warmth of the familiar, though forgotten. He is not just overlooking his father's land, he's scoping the land where three centuries of his family have been buried, all the way down to the first settlers.

In old, he's not drawing upon 22 years of memories, he is pulling from himself 62 years of memories and experiences that have shaped him into the man he is today. And he knows it, and whether he looks at the land with compassion and love i don't know, he most likely respected it.

1855 v 1860

Reading the analysis of both versions, the history behind them is what fascinated me. The first version and printing is considered very rare and valuable given the personal work and correcting that was done towards them. Misspellings, minor line changing. Whitman encountered various nuisances that he changed mid printing and these various printings made the first edition super valuable given their imperfections. he never thought they would garner such much scrutiny and appraisal and he was flustered when he learned that the manuscript could fetch so much money. (money he could have used for his sick brother eddy.)

Whitman was never content with his masterwork, hashing and rehashing, shifting lines and altering the overall presentation of leave's of grass. the first edition however, would be consider the ultimate expression of his, work, covered in cloth with green grass and bold gold printing of LEAVES OF GRASS.

however, the 1960 edition introduces something very important.

For one, her formats the text in a biblical fashion mirroring the holy scripture while also expressing what the text really means, the representation of democracy and freedom and the triumph of religion. Whitman's religion.

I also noticed that he changed breeding in the original version to sex. Maybe the word sex was a little to intense. He added a ton of new poetry including calamus which is considered an important piece and recognized not only as an amazing political power, but represents male yearning, unattested love and manly love. It is a small glance of Whitman's personal life.

Geneology

It was impressive reading the amount of work Whitman put into finding out the origin of his family and surname. I believe he went as far back as english roots on his father side, dating nearly three centuries. What most impressive were the tools he used to find this information, almost none. He referenced an old geneology dictionaryy, but most of the information he acquired must have required serious detective work and investigation.

This kind of brings me shame because given the technology we have today, i can only go as far back as 4 generations, which isnt much, the rest of my family becomes clouded with illegitamate children and wild affairs.

How does geneology correlate with LoG?

Whitmans writings are what i would consider a serious process of molding and manipulation to arrive at the core of LoG. Now this sounds like bullshit(and it might be.) And maybe im just stating my analysis in an awkward fashion, but his LoG is a culmination of his life experiences compressed and broken down into a genuine perspective of what life is and what life has become within are society. He longs to go back to time where loafing in the woods wasn't such a travesty. But most importantly he wants to return and have bring us with him to time when we werent so caught up in the flow of advancing technology and dwindling social interactions.

Whitman would probably die from the smell of all this plastic that encases us and the melt from the LEDs that would blast upon him. More so, he would be disappointed by the lack of social interaction that technology has propogated(sic?)  He wants to go back to a time when we were more one one ourselves and those around us, but i am sure he would want us to take advantage of technology to exploit the power of mass communication to reach others and the deepest parts of ourselves.

Oneida and Whitman.

The Oneida Community was a relgious movement which belived that Jesus had already returned in the year 70 and that heaven could be expierenced on earth. A communist group, they shared everything including responsiblities and work which allowed them to have thriving business in silk, leather fronds and silverware. The practiced a form of polygamy which allowed them to have various closed marriages.(to avoid sti) They also practiced a form of eugenics in an attempt to breed perfection children.

It could be said that the Oneida community practiced a nearly perfected for of communism since all resources and responsibilites were shared evenly and the open criticism was practiced and appreciated by all especially Noyes who was subject to criticism as well. The community fragmented when Noyes attempted to transfer power to Theodre Noyes. (Grandson?) Who was agnostic and not a thourough follower in the community and when Noyes fled to avoid charges of statutory rape. This move convinced him to suggest traditional marriages within the community which had already become a growing movement.

Whitman used to be a nieghbor of Noyes when Noyes fled his circle for a brief period at the hieght of his messianic leadership.

It could be understood why Whitman would acknowledge and even appreciate the Oneida movement as it promoted a higher sense of living and a formal criticism of self while sharing resources and responsivilities. No one was greater then the other and most importantly, the community helped one another in terms of a raising children and caring for family. The oneida community was also open to mixed sexuallity within their closed marriages which might have been a first for any religious groups.