Journal #42

If I were alive in the time period of Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman, I would most likely have read the poems of Emily Dickinson. Dickinson's poetry caused a bit of an uproar back in the day; however, it was actually interesting and beautiful to read. Whitman, who also raised red flags with his poetry, wrote poetry that I think was just ignorant and way too self absorbed for me to ever be interested in reading his works. Emily Dickinson, in my opinion, was actually a very talented writer and I enjoy reading her poems today, which leads me to believe that I would most likely enjoy reading her poems back when she actually wrote them. Dickinson's poems focus a lot on feminism, which was a big step at the time. Being a girl, I can obviously appreciate her mindset and the points she was trying to make. Dickinson wrote about the power of women, but she did it in an interesting way in which she did not necessarily slam men or their intentions, she just portrayed how women can be strong, powerful, and beautiful. Whitman, when trying to prove his points, would put other people down and be extremely biased, which I just think is annoying, and it makes me not want to read his works. Dickinson, however, just kind of throws out her ideas and does not try to make it seem as if she is right and everyone else is wrong. Dickinson also wrote her "offensive" poems in a very interesting way; her racy poems were actually extremely intriguing and sort of fun to read, while when reading Whitman's provocative poems I was just kind of annoyed and wanted to get to the end of it. Also, he was a homosexual, which I have absolutely nothing against, but I felt that it was sort of controversial how at times he would write about his love with a man and other times his love with a woman. It was just he wanted to woman so that they could actually have sex, which sounds vulgar, but it is true. Dickinson, however, wrote about things such as sex in a way that was not really as offensive or controversial, and it was made to seem much more beautiful. I like the simplicity of her poems and how creative she got, and, even though it was definitely offensive at the time, I would have read her over Whitman any day.

Dickinson's "Poor little heart!" Analysis

When I read the poem "Poor little heart!" by Emily Dickinson, I felt myself relating to it very easily. Although my interpretation might not be that of others, I feel that Dickinson wrote a very intriguing and truthful poem. Speaking from a third person's perspective and referring to the heart of another woman, in the first stanza of "Poor little heart!," Dickinson writes of the "poor little heart" being forgotten by a man, and exclaims that the woman should not care or be upset (Dickinson). In the second stanza, the "poor little heart" has been abandoned by this man, and the woman is informed that she should be carefree and keep her head up high (Dickinson). The third stanza is of the speaker talking directly to the woman now, saying that he would never break her heart, and he wants her to let him in. He asks if she would "credit" him, or if she would trust him and grant him his wishes of making her his (Dickinson). In the fourth stanza, however, the "poor little heart" is now a "gay little heart," which I took to mean that since this man has come into the woman's life, she is now happy and extremely blissful; her heart is happy now (Dickinson). However, in the second part of the last stanza, "Like morning glory Thou’ll wilted be; thou’ll wilted be!" (Dickinson). I believe that this is referring to the man breaking the woman's heart once again. The whole poem is like a cycle. The woman has a broken heart, and she tries to stay strong but feels lost. She then meets a man who promises that he will always be there for her and will never hurt her and, gradually, she believes him and falls in love. However, he was deceitful, and he ends up leaving her and breaking her heart, leaving it sad and lonely once again (Dickinson).

In a literary criticism written by Mary Ellen Snodgrass, it is written that Dickinson was known for her poems like this. She was seen as feminist, and she was very bold and brazen in expressing her opinions regarding women, men, and love (Snodgrass). This included her views on how men should not necessarily be viewed as heroes or the stronger gender as they previously had been shown; this idea is kind of expressed in "Poor little heart!" as Dickinson elaborates on the lies and untrustworthy behavior shown in man (Dickinson). Throughout the short poem, the woman being addressed in the work of literature is constantly told to stay strong and to not let this man defeat her, even though he broke her heart (Dickinson). This is another example of how Dickinson may have been projecting her feminist ideas; she believed that women should not rely on men to make them happy, but women should instead be strong enough to make their own decisions and care for themselves (Snodgrass). By telling the woman to not allow the degrading acts of a man to affect her, but to instead defy his actions and stand proud, Dickinson expressed her views very clearly (Dickinson). She also managed to include the softer side of the heart, though, when the man and the woman briefly fall in love. Altogether, Dickinson wrote a wonderful poem that truly does even today express the cycle of falling in and out of love, and while producing this great piece of literature, Dickinson was also successful in proclaiming her views on feminism.

WORKS CITED

Dickinson, Emily. "Poor little heart!" Bartleby.com: Great Books Online -- Quotes, Poems, Novels, Classics and Hundreds More. 2011. Web. 21 Mar. 2011. .

Snodgrass, Mary Ellen. "Dickinson, Emily." Encyclopedia of Feminist Literature. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= EFL136&SingleRecord=True (accessed March 21, 2011).

Journal #41

Emily Dickinson's poem, "Pain has an element of blank" is a beautiful and creative work of literature. Although the poem itself is extremely short, its meaning and the image it projects is strong and powerful. In the poem, Dickinson refers to pain and the different elements of pain (Dickinson). Dickinson states that pain "has an element of blank," which I think is a very intriguing thought, and it is definitely true (Dickinson). She recalls that pain, once it begins, makes the body and the mind forget about when there had not been pain; all one can think about is the current pain they are in and it is hard to recall the better feeling they had had beforehand (Dickinson). Like I said, I think this is a very interesting way of wording her thoughts, and the statement is, in my opinion, completely correct. For example, one might be running and sprain their ankle very terribly. This is a very painful occurrence that actually happens quite often to people. The thing that is the worst about a sprained ankle is that it literally affects someone pretty much all the time. When one is sitting, they can feel the throb of the blood as it swells around the tender ankle, and when one begins to walk on the ankle, it causes very much pain and most likely makes the wounded individual have to hobble or use some kind of a crutch. When one sprains their ankle, it becomes very hard to remember what their ankle had felt like before it was in pain; people tend to take lack of pain for granted and then, once injured, can only think about the pain they are in. Emily Dickinson did a phenomenal job of expressing this thought. I also thought it was interesting how she wrote about the fact that pain also has no future; this, too, is very true, as it is hard to see an end when one is enduring unbearable pain (Dickinson). I am not entirely sure if this poem is supposed to be very incredibly deep or have any meaning besides the literal meaning, but I feel that this poem, taken literally, is very powerful and definitely interesting.

WORKS CITED

Dickinson, Emily. "Pain has an element of blank." Bartleby.com: Great Books Online -- Quotes, Poems, Novels, Classics and Hundreds More. 2011. Web. 21 Mar. 2011. .

Journal # 40

I do not really have an idea of self like Whitman does. While Whitman views everybody as sort of one equal being that came from God's image and are therefore pretty much the same, I totally disagree. I think that every person is different in their own way; while we are all human beings and have more or less the same genetic makeup, we are all completely different. Whitman has this idea of everybody having the same background, having more or less the same life, and having the same mindset about pretty much everything. I think this is a load of garbage. Just look around any typical high school and you will see the differences between everyone. While, yes, we all do kind of look similar and might demonstrate similar traits and behaviors, we are absolutely nothing alike. High school students have completely different ideas about what is right and wrong, what is interesting or boring, and what is cool or lame. I, personally, think that doing drugs and drinking is ridiculous, while some of my friends think that it is just a fun thing to do and do it every weekend. I go to church every weekend and believe in God, while others think that God is just a lie or too much to think about. These examples prove that our lifestyles are completely different; while I do believe that we were created by God in his own image, I do not take that literally as Whitman did. Whitman seems to have not realized that people were also blessed by God with the power of free will, and this free will is what distinguishes people from each other. Over time, it has made us who we are today. My lifestyle is completely different than the lifestyles of everyone else sitting in this English class with me today. This is because of our free will, opinions, and choices. While maybe we were born naturally because of God and therefore are all connected, but I think that after we leave the womb and begin to grow up and live our lives, everyone establishes their own "self" that is completely different than the self of everyone else.

"Look Down Fair Moon." Reflection

Walt Whitman's poem, "Look Down Fair Moon," is actually one poem written by him that I genuinely like and respect. Although it is only four lines long, the true meaning and power behind the words is incredible. Whitman writes of the moon shining down over the dead bodies of men lost in war, and displays it as eerie and haunting yet peaceful at the same time (Huff). How he is able to create this effect is truly incredible as a simple poet; while usually I disregard poets who write merely four lines of literature and call it a masterpiece, Whitman is really able to create emotion and draw in a reader's eye in this poem. For example, he speaks of the moon shining over the bodies of the dead (Whitman). Instead of simply stating just this, he uses descriptions that are incredibly appealing to the senses. He describes the faces of the men as "ghastly," "swollen," and "purple" (Whitman). By using descriptions such as these, the reader is able to picture the scenario in his or her head, therefore creating a stronger image of the story being told and developing empathy and interest in the characters. This is a great accomplishment to have achieved as an author, and it definitely makes this poem much more noteworthy and memorable than many of his previous works.

Whitman does reveals, of course, his idea of spirituality in the poem. He writes of the nimbus clouds that will pour down on the faces of the dead (Whitman). When writing this, he is referring to a rain cloud, or a nimbus cloud, that will rain over the bodies of the dead (Huff). Rain is said to purify things; when he speaks of the rain pouring over them, he is referring to God purifying their bodies as they return to nature and their spirits go to God for their final judgment (Huff). Whitman was a strong believer in God, and this is obviously portrayed throughout this poem as he wishes for the bodies of the dead to be purified in order for them to return to God peacefully and washed of sin. I think it was really creative in the way he wrote this; instead of being really basic, blunt, and simple like he usually is, Whitman was creative and actually poetic for once (Whitman). Like I said, this really is the first poem by Whitman that I found to actually sound educated, intellectual, knowledgeable, and sane. It did not rant, line after line, about sex, or about homosexuality, and then try to link it all back to spirituality in some crazy hypocritical, contradicting way, like the style in which he portrayed in many previous poems. Instead, he is truly exhibiting and honest understanding of spirituality and is showing empathy and acknowledgment on someone other than himself, which I believe is a big step (Whitman). That is one thing that annoys me to no end about Whitman. He constantly writes about how he is right about everything and everyone else is wrong; while I believe it is necessary to be confident as a poet, it is awful to be arrogant and biased. That is why I have no respect for him as a poet. However, he did prove me wrong in this one poem, "Look Down Fair Moon," as Whitman not only portrays emotions towards someone other than himself or a lover, he does so in a way that is both poetic and beautiful (Whitman).

WORKS CITED

Huff, Randall. "'Look Down Fair Moon'." The Facts On File Companion to American Poetry, vol. 1. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2007. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= CPAP0247&SingleRecord=True (accessed March 8, 2011).


Whitman, Walt. "Look Down Fair Moon." Leaves of Grass (1891-1892). The Whitman Archive. Ed Folsom & Kenneth M. Price, 1995. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.

From Pent-Up Aching Rivers Reflection

Walt Whitman's work of poetry, "From Pent-Up Aching Rivers," is a little different that many poems written in his time. Actually, it is extremely different than most literature that was being produced in general. Frankly, the entire poem describes sex and all of the joys of sex (Whitman). Walt Whitman was known for not writing what was the norm; he caused quite the uproar with all of his new ideas and thoughts. After reading this poem, I understand why. While I am not a shy or bashful person by any means, I felt a little uncomfortable reading this poem in an open room with my parents in the next room. I was ready at any time to click to a different link just so that they would not catch a glimpse of the literature I was reading. Does that seem right? I feel that a man of great literary achievement who was so influential on modern literature more than a hundred years ago should not have been writing so crassly about this topic, although I guess that is also why he was such an eye opening and powerful author.

"From Pent-Up Aching Rivers" describes Whitman's thoughts regarding nature, and how the human really is, in all, just an animal in nature's course (Whitman). It also describes how sex is not just merely for pleasure, but that God created us in his image and therefore we are all perfect creations and sex is a divine activity (Oliver). While I do see the truth in some of those statements, I find that they are a bit contradictory. I do agree with Whitman when he writes of other animals and their mating patterns, relating them to ours (Whitman). I think this is an accurate realization and he expressed it in an interesting and captivating way. When he starts to write about how divine the body is and how sex is divine, however, I become a bit confused (Whitman). Whitman was, first of all, homosexual; his literature, however, is sometimes in regards to having sex with a woman (Whitman). This right here is completely against the Bible and what God says in many different chapters. For example, Matthew 5:27-30 is all about adultery and how even talking about it or thinking about it is a sin; this can lead to an afterlife in Hell (Jones). If Whitman was trying to relate sex and his thoughts of it to a divine being such as God, he failed completely. Instead of acting pleasing towards God, he was instead writing of lust in which women and men both were the objects of his attention, so obviously he was not married to or even thinking about marrying his subjects (Whitman). In the Bible, in many, many passages, this is regarded as a very serious sin; it is even one of the Ten Commandments. While I understand where Whitman was coming from, he was just displaying his "every man" concept of how every man is like each other and every man came from God, I think he misinterpreted it and took advantage of his literary power to write a very creative yet crude poem that certainly had an impact on all future forms of literature.

WORKS CITED

Jones, Michael. "Bible Verse List - Scriptures about Sex from ScriptureMenu.com." Scripture Menu: Bible Topic Scripture Verse Lists. Crossway Bibles, 2005. Web. 06 Mar. 2011. .

Oliver, Charles M. "'From Pent-up Aching Rivers'." Critical Companion to Walt Whitman: A Literary Reference to His Life and Work, Critical Companion. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= CCWW168&SingleRecord=True (accessed March 6, 2011).

Whitman, Walt. "From Pent-Up Aching Rivers." Leaves of Grass (1891-1892). The Whitman Archive. Ed Folsom & Kenneth M. Price, 1995. Web. 6 Mar. 2011.

Journal #39

Walt Whitman's "Bardic Symbols" is a very emotional poem. It explores certain different emotions he is experiencing, and he presents them in a very dramatic way. Personally, I was a bit thrown off by the poem; it was sort of confusing, and he seemed to go back and forth in his thoughts (Whitman). William Howells, in his criticism of "Bardic Symbols," was said to kind of make sense of the madness Walt Whitman wrote; however, I think that Howells made it even more confusing. Howells was biased; at the beginning of his criticism he praised Whitman's works and the greatness of them (Howells). When I read that, it immediately made me disregard the rest of his criticism. I do not think a literary critic should be so bluntly biased. I think it sort of ruins their credibility, so the analysis he wrote really did not help clear up anything Whitman wrote.

Although I obviously am not a fan of Whitman's "Bardic Symbols," it did definitely portray his beliefs and tendency to write about spirituality and the "every man" concept. Whitman focused on himself throughout most of the poem and on his specific emotions and thoughts, but then in the very last stanza he wrote about how everybody feels that way since everybody is the same (Whitman). This obviously shows his "every man" concept, as he portrays everybody as basically being the same since we all derived from the same being, God. Whitman also touched more on spirituality throughout the poem as he talks about his father (Whitman). It is possible that he is literally speaking and is actually talking about wanting his biological father and how he wants to be closer to his father, but I took is as his spiritual father, as in God (Whitman). I think that Whitman is expressing how he wants to be closer to God and he wants God to love him and accept him and hold him close, even though Whitman is such an unhappy man and has sinned. Although the poem is super dramatic and a little too wordy, Whitman did portray an example of the "every man" as well as focusing on spirituality.

WORKS CITED

[Howells, William Dean]. ""Bardic Symbols"." The Daily Ohio State Journal (28 March 1860): 2.

Whitman, Walt. "Bardic Symbols." Leaves of Grass (1891-1892). The Whitman Archive. Ed Folsom & Kenneth M. Price, 1995. Web. 2 Mar. 2011.

"Beginners" by Walt Whitman

"Beginners" is a poem written by Walt Whitman. In it, he describes beginners in general; he describes the positives, the negatives, and just how the typical beginner acts in a situation (Whitman). In that way, he is describing the "every man;" a concept commonly written about by Whitman in which he describes how every man is, in theory, the same as any other man. Since every person is derived from the same being, according to the author, everybody contains the same basic structure and function and therefore are alike to the point where "every man" is kind of the same. When Whitman takes the average "beginner" and makes a generalization such as the ones he makes in "Beginners," it is obvious that he is creating another example of the "every man" (Oliver). It was said that Whitman used to walk to streets of New York and Boston, just talking to random people in order for Whitman to get a sense of their selves (Oliver). In doing this, Whitman created his own opinions of how a beginner typically acts, therefore creating his idea of the beginning "every man."

Whitman's poem "Beginners" struck me in a different way than many of his other poems had struck me. While I typically see Whitman as a self concerned, conceited, and biased writer, I actually received intellectual insight from this poem. My favorite line from the work is "How people respond to them, yet know them not..." (Whitman). I think this is an incredibly simple yet insightful statement to write about beginners. It is so true. When one is beginning an activity, or is acting as a beginner at a new feat, other people respond to them in judge them in ways that are absurd. For example, in high school, the freshman are the beginners. The first few days, weeks, and months of school, everybody is judging them. The older students look at how the freshman act, dress, talk, and look, and based on these judgments, opinions are made and the older students react accordingly. Without even knowing a thing about these individuals, the older students are quick to judge and react. Being a beginner at any activity is frightening enough, as usually one just wants to impress the more accomplished individuals in the field. With biased or incorrect judgments and reactions, beginners are kind of thrown into an awkward and difficult position that Whitman portrayed very well in his poem. While he covered many different aspects of beginners in the poem, this statement stuck out the most to me.

On the contrary, Whitman did also cover the aspect of beginners acting in annoying and showy behaviors. This is also very true; many individuals, in order to prove themselves worthy, experienced, or tough enough, seem to show off for those who have already had more experience in a situation. This often leads to the beginners being viewed as even more inexperienced than they would have been seen before, as well as being seen as immature and almost silly. Whitman actually does a great job covering the different aspects of being a beginner in this work of literature. Whitman's poem "Beginners" was an intellectual and insightful piece of poetry.

WORKS CITED

Oliver, Charles M. "'Beginners'." Critical Companion to Walt Whitman: A Literary Reference to His Life and Work, Critical Companion. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= CCWW052&SingleRecord=True (accessed March 1, 2011).

Whitman, Walt. "Beginners." Leaves of Grass. 1990. Web. 01 Mar. 2011.

Journal #38

Whitman's poem "As I Watch'd the Ploughman Ploughing" is a short work of art that describes displays Christianity and spirituality as well as the concept of the "everyman." Whitman describes the ploughers ploughing and the sowers sowing as well as the harvesters harvesting (Whitman). These exhibit the every day jobs of regular people in the society; people were very farm based and grew their own food in order to survive. Therefore, it was common for one to be a phoughman, a sower, or a harvester. Through those lines in his poem, Whitman is describing the "everyman," as, typically, the common man in his culture was some sort of a farmer.

Whitman describes the cycle of life and death in his poem. He described life as the tillage, and death as the harvest according (Whitman). By this, I interpreted the idea that he is referring to life as the tillage since, in tilling land, one is planting the seeds that are to be grown, and in one's life, they are planting their seeds in society for the rest of the world to see. In one's life, they are constantly changing the world in small ways just by existing; therefore, they are planting their theoretical seeds in society just as physical seeds are planted into the ground. "Death is the harvest according" refers to the aftermath of one's life; after they are dead and gone, what has he or she left to society (Whitman)? The harvest is the result of the crop; those seeds have already been planted, grown, and are ready to be sown. They have provided their fruits and their gifts to the rest of the world. As a person dies, their seeds have already been sown; he or she has already made their initial impact on his or her world. When he or she is gone, the aftermath, the result, of how he or she had lived his or her life is what is left. This is one's "harvest;" he or she is leaving behind his or her gifts and ideas. Whitman relates this to spirituality as he believes that God has gifted us the joy of life and death, and therefore we are to rejoice in that and make positive impacts on society through our life; therefore, great harvests are to be sown after our death.

WORKS CITED

Whitman, Walt. As I Watch'd the Ploughman Ploughing (1900). Web. 28 Feb. 2011.