|
. . . .Let me not dare, here or anywhere, for my own purposes, or any
purposes, to attempt the definition of Poetry, nor answer the question
what it is. Like Religion, Love, Nature, while those terms are
indispensable, and we all give a sufficiently accurate meaning to them,
in my opinion no definition that has ever been made sufficiently
encloses the name Poetry; nor can any rule of convention ever so
absolutely obtain but some great exception may arise and disregard and
overturn it.
And it must be carefully remember'd that first-class literature does
not shine by any luminosity of its own; nor do its poems. They grown of
circumstances, and are evolutionary. The actual living light is always
curiously from elsewhere--follows unaccountable sources, and is lunar
and relative at the best. There are, I know, certain controlling themes
that seem endlessly appropriated to the poets--as war, in the past--in
the Bible, religious rapture and adoration--always love, beauty, some
fine plot, or pensive or other emotion. But, strange as it may sound at
first, I will say there is something striking far deeper and towering
far higher than those themes for the best elements of modern song.
Just as all the old imaginative works rest, after their kind, on long trains
of presuppositions, often entirely unmention'd themselves, yet supplying
the most important bases of them, and without which them could have no
reason for being, so Leaves of Grass, before a line was written,
presupposed something different from any other, and, as it stands, is
the result of such presupposition. I should say, indeed, it were useless
to attempt reading the book without first carefully tallying that
preparatory background and quality in the mind. Think of the United
States today--the facts of these thirty-eight or forty empires solder'd
in one--sixty or seventy millions of equals with their lives, their
passions, their future--these incalculable, modern, American, seething
multitudes around us, of which we are inseparable parts! Think, in
comparison, of the pretty environage and limited area of the poets of
past or present Europe, no matter how great their genius. Think of the
absence and ignorance in all cases hitherto, of the multitudinousness,
vitality, and the unprecedented stimulants of today and here. It almost
seems as if a poetry with cosmic and dynamic features of magnitude and
limitlessness suitable to the human soul were never possible before. It
is certain that poetry of absolute faith and equality for the use of the
democratic masses never was.
In estimating first-class song, a sufficient Nationality, or, on the
other hand, what may be call'd the negative and lack of it, (as in
Goethe's case, it sometimes seems to me,) is often, if not always, the
first element. One needs only a little penetration to see, at more or
less removes, the material facts of their country and radius, with the
coloring of the moods of humanity at the time, and its gloomy or hopeful
prospects, behind all poets and each poet, and forming their birthmarks.
I know very well that my Leaves could not possibly have emerged
or been fashion'd or completed, from any other era than the latter half
of the Nineteenth Century, nor any other land than democratic America,
and from the absolute triumph of the National Union arms.
And whether my friends claim it for me or not, I know well enough,
too, that in respect to pictorial talent, dramatic situations, and
especially in verbal melody and all the conventional technique of
poetry, not only the divine works that today stand ahead in the world's
reading but dozens more, transcend (some of them immeasurably transcend)
all I have done, or could do. But it seem'd too me, as the objects in
Nature, the themes of estheticism, and all special exploitations of the
mind and soul, involve not only their own inherent quality, but the
quality, just as inherent and important, of their point of view,
the time had come to reflect all themes and things, old and new, in the
lights thrown on them by the advent of America and democracy--to chant
those themes through the utterance of one, not only the grateful and
reverent legatee of the past, but the born child of the New World--to
illustrate all through the genesis and ensemble of today; and that such
illustration and ensemble are the chief demands of America's prospective
imaginative literature. Not to carry out, in the approved style, some
choice plot of fortune or misfortune, or fancy, or fine thought, or
incidents, or courtesies--all of which has been done overwhelmingly and
well. Probably never to be excell'd--but that while in such aesthetic
presentation of objects, passions, plots, thoughts, etc., our lands and
days do not want, and probably will never have, anything better than
they already possess from the bequests of the past, it still remains to
be said that there is even toward all those a subjective and
contemporary point of view appropriate to ourselves alone, and to our
new genius and environments, different from anything hitherto; and that
such conception of current or gone-by life and art is for us the only
means of their assimilation consistent with the Western world.
Indeed, and anyhow, to put it specifically, has not the time arrived
when, (it must be plainly said, for democratic America's sake, if for no
other) there must imperatively come a readjustment of the whole theory
and nature of Poetry? The question is important, and I may turn the
argument over and repeat it: Does not the best thought of our day and
Republic conceive of a birth and spirit of song superior to anything
past or present? To the effectual and moral consolidation of our lands
(already, as materially establish'd, the greatest factors in known
history, and far, far greater through what they prelude and necessitate,
and are to be in the future)--to conform with and build on the concrete
realities and theories of the universe furnish'd by science, and
henceforth the only irrefragable basis for anything, verse included--to
root both influence in the emotional and imaginative action of modern
time, and dominate all that precedes or opposes them--is not either a
radical advance and step forward, or a new verteber of the best song
indispensable?
The New World receives with joy the poems of the antique, with
European feudalism's rich fund of epics, plays, ballades--seeks not in
the lease to deaden or displace those voices from our ear and
area--holds them indeed as indispensable studies, influences, records,
comparisons. But though the dawn-dazzle of the sun of literature is in
those poems for us of today--though perhaps the best parts of current
character in nations, social groups, or any man's or woman's
individuality, Old World or new, are from them--and though if I were
ask'd to name the most precious bequest to current American civilization
from all the hitherto ages, I am not sure but I would name those old and
less old songs ferried hither from east and west--some serious words and
debits remain; some acrid considerations demand a hearing. Of the great
poems receiv'd from abroad and from the ages, and today enveloping and
penetrating America, is there one that is consistent with these United
States, or essentially applicable to them as they are and are to be?
What a comment it forms, anyhow, on this era of literary fulfillment,
with the splendid day-rise of science and resuscitation of history, that
our chief religious and poetical works are not our own, nor adapted to
our light, but have been furnish'd by far-back ages out of their arriere
and darkness, or, at most, twilight dimness! What is there in those
works that so imperiously and scornfully dominates all our advanced
civilization, and culture?
Even Shakespeare, who so suffuses current letters and art (which
indeed have in most degrees grown out of him,) belongs essentially to
the buried past. Only he holds the proud distinction for certain
important phases of that past, of being the loftiest of singers life has
yet given voice to. All, however, relate to and rest upon conditions,
standards, politics, sociologies, ranges of belief, that have been quite
eliminated from the Eastern hemisphere, and never existed at all in the
Western. As authoritative types of song they belong in America just
about as much as the persons and institutes they depict. True, it may be
said, the emotional, moral, and aesthetic natures of humanity have not
radically changed--that in these the old poems apply to our times and
all times, irrespective of date; an that they are of incalculable value
as pictures of the past. I willingly make those admissions and to their
fullest extent; then advance the points herewith as of serious, even
paramount importance.
I have indeed put on record elsewhere my reverence and eulogy for
those never-to-be-excell'd poetic bequests, and their indescribable
preciousness as heirlooms for America. Another and separate point must
now be candidly stated. If I had not stood before those poems with
uncover'd head, fully aware of their colossal grandeur and beauty of
form and spirit, I could not have written Leaves of Grass. My
verdict and conclusions as illustrated in its pages are arrived at
through the temper and inculcation of the old works as much as through
anything else--perhaps more than through anything else. As America fully
and fairly construed is the legitimate result and evolutionary outcome
of the past, so I would dare to claim for my verse. Without stopping to
qualify the averment, the Old World has had the poems of myths,
fictions, feudalism, conquest, caste, dynastic wars, and splendid
exceptional characters and affairs, which have been great; but the New
World needs the poems of realities and science and of the democratic
average and basic equality, which shall be greater. In the center of
all, and object of all, stands the Human Being, toward whose heroic and
spiritual evolution poems and everything directly or indirectly tend,
Old World or New . . . .
But I set out with the intention also of indicating or hinting some
point-characteristics which I since see (though I did not then, at least
not definitely) were bases and object-urgings toward those Leaves
from the first. The word I myself put primarily for the description of
them as they stand at last, is the word Suggestiveness. I round and
finish little, if anything; and could not, consistently with my scheme.
The reader will always have his or her part to do, just as much as I
have had mine. I seek less to state or display any theme or thought, and
more to bring you, reader, into the atmosphere of the theme or
thought--there to pursue your own flight. Another impetus-word is
Comradeship as for all lands, and in more commanding and acknowledg'd
sense than hitherto. Other word signs would be Good Cheer, Content, and
Hope.
The chief trait of any given poet is always the spirit he brings to
the observation of Humanity and Nature--the mood out of which he
contemplates his subjects. What kind of temper and what amount of faith
report these things? Up to how recent a date is the song carried? What
the equipment, and special raciness of the singer--what his tinge of
coloring? The last value of artistic expressers, part and present--Greek
aesthetics, Shakespeare--or in our own day Tennyson, Victor Hugo,
Carlyle, Emerson--is certainly involv'd in such questions. I say the
profoundest service that poems or any other writings can do for their
reader is not merely to satisfy the intellect, or supply something
polish'd and interesting, nor even to depict great passions, or persons
or events, but to fill him with vigorous and clean manliness,
religiousness, and give him good heart as a radical possession
and habit. The educated world seems to have been growing more and more
ennuyed for ages, leaving to our time the inheritance of it all.
Fortunately there is the original inexhaustible fund of buoyancy,
normally resident in the race, forever eligible to be appeal'd to and
relied on.
As for native American individuality, though certain to come, and on
a large scale, the distinctive and ideal type of Western character (as
consistent with the operative political and even money-making features
of United States' humanity in the Nineteenth Century as chosen
knights, gentlemen and warriors for the ideals of the centuries of
European feudalism) it has not yet appear'd. I have allow'd the stress
of my poem from beginning to end to bear upon American individuality and
assist it--not only because that is a great lesson in Nature, amid all
her generalizing laws, but as counterpoise to the leveling tendencies of
Democracy--and for other reasons. Defiant of ostensible literary and
other conventions, I avowedly chant "the great pride of man in
himself," and permit it to be more or less a motif of
nearly all my verse. I think it not inconsistent with obedience,
humility, deference, and self-questioning. . . .
Leaves of Grass indeed (I cannot too often reiterate) has
mainly been the outcropping of my own emotional and other personal
nature--an attempt, from first to last, to put a Person, a human
being (myself, in the latter half of the Nineteenth Century, in
America,) freely, fully and truly on record. I could not find any
similar personal record in current literature that satisfied me. But it
is not on Leaves of Grass distinctively as literature,
or a specimen thereof, that I feel to dwell, or advance claims. No one
will get at my verses who insists upon viewing them as a literary
performance, or attempt at such performance, or as aiming mainly toward
art or aestheticism.
I say no land or people or circumstances ever existed so needing a
race of singers and poems differing from all others, and rigidly their
own, as the land and people and circumstances of our United States need
such singers and poems today, and for the future. Still further, as long
as the States continue to absorb and be dominated by the poetry of the
Old World, and remain unsupplied with autochthonous song, to express,
vitalize and give color to and define their material and political
success, and minister to them distinctively, so long will they stop
short of first-class Nationality and remain defective. . . .
|
|