Peter Doyle: The Intimate Friend

Peter Doyle

Peter Doyle was born in Limerick, Ireland sometime around 1845. He came to America around the age of eight. He fought on the side of the Confederacy before being discharged and moving to Washington D.C. He became a street car conductor and a close and intimate friend of Walt Whitman.

It seems that Pete was more than a friend, but instead a lover and the biography available through the Whitman archive speculates about this. It gives great detail of the fluctuating relationship between Pete and Walt and even ties in some of this to Walt's poetry. To be honest i have not read the entire biography yet but their correspondence with one another suggested a very passionate relationship.

Though they are seemingly opposite it is perhaps quite fitting that Whitman would like a man close to his opposite. Whitman tried to encompass all and in that attempt, grabbing a man cut from a different cloth does not seem so strange.

Project: Whitman's Speech

I suppose since i posted about it twice already i would like to more thoroughly investigate Whitman's sentiments on speech. I think i will do this by going through specimen days and his poetry. A poets relationship with speech or at least communication is paramount. Everyone is afraid they will be misunderstood or misread. In "Song of Myself" Walt has a few parts where he talks about speech and how it affects him.

What is the relation of communication and speech to a poem. How does Whitman try to close the gap between reader and author? Does Whitman invite us to try to go deeper?

On the surface some of these answers may seem easy and plain enough but it is more complex. Walt revising the Leaves as much as he did is important, perhaps focusing on segments that talk about speech or authors and readers through the revisions will also shed some light.

A Couple Of Old Friends - A Coleridge Bit

It always amazes me how much Whitman loved nature. He takes his time there to lean and loaf b y a pond and bird watches. It is hard for me to see him as a b'hoy of the Bowery as much as a the Whitman of nature. It's almost as if he had some sort of all encompassing hippy dippy love. Like 1969 was actually the culmination of a culturally rich ideally Whitmanian explosion. Except with drugs. Which i don't think Whitman would have dug. I think drugs are in the perfume category for him.

It is weird to think of what happened in America post Whitman and how much he may have influenced it. For instance how manhood was perceive in the beginning of the 20th century with the creation of all those boys clubs ect. Or Teddy Roosevelt calling for people to go out side. That nature prevented the "sissification" of men ( i have a source for this, let me check my papers and i will show you).

Surely some sort of twisted and corrupt Whitmanian stance led to that? ( i don't think Whitman would have approved the word "sissification" ).

I wonder how this man who said he could contain all always came out so sensibly in his own life for the love of nature. How could he really be a "rough" when he so loved nature and beauty? I am glad he didn't live to see the first world war. As much as the civil war broke his heart, which it did, i wonder how modernity WW1 would have affected him.

Whitman Treasure Hunt!

Here are some things i found that have echoes of Whitman!

1) Twilight Zone "I Sing the Body Electric"

This episode is about an electric grandmother that takes care of a family. It was written by Ray Bradbury some lines from the poem that are reflected in the episode are:

"The expression of a well made man appears not only in his face,"
"And in man or woman a clean strong firmfibred body is a beautiful as the most beautiful face."

The poem is about the strength of the body and in the episode the grandma is indestructible. This connection shows that Whitman can influence many different areas of art.

2) Archer episode seven season one "Skytanic"

Though it is a very small part, Mallory Archer mutters the lines "O' Captain, My Captain" to the captain of the sky blimp. Though this is a small and insignificate part (so much so that i couldn't find a clip) it shows how much Whitman's poetry is a part of the American consciousness. Yes it is one of the most quoted of Whitman's poems, but even that one line from it invokes Whitman. So we can see how American literary identity is shaped by Whitman.





3) Breaking Bad: Season 3 episode 12 " Half Measure

In the fortieth minute of this episode we get a very metafictional scenario. Walter White is watching Jeopardy with his son, and a question about Walt Whitman comes up. It is about his barbaric yawp, a line from song of myself we all know well. Without spoiling anything this reference foreshadows certain aspects of the episode to come and the remaining minutes of the episode. Also it could be seen as metaphorical for Walter White's character as he is the academic who is learning to release his own form of a barbaric yawp upon the world.
Breaking Bad also quotes Whitman again in an earlier episode (episode 6). So we can see that clearly the writers have Whitman on the brain.







So what does all of this tell us? That Walt Whitman is spread out among our culture like the roots of the grass. I can't wait to see what everyone else found because i am sure there is a plethora of Whitman inspired pop culture items. Furthermore it is hard to look at American poetry and not see something of Whitman there. He is essential to our culture as a poet and an artist so thoroughly American that we can see him amongst our daily lives. To quote a favorite poem of mine by Ginsburg "What thoughts i have of you tonight, Walt Whitman".

I'm Not Kidding Anymore

"Well it's 1969 okay/ All across the USA/ another year for me and you/ another year with nothing to do"- The Stooges

"I got a six-pack and nothing to do"-Black Flag

"The problem of leisure/ What to do for pleasure" - Gang of Four

Whitman is THE proto-punk. The first god damned one. I promise you this. We've seen it before. Dressing like a Bowery B'hoy, jaunty hat and a "i don't give two shits" hand on hip attitude. Not to mention he printed the first copies of Leaves of Grass by himself. Have you heard of a zine? Walt DIY'ed before DIY'ing was cool. The quotes above? Oh yeah....LOAFING. Three punk bands, and three bands full of loafers. Starting to get the picture?

How bout some text? Yes?

The poet "is the arbiter of the diverse and he is the key. He is the equalizer of his age and land" (v)

The poet. The punk. When capitalism was rampant in the age of Reagan we get this gem from Black Flag:

"This fucking city / Is run by pigs /They take the rights away /From all the kids /Understand/ We're fighting a war we can't win /They hate us-we hate them /We can't win-no way"

Black Flag is complaining about the status quo at one of the times that the status quo was strongest (except for now). Not to mention the big problems that were happening with the L.A.P.D. all throughout the eighties and ninties. Black Flag is equalizing the land. They are telling the youth of the troubles of their society and of unequality. Sure there is youthful zeal and sure this may be a stretch but....you can see it right?

But here is Walt showing us his even more punk like aspects:
"If the time becomes slothful and heavy he knows how to arouse it...he can make every word he speaks draw blood. Whatever stagnates in the flat of custom or obedience or legislation he never stagnates."(v)

Hell ya! Punks make their words draw blood, especially in times slothful. When change is the least, when things have become comfortable and terrifyingly so. Here are two examples of punk bands make their words draw blood.

"what they did,past or present/got us in this situation/predicament/no where to run/everybody's building bombs/no more housewives;/"days of our lives",/television,disneyland,/basketball or stars and stripes/their chairman's on his death bed/our president's popularity is down/an epileptic called a colonel/presses a button/and its all knocked down"-Circle Jerks

At this point and time (1982) the cold war had been going on for almost thirty years. Our Government had gotten out of certain crises but Reagen only helped propel the Cold War until he "won". Basically, this little band was stirring it up, being political, and showing the youth was was going on in the country. Booyah.

I know by know you are pissed as shit at me thinking "what does the Misfits wanting my skull have to do with Walt Whitman?!?" well it does. Walt was lauded as a crude and vulgar poet by some reviewers and he had done things no poet had done. He experimented with the new verse. He had the guitar riffs crunch and barbaric that where the words from his voice. He changed the shape of poetry and made new ways of making poetry available to furture generations. Likeso with punk. The amount of amateur but glorious guitars, brutal riffs and care-free attitude allowed many young bands to "sound [their] barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world" (not to mention many of the musicians in these bands were self taught).

These punk kids tried to change the world. Their attitude was one of not backing down, not giving in to conformity. Walt didn't either. He revised his Leaves sure, but he never gave in, never took out the profane because of peoples anger. He was himself through the poetry, loving, changing and not afraid of his own ideas. This makes me think of a line from a Refused song:

"It could be dangerous/ Art as a real threat"

The bottom line of this is that Walt was revolutionary and we need to understand that to understand his poetry. Contemporary times have jaded us from seeing just how crazy of a game Walt was playing, one as crazy as these punks. Walt tells us in his poem he harbors a slave. Walt tells us that "he most honors my style who learns under it to destroy the teacher"(40). Walt was for America herself, even for the President, but also against establishments that would prevent humans from being alive, being human.

Despite his intent, which is a thing unknowable, he had somewhat of a pervasive poetry. The poetry of a rebel, a loafer, a rebel loafer, who dared to dream that we could all be humans together.

I wont lie to you, i am not done with this, i will bring about Punk into Whitman every god damned chance i can because i think the movement of Punk and the poetry of Whitman are combined in a way so thoroughly American that i can hardly stand it. Maybe it is the aspect of America that so brings together these things. Or maybe it was Walt who indeed started it all. We will see. Maybe i will change the song i am singing, but if i do, i still wont back down.

Reviewing the Reviewers

Does Walt Look Like He Cares What They Say?

Okay, understanding that the last two posts were epic in length i intend to try and keep this one short(er). I read five reviews in total, two bad, two good, and one that seemed to be on the fence. It was just as beneficial to see how Whitman received negative comments as good. A full view of the spectrum of reviews allows us the scope to understand Whitman as the circle of critics viewed him.

Starting with bad, here are some lines that really stuck out.

"As to the volume itself, we have only to remark, that it strongly fortifies the doctrines of the Metempsychosists, for it is impossible to imagine how any man's fancy could have conceived such a mass of stupid filth, unless he were possessed of the soul of a sentimental donkey that had died of disappointed love. This poet (?) without wit, but with a certain vagrant wildness, just serves to show the energy which natural imbecility is occasionally capable of under strong excitement" -Rufus Griswold

""We have glanced through this book with disgust and astonishment;—astonishment that anyone can be found who would dare to print such a farrago of rubbish,—lucubrations more like the ravings of a drunkard, or one half crazy, than anything which a man in his senses could think it fit to offer to the consideration of his fellow men. Where these bald, confused, disjointed, caricatures of blank verse have any meaning, it is generally indecent; several times execrably profane." - Henry Bagshawe

Wow. Right? Wow. Scathing really. Scathing. Over the top certainly, however understandable given the knowledge of Victorian sensibilities.

Griswold is extremely reactionary and extremely subjective. Despite the logical fallacies he commits (such as attacking Whitman directly) he actually does not quote any of what he finds displeasing about "Leaves". We know, in fields literary, that when you don't quote, yo shit don't float. His knee jerk reactionary stance that only expounds how vile he thought the poetry was betrays a sense of not having read past maybe the first few pages of "Song of Myself". Yet his abhorrence helps us understand a fact that made Walt so revolutionary. Walt was the first Punk. Walt was Pete Townshend smashing his guitar on stage. Walt was "The Lizard King" so high on acid he couldn't finish a concert. Walt was Zappa (I said it!) telling us to not eat the yellow snow. The poetry was raw and egdgey, and that is exactly why it elicited the response it did.

Bagshawe at least comments on things he doesn't like about the poetry itself. He points towards Walt's blank verse. That's at least something objective yes? But once again he merely talks about how profane the poetry is, and attacks Whitman. And, strangely, nay even suspiciously, he doesn't quote Walt either. Now i understand that, if profanity is the issue, why quote? Well at least censor whats offensive or quote parts that were disliked yet not profane. The reality of these negative reviews is that they are so upset about what they found offensive in the poetry they most likely forgot to correctly analyze it. That's a problem. Some of the best works of art have been profane and profound so, even though we may recoil in horror, to be good critics we must remain at least a bit objective. That is the problem shown by these two of Walt's contemporaries.

So here is the quote of the on-the-fence review.

"A curious title; but the book itself is a hundred times more curious. It is like no other book that ever was written, and therefore, the language usually employed in notices of new publications is unavailable in describing it."-Anonymous

The rest of the review is similar. On the fence, merely stating certain facts about the book and saying that, though strange, the book can provide pleasure to people who are " fond of new and peculiar things". This person has read the book, and thus is capable of reviewing it. Though the review is very ambiguous it is, no the less decent, merely stating that the book is new and strange. This gives people who would read it the idea that, if they are strict traditionalists, they may not care for it, and if they like things new and different, they will find pleasure in it.

Now for the positive reviews.

"In glancing rapidly over the "Leaves of Grass" you are puzzled whether to set the author down as a madman or an opium eater; when you have studied them you recognize a poet of extraordinary vigor, nay even beauty of thought, beneath the most fantastic possible garments of diction. If Hamlet had gone mad, in Ophelia's way, as well as in his own, and in addition to his own vein of madness, he might, when transported to our own age and country, have talked thus." -Anonymous, Our Book Table

This is a review from someone who understands a bit more about Whitman and perhaps America. While they praise Whitman they acknowledge that he is doing something never done before. Whitman is challanging the current conception of poetry in 1855. Though they equate him with Shakespeare (or rather a character of Shakespeare's) the understand Whitman's "roots" or at least the influences that effect him. They call him "Walt Whitman the b'hoy poet". As in bowery b'hoy. As in they know something about Whitman. This intimacy with the culture current in America is perhaps what keeps away the knee jerk reaction to some of the more profane parts of Walt's poetry.

The second Review:

"Walt Whitman, the world needed a "Native American" of thorough, out and out breed—enamored of women not ladies, men not gentlemen; something beside a mere Catholic-hating Know-Nothing; it needed a man who dared speak out his strong, honest thoughts, in the face of pusillanimous, toadeying, republican aristocracy; dictionary-men, hypocrites, cliques and creeds; it needed a large-hearted, untainted,self-reliant, fearless son of the Stars and Stripes, who disdains to sell his birthright for a mess of pottage"-Fanny Fern

I love Fanny Fern. No Joke yo. She hits the nail on the head of how people should have felt about Walt's poetry. He embraces everything and sets everything equal. Though she is very excited by "Leaves" she still reads Walt well, in our terms. She understands the reasoning Walt was apparently trying to get and she poets to him as a thoroughly American poet. She may even purpose my thieving bastardization of a statement from "The Dark Knight"

"Walt Whitman is the poet America needs, but not the one it deserves"

Walt had a vision of an America i wish i could be a part of, a vision of an America that Fanny agrees with and it is that vision that the negative reviewers were afraid of. Progressive and accepting. Refusing the old outdated modes of aristocracy and judgement.

GO WALT GO!

Sorry this wasn't short.