By: meghanedwards

meghanedwards — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:11:01 +0000

I agree with you; I can’t see Whitman as a communist. He’s too fond of the individualism which he believes makes up America and himself, for that matter. I’ve also read criticism that maintains that Whitman failed to reach the working class the way he wanted to be and maybe that individualism is why. This is the point, I think, where the poets diverge: Whitman remains the poet of America and capitalism, and Moruo, China and communism. However, I do think that the core belief of individuals maintaining equality and working for the common good of the country would appeal to him, if nothing else.

By: tallersam

tallersam — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:58:40 +0000

One of the articles assigned this week mentioned how Whitman can be turned into a symbol of the ‘working man,’ which works perfectly for Communism. I’m not sure how Whitman’s call for individual accomplishment gells with Marxism though. I mean, and I think your Guo Moruo passage conveys Whitman’s idea very well. The more I read it, the more I see Whitman and ‘Leave of Grass’ in it. Both see themselves as a locus through which people can connect with each other in ways that would have been impossible otherwise.
However, there’s the paradox of Whitman calling for unity while, at the same time, he calls for people to surpass him however they may. I think that removing that call for individuality is akin to avoiding mention of Whitman’s sexuality: it doesn’t give us the full picture. Would Whitman be happy that his words are inspiring people on the other side of the world, more than one hundred years after his death? Of course! Would Whitman be a Communist? I’m not so sure.

Comments on: Meghan for November 17

By: meghanedwards

By: tallersam