Response to Whitman Post

The paragraph from the preface of Leaves of Grass is the strongest paragraph in the whole excerpt. And this would be why it's on a fridge magnet. Although the paragraph does not do an excellent job of using poetic devices or imagery to get it's point across, it does a great job at smacking you in the face with the ideas spread throughout the poetry. The paragraph starts of by flat out telling you what you will do. It does not recommend how you should live, it flat out says, "This is what you shall do." Fits with the second line of the poem: "And what I shall assume, you shall assume." "Assume" is a really loaded verb here-has many meanings. Anyway...This strong language does a great job of setting the author up. It helps illustrate that the author is going to give you guidelines and rules that you should live your life by. The first guideline or rule that is laid stated is, "Love the earth and sun and the animals." It is not shocking that this is the first rule stated because the romantics are all for nature and finding God in nature. Yes; many of the catalogs in sections of this poem that we did not read deal with critters in nature. Therefore it makes perfect sense that the first rule says that you should love nature, because according to the romantics, without love for nature, you will never find God. The next group of rules is "despise riches, give alms to everyone that asks, stand up for the stupid and crazy, devote your income and labor to others." These rules are also strongly rooted in romantic ideals. Despising riches, giving alms, and devoting income are all very typical of romantics because they thought property was basically useless. Therefore you have no need for money so why not give it to others who cherish it much more than you do. If you are a true romantic you have already found God in nature and have no need for money so why not give it to people who cherish it more than anything. Since they haven't found God, let them find joy in the money that is useless to you. Standing up for the stupid and crazy could be a romantic thought because they are not priviledged enough to have found God, and since you are, you should help them in any way possible. Yes, but this sentiment is most specific to Whitman. He was (of the Romantics we read) the most concerned with societal rejects. His nickname "the Poet of Democracy" suggests his interest in societal unity, specifically post-war reunification, which involved ridding ourselves of prejudices. The next couple rules basically say that you should not bow down to any power. There is no man greater than another, and the only person who you should feel inferior to is God. But God is also something you should not argue about because arguements are not peaceful and are pointless. The only thing that matters is going out into nature and finding God. The nest very powerful rule that really stands out is "go freely with the powerful uneducated person and the young and with the mothers of families." Fits so well with Emerson. PLUS, he adds women! This rule is extremely trancendentalist. The important part is go freely with the uneducated. This is very important because an uneducated person is free of corruption. They believe what they think and not what the are taught or is popular in society. This fits in perfectly with the trancendentalist idea that being an individual is the most important thing because without individuals, everything fails. Yup. This also ties in with the next big rules which are, "re-examine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your own soul." This again ties in very strongly with the tracendentalist idea of being an individual. You must examine what you have been taught because if you don't, what you believe is the mush that has been spoon fed to you by society, I like your metaphor here not ideas that you have personally formulated. Dismissing what offends you brings you closer to enlightenment and makes you an individual, not just another ant marching through society. If this paragraph was something we read out of the actual preface in its entirety, this sentence would stand out because it is oddly punctuated and very long. This would emphasize the ideas present and really hit home harder than it does alone. Not sure I get your last sentence, but you did an excellent job connecting the preface to the key ideas in the movement. Neat approach.