Whitman’s approach to the civil war is perhaps the most neutral when compared to Timrod and Horton. His agenda in writing about the civil war seems to be nothing more than to discuss the disturbances and distastefulness of it, and most certainly not to encourage the idea of emancipation.
When classifying these three poets, Timrod is undeniably a Confederate, while Horton is undeniably aligned with the Union. This can be seen quite clearly in their works. In “The Cotton Boll”, Timrod expounds upon the beauty of the South in a rather long winded manner, capitalizing on the characteristics which make it uniquely southern, and claiming recognition as a separate entity from the North. In Horton’s works, even though they may not at first seem to be advancing the rights of African Americans, they most certainly do in the fact that the minority is writing history (instead of the leading class, which would be Caucasians). Even though Horton is undoubtedly catering to the whims of Caucasians in his poetry (which was often recited for entertainment) an underlying theme of racial equality can be seen throughout his works, and a desire for emancipation, although not prominent in his works, was most definitely a goal of his (as it would have been for most African Americans).
Whitman, on the other hand, can not be classified as easily as Horton and Timrod. His description of the war approaches conflict as a generally negative thing, and fails to take a particular side. Whitman cares more about the war being resolved in general, and no longer disturbing the “weeper or prayer” than about a particular side winning.
What makes Whitman able to approach war in such an ambivalent manner is the simple fact that he did not have to cater to a particular audience in order for his work to be successful. Whitman is a rare case of a poet whose literary decisions were not heavily influenced by his audience; his work was valued practically based on merit alone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I definitely agree that Whitman's writing was incredibly ambiguous. I had attributed this to the fact that maybe he didnt have a particulary strong opinion on the war. "Beat! Beat! Drum! does not take a real stand as far as sides go, but in my opinion he could have still made it a more powerful poem while still being ambiguous if he so chose. But I think that you make a good point with your suggestion that it was more because he did not have to cater to a specific audience. Why bother picking sides if you don't have to?
Although, that being said, it could be that it was the other way around and Whitman did not want alienate potentially large parts of his audience by making his poetry propaganda of sorts. While it may have been that his poetry was appreciated on its own merit, he may simply have not wanted to go down the road of controversey for simplicity's sake. His poetry had never been particularly controversial prior to the war ant that may have influenced why it was able to stand on its own feet and be valued on its own merit.
I also agree that Timrod and Horton made it very easy for themselves to be classified as being Confederate and Union supporters, respectively. I thought it was interesting that even though they made their positions very clear, neither made very strong statements with their poetry. Timrod, in my opinion, could have made a stronger statement than simply writing about how pretty and different the South is from the North.
Post a Comment