{"title":"马克Edmundson。我们自己的歌:沃尔特·惠特曼和为民主而战。","authors":"Jerome M. Loving","doi":"10.13008/0737-0679.2418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Mark Edmundson, Whitman’s “Song of Myself” is an onanistic dream in which the poet, or speaker of this vision, is, among other things, angry at the sun. Although masturbation is his “characteristic sexual mode,” Whitman is distressed “by the fact that some, or even all, of the figures he’s fantasizing about . . . are male” (64-65). Later (110) Edmundson says he is “agnostic” on the question of Whitman’s alleged homosexuality. Whitman’s imagined “fight for democracy” in this volume—intended for “general readers”—centers upon his autoerotic encounter of Self and Soul and a “duel with the sun” (“There are millions of suns left”), which represents the patriarchal or aristocratic forces that continue to threaten the fragile democracy on the verge of civil war. The vernacular “you” in the poem is no longer primarily the reader, or “divine average,” but “another part of Walt himself” (17). The sun and the grass serve in this rather private, if not “New Critical,” reading of Leaves of Grass as the age-old opponents in the people’s war against kings and aristocracy. In this fight, Whitman was responding to what Emerson called for in his essays: “a vision of what being a democratic man or woman felt like at its best, day to day, moment to moment” (3). It seems that Thoreau might be the preferred Transcendentalist to get down in the dirt with Whitman and his omnibus drivers, not Emerson, who allegedly complained of the “fire-engine” society he encountered when Whitman took him to a restaurant in New York City at the end of 1855. Indeed, for all the Emerson that Edmundson calls upon in this monograph on Whitman, he seems oblivious to the Transcendentalist or logocentric context for “Song of Myself” and in fact all of Leaves of Grass. As we know and as Edmundson acknowledges, Whitman claimed that he was “simmering, simmering, simmering,” and that Emerson—along with opera and the King James version of the Bible—“brought [him] to a boil” (5). And just what was it that turned this mediocre poet/journalist/fiction writer (whose humble beginnings Edmundson exaggerates, ignoring the importance of Whitman’s having edited the Brooklyn Eagle from 1846 to 1848) into America’s greatest poet? It was the Emersonian idea that everybody and everything was REVIEWS WWQR Vol. 39 No. 1 (Summer 2021)","PeriodicalId":42233,"journal":{"name":"WALT WHITMAN QUARTERLY REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mark Edmundson. Song of Ourselves: Walt Whitman and the Fight for Democracy.\",\"authors\":\"Jerome M. Loving\",\"doi\":\"10.13008/0737-0679.2418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to Mark Edmundson, Whitman’s “Song of Myself” is an onanistic dream in which the poet, or speaker of this vision, is, among other things, angry at the sun. Although masturbation is his “characteristic sexual mode,” Whitman is distressed “by the fact that some, or even all, of the figures he’s fantasizing about . . . are male” (64-65). Later (110) Edmundson says he is “agnostic” on the question of Whitman’s alleged homosexuality. Whitman’s imagined “fight for democracy” in this volume—intended for “general readers”—centers upon his autoerotic encounter of Self and Soul and a “duel with the sun” (“There are millions of suns left”), which represents the patriarchal or aristocratic forces that continue to threaten the fragile democracy on the verge of civil war. The vernacular “you” in the poem is no longer primarily the reader, or “divine average,” but “another part of Walt himself” (17). The sun and the grass serve in this rather private, if not “New Critical,” reading of Leaves of Grass as the age-old opponents in the people’s war against kings and aristocracy. In this fight, Whitman was responding to what Emerson called for in his essays: “a vision of what being a democratic man or woman felt like at its best, day to day, moment to moment” (3). It seems that Thoreau might be the preferred Transcendentalist to get down in the dirt with Whitman and his omnibus drivers, not Emerson, who allegedly complained of the “fire-engine” society he encountered when Whitman took him to a restaurant in New York City at the end of 1855. Indeed, for all the Emerson that Edmundson calls upon in this monograph on Whitman, he seems oblivious to the Transcendentalist or logocentric context for “Song of Myself” and in fact all of Leaves of Grass. As we know and as Edmundson acknowledges, Whitman claimed that he was “simmering, simmering, simmering,” and that Emerson—along with opera and the King James version of the Bible—“brought [him] to a boil” (5). And just what was it that turned this mediocre poet/journalist/fiction writer (whose humble beginnings Edmundson exaggerates, ignoring the importance of Whitman’s having edited the Brooklyn Eagle from 1846 to 1848) into America’s greatest poet? It was the Emersonian idea that everybody and everything was REVIEWS WWQR Vol. 39 No. 1 (Summer 2021)\",\"PeriodicalId\":42233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WALT WHITMAN QUARTERLY REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WALT WHITMAN QUARTERLY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13008/0737-0679.2418\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"POETRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WALT WHITMAN QUARTERLY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13008/0737-0679.2418","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"POETRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
根据马克·埃德蒙森(Mark Edmundson)的说法,惠特曼的《自我之歌》(Song of Myself)是一个唯心主义的梦境,在这个梦境中,诗人,或者说这个梦境的讲述者,除其他外,对太阳感到愤怒。尽管手淫是他“典型的性方式”,惠特曼还是为“他所幻想的一些,甚至是所有的人物……”都是男性”(64-65)。后来(公元110年),埃德蒙森说他对惠特曼所谓的同性恋问题是“不可知论者”。在这本书中,惠特曼想象的“为民主而战”——面向“普通读者”——集中在他对自我与灵魂的自恋遭遇和“与太阳的决斗”(“还有数百万个太阳”)上,这代表了父权或贵族力量继续威胁着处于内战边缘的脆弱的民主。在诗中,白话中的“你”不再主要是读者,或“神圣的平均”,而是“沃尔特自己的另一部分”(17)。在《草叶记》这本颇为私密的书中,太阳和草地即使不是“新批判”式的解读,也是人民反对国王和贵族的战争中由来已久的对手。在这场较量中,惠特曼是应对爱默生呼吁在他的论文:“作为一个民主党人的视觉感觉最好的,每一天,时刻”(3)。梭罗似乎可能是首选的先验论者下来的污垢与惠特曼和他的公共汽车司机,不是爱默生,据称“消防车”社会的抱怨时,他遇到了惠特曼带他去一家餐馆在纽约市在1855年底。事实上,埃德蒙森在这本关于惠特曼的专著中提到了爱默生,他似乎忽略了《我的歌》以及《草叶集》的先验主义或意义中心语境。正如我们所知,正如埃德蒙森所承认的,惠特曼声称自己“在酝酿,酝酿,酝酿”,而爱默生——以及歌剧和詹姆斯国王钦差版《圣经》——“使他沸腾”(5)。究竟是什么使这位平庸的诗人/记者/小说作家(埃德蒙森夸大了他卑微的出身,忽略了惠特曼从1846年到1848年编辑《布鲁克林鹰报》的重要性)成为美国最伟大的诗人?这是爱默生的想法,每个人和每件事都是评论WWQR第39卷第1期(2021年夏季)
Mark Edmundson. Song of Ourselves: Walt Whitman and the Fight for Democracy.
According to Mark Edmundson, Whitman’s “Song of Myself” is an onanistic dream in which the poet, or speaker of this vision, is, among other things, angry at the sun. Although masturbation is his “characteristic sexual mode,” Whitman is distressed “by the fact that some, or even all, of the figures he’s fantasizing about . . . are male” (64-65). Later (110) Edmundson says he is “agnostic” on the question of Whitman’s alleged homosexuality. Whitman’s imagined “fight for democracy” in this volume—intended for “general readers”—centers upon his autoerotic encounter of Self and Soul and a “duel with the sun” (“There are millions of suns left”), which represents the patriarchal or aristocratic forces that continue to threaten the fragile democracy on the verge of civil war. The vernacular “you” in the poem is no longer primarily the reader, or “divine average,” but “another part of Walt himself” (17). The sun and the grass serve in this rather private, if not “New Critical,” reading of Leaves of Grass as the age-old opponents in the people’s war against kings and aristocracy. In this fight, Whitman was responding to what Emerson called for in his essays: “a vision of what being a democratic man or woman felt like at its best, day to day, moment to moment” (3). It seems that Thoreau might be the preferred Transcendentalist to get down in the dirt with Whitman and his omnibus drivers, not Emerson, who allegedly complained of the “fire-engine” society he encountered when Whitman took him to a restaurant in New York City at the end of 1855. Indeed, for all the Emerson that Edmundson calls upon in this monograph on Whitman, he seems oblivious to the Transcendentalist or logocentric context for “Song of Myself” and in fact all of Leaves of Grass. As we know and as Edmundson acknowledges, Whitman claimed that he was “simmering, simmering, simmering,” and that Emerson—along with opera and the King James version of the Bible—“brought [him] to a boil” (5). And just what was it that turned this mediocre poet/journalist/fiction writer (whose humble beginnings Edmundson exaggerates, ignoring the importance of Whitman’s having edited the Brooklyn Eagle from 1846 to 1848) into America’s greatest poet? It was the Emersonian idea that everybody and everything was REVIEWS WWQR Vol. 39 No. 1 (Summer 2021)
期刊介绍:
Walt Whitman Quarterly Review publishes essays about Whitman, his influence, his cultural contexts, his life, and his work. WWQR also publishes newly discovered Whitman manuscripts, and we publish shorter notes dealing with significant discoveries related to Whitman. Major critical works about Whitman are reviewed in virtually every issue, and Ed Folsom maintains an up-to-date and annotated "Current Bibliography" of work about Whitman, published in each issue.