Natalie Cizmar

November 18, 2004

The Emergence of Beauty in Whitman’s Work out of Sensationalism

Welcome to Pfaff’s

            Writers and artists are traditionally known for their unconventional lifestyles, and the bohemians who frequented the underground bar called Pfaff’s were no exception. Pfaff’s was opened by Charlie Pfaff in 1855 in New York City on Broadway. It was modeled after the bohemian-type bars that were springing up all over Europe (www.gvny.com). Many writers and artists spent time at Pfaff’s; the most well-known of these was Walt Whitman. “Walt Whitman was unlike most of Pfaff’s patrons in that he had actually published a book” (www.gvny.com). After publishing Leaves of Grass, Whitman gained notoriety among the underground artists who hung out at Pfaff’s and called themselves “bohemians.” Pfaff’s was a comfortable place for friends to hang out, drink some wine, eat some food, share their work, and socialize. Whitman even wrote poetry about his time spent at Pfaff’s.

            Whitman can be seen as the type of poet that has something for everyone. This was probably why he got along so well with everyone at Pfaff’s. He was a bohemian, in that he was a writer living in a sort of underground society. He also had respect because he did make money off his work. Plus, he had other jobs, so he could relate with the other working men. Throughout much of his work, Whitman spends time relating with the rest of humanity.

            However, his work was mostly influenced by the works around him. To really understand his style, we have to delve into what was happening in literature at his time. There was a wave of sensational literature, which Whitman embraced and rebelled against at the same time. Some of the sensational authors were Whitman’s friends that hung out with him at Pfaff’s. The sensational literature actually originated from more tame literature that warned against sin, but this eventually turned into wild, sinful stories. These stories were embraced by Whitman, but he did not write on their level. Unlike the sensationalists, he never pretended to live a life he did not live. He was true to himself, to his readers, and he turned the sensational literature into something that could be seen as good and beautiful by completely taking out the evil and focusing only the good human qualities of empathy and love.

Whitman as a Bohemian

            First of all, before we dive into Whitman’s works, we have to look at him a little. He and his friends at Pfaff’s defined themselves as Bohemians. But what exactly is that? Webster’s defines “Bohemian” as “a writer or artist living an unconventional life” (91). This is a good way to describe Whitman. From his drunken nights at Pfaff’s to his toiling hours as a working man, his homosexual tendencies to his respect for women, his supposedly risqué literature to his rebellion against rebellion, his life can be seen as nothing but unconventional.

            Whitman expresses his views throughout his literature. In “I Sing the Body Electric,” he makes women equal to men. “That of the male is perfect, and that of the female is perfect” (Blodgett 118). He also talks about how he likes to spend time with his friends. “I have perceiv’d that to be with those I like is enough, / To stop in company with the rest at evening is enough” (Blodgett 120). These views are not too far-fetched. His beliefs in women’s rights may be a little before his time, but overall, these statements are not way out there.

            But of course, Whitman has many more works. The sensational literature at his time was a rebellion against the temperance literature, which was trying to reform people to get them away from sin. Whitman embraces that rebellion, but then he rebels against it, too. The sensational focuses only on the bad consequences of sin. It takes a sin and makes everything that happens to the person who commits that sin extreme and ridiculous. Whitman takes out the sin completely and instead makes the acts of the people in his works more beautiful. He presents the grotesque as something we can relate to, feeling empathy for people who have problems. He presents sex as an expression of love. Whitman approaches these two subjects in similar ways and becomes a reformer and a sensualist. 

 

Whitman as a Reformer

            As we have all seen too many times, when people try to warn against sin, they tend to make the sin seem more interesting and appealing than it was before the audience received the warning. This is exactly what happened with temperance literature. What began as rational warnings about the dangers of drinking turned into wild, sensational tales that made alcohol seem more exciting than it really is. “American temperance literature, which began as a rather conventional genre, assumed a notably ‘devilish,’ subversive aspect as it fell into the hands of immoral reformers and opportunistic publishers” (Reynolds 65). The reform movement to turn people away from sin led to sensationalist writings which, ironically, turned people back to sin.

            Temperance literature was based on trying to keep the people from sinning. One of the major sins temperance writers focuses on was alcoholism. Temperance writers started out trying to warn of the “harmful effects of excessive drinking on one’s intellectual and physical well-being” (Reynolds 65). This literature started out trying to deter people from alcohol. The literature slowly went through a dark temperance phase, in which authors made up stories about people and families that were destroyed by alcohol. These stories eventually led to sensationalism, in which the effects of alcoholism were seen as extreme and absurd. “Letters from the Almshouse and John Elliott (both 1841) contain several sketches of drunken husbands dragging their wives about by the hair, driving their families outdoors, or chopping up family and friends with an ax” (Reynolds 68). An 1849 book called The Glass written by Maria Lamas “gives dark temperance an unusual twist by describing a young boy, locked by his drunken mother in a closet, bleeding to death after having chewed his own arm to the bone in an effort to save himself from starvation” (Reynolds 68). Both of these examples are extreme and usually do not occur when people drink. The writers of these stories were trying to make alcoholism as vile as possible. Sometimes, they included clergymen in their stories. In one story by Mason Locke Weems, “the devil promises great things to a preacher if he will either rape his sister, kill his father, or get drunk—the preacher gets drunk and then proceeds to murder his father, rape his sister, and hang himself” (Reynolds 60). This is another story in which the effects of alcohol are grossly exaggerated. While situations such as these may actually occur at sometime somewhere in the world, it is extremely rare. Alcoholism is dangerous, but the sensationalists took it to the extreme, making it grotesque and fearsome. However, this succeeded only in intriguing people even more. The sensational literature was extremely popular; people were eager to find out just how much more gross the authors could get.

            The leap from a “puritanical protest against vice” (Reynolds 68) to a fascination with horrible, grotesque sin intrigued Whitman as he went on his journey from one style of writing to another. “Whitman himself moved from Conventional reform writing (‘The Sun-Down Papers’) through dark temperance (Franklin Evans) to rebellious, morally liberated poetry (Leaves of Grass)” (Reynolds 68-9). Whitman could not help but admire sensational literature, especially the passion with which it was delivered. This passion was especially beginning to be seen in the way preachers were giving sermons. Because religious interest was on the decline, “sermon style was simplified and enlivened, while pulpit performers became more crowd-pleasingly theatrical” (Reynolds 25). While Whitman did not agree with the subject of the sermons, he would attend them just to see the show. He “could revel in the power and style of these sermonizers while discarding their doctrines” (Reynolds 25). Whitman was especially impressed with the passion used in temperance literature and sermons, which had, ironically, twisted it into sensationalism. This passion combined with the disturbing yet interesting images of the grotesque in sensationalism (that the passion itself had produced) makes its way into much of Whitman’s poetry, molding his style.

            Whitman displays his form of the grotesque in his poem “Respondez!” with the line, “Let churches accommodate serpents, vermin, and the corpses of / those who have died of the most filthy of diseases!” (Lauter 2958) Here, Whitman is placing a grotesque image within the church itself. Whitman, who started out as a conventional reformer, sees how the passion of the temperance writers led them to sensationalism. I think he is pushing their product back into their faces and reveling in scenes that they would find disgusting but that they are actually responsible for creating. Whitman also shows how the temperance writers who were originally trying to veer the public away from sin actually succeeded in steering them right back to it.

            Also in “Respondez!” Whitman shows his view of the temperance lecturer in the lines, “Let the reformers descend from the stands where they are forever / bawling! let an idiot or insane person appear on each of the stands!” (Lauter 2959) While Whitman uses the lecturers’ passion throughout this poem, he also makes fun of it by implying that “an idiot or insane person” could do their job. This shows how he does not agree with what they are saying or the fact that their sermons have twisted their original doctrine into sensationalism.

            The sensationalism that has resulted from the temperance writers and lecturers is what has, in fact, brought people back to sin. This sin is seen in many of the temperance writers and lecturers themselves. Whitman saw this sin because some of these writers and lecturers were his friends. They were his bar buddies that hung out with him at Pfaff’s. One was Henry Clapp who “had early in life been a rabid temperance lecturer and editor but then became a Fourierist rebel who sang praise to free enjoyment of sensual pleasures” (Reynolds 69). Whitman’s friend Fitz-James O’Brien loved boxing but wrote temperance literature against it, while another friend, Fitz-Hugh Ludlow, wrote against doing drugs even though he did them himself (Reynolds 69). Whitman saw how temperance writers and lecturers were not living the life they were preaching. He also saw that because of the sensational literature they produced, sin was more interesting and appealing to the masses. Whitman therefore refused to deny that he himself took part in sensual pleasures.

            In “Song of Myself,” Whitman presents himself as a normal human being with flaws like everyone else. He says, “I am not the poet of goodness only, I do not decline to be the poet of / wickedness also” (Blodgett 63). Whitman does not pretend to be only good; he admits that he has evil in him just like every other human being. In the same way, he uses the grotesque in sensationalism as something interesting and not as a guise of temperance. He says, “The suicide sprawls on the bloody floor of the bedroom” (Blodgett 51). He speaks of something gruesome, but he talks about it because it is interesting and something we can all understand. The temperance writers would have tried to link it to some sort of sin, such as drinking. Because Whitman does not do this, he moves away from sensationalism. He is not trying to preach what is “wrong” or “right.” He is merely showing the grotesque in a different light. From his point of view, one could feel sorry for a suicide victim instead of blaming the act on sin. In a way, he is making fun of the temperance writers’ reform movement and starting his own. He is taking the product of their preaching and turning it into something completely separated from what they were trying to do. Instead of judging people, he has empathy for them. He shows the grotesque as a fact of life rather than the consequence of sin; at the same time, he presents himself as a sinner. It seems his writing has led to a more modern reform, which is to help other through their problems instead of blaming the problems on the person’s supposed sin; the way to do this is to realize that we are all sinners, which makes it easier for us to imagine ourselves in the situation of another. By presenting the grotesque in this way, Whitman makes it seem less grotesque and more as something we can relate to.

            In the next section, I will show how Whitman approaches sensuality in a similar fashion to how he approached the grotesque. While the temperance writers tried to make sex something to fear, Whitman shows it as something to be enjoyed.

Whitman as a Sensualist

            Temperance literature did not stop at warning against the dangers of alcohol. It also warned against the dangers of sex. This was also sensationalized and “in time a frankly erotic popular literature emerged” (Reynolds 211). Like the warnings against alcoholism, the warnings against sex turned into wild stories exaggerating the effects of sex, in an effort to deter people from it, but instead (again) making them more interested in it.

            The anti-sex novels warned against the evils of seduction. The basic plot was that a girl would be seduced and eventually turn into a prostitute. “Among the most popular was William B. English’s Rosina Meadows (1846), which traces the fall of an innocent country girl into depraved whoredom after she is seduced by a rich roué” (Reynolds 64). The novels then proceeded to go into sensationalism, becoming more and more graphic. There is one book called Eustace Barcourt by A.J.H. Duganne, “in which an abandoned woman brains her seducer and then madly bathes her illegitimate child in his blood” (Reynolds 64). Also, like the anti-alcohol literature, these works also brought in people of the church. “Maria Monk’s Awful Disclosures of . . . the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal (1836) were among the most infamous works that pictured alcoholism, flagellation, prostitution, and infanticide within convent walls” (Reynolds 64). This sensational literature takes the problems of sex to the extreme; everyone who engages in it proceeds to live a horrible life. This literature was also very popular—people could not get enough of disgusting, erotic tales.

            The sexual sensationalism was just as—if not more than—interesting as the grotesque. Therefore, Whitman uses it in his poetry. He is open about sex and does not try to hide the fact that he enjoys it, while the temperance writers would have originally had society abhor it. “Whitman adopted free verse in the spirit of an American Subversive trying to mock conventional literature through the introduction of the explicit, rebellious images” (Reynolds 313). Some of these images can be seen in his poem “The Sleepers.” He speaks of “the genitals previously jetting” (Blodgett 116). He also imagines himself as a woman whose lover’s “flesh was sweaty and / panting, / I feel the hot moisture yet that he left me” (Blodgett 112). While speaking of people sleeping in their beds together, he invokes a homosexual image with the line, “The men sleep lovingly side by side in theirs” (Blodgett 111). All of these images could be seen as rebellious because they are openly about sex.

            More images are seen in “Song of Myself” in the lines, “Through me forbidden voices, / Voices of sexes and lusts, voices veil’d and I removed the veil” (Blodgett 65). Whitman also says in this poem, “Winds whose soft-tickling genitals rub against me it shall be you!” (Blodgett 66) Whitman gives even more rebellious images in his poem “Respondez!” “Let men among themselves talk and think forever obscenely of / women! and let women among themselves talk and think / obscenely of men!” (Lauter 2958) All of these images are openly about sex. Whitman does not try to hide his views and pretend that he does not enjoy sex.

            These examples of rebellious images are what Whitman uses to openly talk about sex. But he also goes further than this. The sensational literature also spoke openly about sex, but its purpose was to make sex seem evil. Whitman, on the other hand, wants people to view sex as a good thing. His “goal was to absorb his popular culture’s shocking images but at the same time to purify them” (Reynolds 329). Whitman had no problem talking openly about sex, but it was a bit more of a challenge to present sex in a good light. He strived “to present sex as a natural, unifying human impulse rather than the treacherous divisive contest it became in the hands of the sensationalists” (Reynolds 328). The beauty and love that surround the sexual images in Whitman’s poetry show that he accomplished his goal.

            In “Song of Myself” he remembers “How you settled your head athwart my hips and gently turn’d over / upon me, / And parted the shirt from my bosom-bone, and plunged your tongue / to my bare-stript heart” (Blodgett 48). This scene is very sexual, yet it is full of love. In “I Sing of the Body Electric” He speaks of the female body in a lovingly way as something that “attracts with fierce undeniable attraction” (Blodgett 121). He goes on to say, “Ebb stung by the flow and flow stung by the ebb, love-flesh swelling / and deliciously aching, / Limitless limpid jets of love hot and enormous, quivering jelly / of love, white-blow and delirious juice” (Blodgett 121). Here, he speaks explicitly about sex, but he still avoids sensationalism because this passage is full of love. Sex is not bad; it is something that is “deliciously aching.” He celebrates the sublime joy of sex and passionate love. The sensationalists focused on sex alone, but Whitman combines it with love to give it a much more friendly connotation.

            Like the grotesque, Whitman presents sex as a fact of life. And just as we can all relate to each others’ problems, we can all enjoy sex with someone we love. Whitman speaks of shocking images like the sensationalists do, but unlike the sensationalists, he pulls away from sin, instead celebrating it as the virtues of empathy and love.

Conclusion

            While the sensational literature was popular during Whitman’s day, it has not survived to today. Whitman’s works, however, are still being read. The way Whitman presents his views can be understood by many people today, probably better than in his own time. Most people do not believe that drinking and sex always lead to such horrible situations as what is described in the sensational literature. As far as the grotesque goes, most people today would agree with Whitman that it is best to try to relate to people instead of just blaming all their problems on their own sin, forgetting that we are sinful ourselves. Most people feel the same way about sex as him, as well. As long as it occurs between two people who love each other, we see it as a beautiful thing—not as something dirty like the sensationalists did. Overall, Whitman’s views are more modern and more easily applied to real life. Although he lived over 100 years ago, people today are living by his standards without even realizing it. By reading his work, we can go deeper into our understanding of human nature and appreciate more the qualities he praises.