LITR 5535: American Romanticism
Student Student Poetry Presentation, summer 2002

Walt Whitman, “When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer,”  N1044

Poetry Reader:  Ileana Dejuan
Recorder:  Jennifer Thurik
Monday, 24 June  

            Walt Whitman’s poem, “When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer,” is an intriguing look at the different aspects of the human experience.  As I read the poem I realized that is consisted of two different parts united in the fact that each was an experience that the narrator was having.  Whitman discusses the danger that because science represents such a powerful kind of knowledge, that you as the individual will be tempted to believe that it represents the only kind of knowledge.  Whitman asserts that when he wants to know the reality around him or over him, he will try to experience it himself, not understand it through the words of a scientist. 

            The poem begins with a group of people listening to the expert astronomer speak about astronomy.  As you read the poem you realize that the narrator is becoming more and more indifferent to the lecture going on around him.  The words “sitting” and “heard” represent these feeling of disinterest that the narrator is having.  The application of repetition of the word “when” also illustrates the level of disinterest and unimportance that the narrator is feeling.       

Question for Discussion:  Is this in fact a Romantic poem, and if so what are the components that make it so?

            I began the discussion by relating with the class the aspects of the poem that I found interesting, such as how the first four lines of the poem, Whitman chooses, words that are flat and very literal in meaning.  The last four lines indicate a change in pace and direction in that his words have suddenly developed a simple, graceful flow which was absent from the first half of the poem.  This element illuminates the theme of finding beauty in simplicity.  By looking into the night sky, and retaining wonderment, the narrator has found more beauty, more insight and more fulfillment than all of the people he left in the lecture hall.  The most romantic and resounding phrase is the last line “look’d up in perfect silence at the star,” this line sums up the way the narrator is feeling at the end of the evening.  The silence in itself is complete and it is a proper way to appreciate the beauty of nature and the universe.  As I moved on to the class discussion of whether this was a romantic poem, Beth answered that she thought that it was a romantic poem, because of the narrators desire to leave the life he is living.  Kelly responds by agreeing to Beth’s statement and stating how the beginning of the poem, the narrator describes the facts and figures, while at the end he is describing his experience while looking at the beauty of the stars.  Kayla replies that the narrator goes from a passive voice to an active one.  Lynda then states that the narrator is perhaps moving from a mundane experience to one that is sublime.  Dr. White interjects by stating that reason is prominent in the beginning of the poem, where beauty is at the end of the poem.  David then responds that the narrator receives greater understanding of the stars through his experience rather than the graphs and charts that were arranged in the lecture hall.  I state that when he looks up at the night sky, he is feeling freedom without the rigidity of proofs and charts.  Dr. White agreed with my statement and Lynda explains that an individual can’t explain beauty that he/she must experience it for him/her self.  Kelly agrees with that statement and relates that until you as the individual experience it, you can’t understand it.  Natasha precedes the argument by implying that you can’t take apart the sublime and the majesty of the stars.  Dr. White states that the laws of nature don’t necessarily follow Romanticism.  That you must have the spirit of nature to attract to it like mathematics is attracted to Astronomy.  David replies to Dr.White’s comment by suggesting that Astronomers have to hypothesize the system through telescopes. 

Dr. White then states that Astronomy violates common sense.  For instance, we see and romanticize the run rise and the sun set, however the reality is that there is no sun up and down, rather the earth is revolving around the sun. 

Cynthia states that the narrator is separated from the masses, for instance the line where the narrator discusses how the audience is applauding, he, the narrator, is separated from the group in the hall due to his disinterest in the lecture. 

Dr. White states to the class that the first four lines are not poetic, but rather labored and progressive.  Cynthia then states that the audience is buying the facts that the astronomer is stating.  I then continue the discussion by addressing how the last four lines as simpler and more graceful that the first four. 
Dr. White then states that in the beginning of the poem the narrator is building impatience, then toward the end he (the narrator) has released his irritation. 

Al continues the discussion by stating how the poem is representative of a choice in which you go to reason and science or go to mystery and romanticism.  The narrator of the poem is in a journey towards transcendence.  For instance when he rises and leaves the lecture hall, the narrator is not actively seeking anything, though the journey is the goal.  Dr. White agrees with Al and states that the transcendence look is correct.  The narrator of the poem is stepping away from the world and getting in contact with nature.  The separation from the masses and a reconnection with nature is transcendence.  Al poses the question whether the narrator is separating from the masses or rather from science.  Dr. White agrees that it may be both.  A standard romantic reaction towards the masses is an escape from the city (community).  In a city an individual is out of touch with nature.  For instance in the city the stars are not as visible as they are in the country. 

Michelle comments on the idea that the poem reminds her of Poe’s “Sonnet to Science”.  She states that the language in both poems is similar.  When science is brought into nature, beauty is taken away, which is why Whitman’s ending is so beautiful because the narrator has gone out into nature leaving science and reason behind.  Dr. White comments on the fact that Whitman looks at nature realistically, while Poe addresses it mythologically.  Kelly ends the discussion by summing up the theme of the poem as being that pleasure in found in nature, not science.