Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-07-23
"LEAvES OF GRASS. ;
a "o'enent i'm Philadelphia 10 Sup
Pres the Work-Criticism Oh a
NelLKnown Clergyman,
mho Has a Very Exalted Opinion Of
war Whitman's Place as Poet
and Philosopher.

=. rih!Lt-ADELPHIA, July 92-Simultaneously
VII me announcement of the reapPearanee
| on .uunday of Walt whitman. Leaves q
~ - rpm the press of Rees, welsh q Co.,
ooun paahsners OF this city, comes the state
Snnnrs.. 80 me philadelphia Society Tor the
euPPIesnon OF Vice and immortality are pre-
PsIing . anticipate the issue of the much
- eook BY an endeavor to have il
Psh .oer the category OF obscene litera-
~. .l s..s 70 prevent its circulation through
lne ms The war of opinions that has
DeeH $500 curing the past few months over
me no.A1 OF this work lie likely to become
ns,cer, psfucularly in religious circles, when
y oecoS generally known that an eminent
oielsy m.5 OF this city denounces the con-
tenpi&ieo action on the part OF the vice So
ICY ao maintains thai Leaves q
6as entitled TO very free
and unrestrained circulation throughout
the country. The sentlem an who takes such
ne'sroo91 view OF the character OF the good
ef-y Pve.s production il the Rev. Mr.. Nor
ro., pastor OF the Tabernacle Methodist
EpiscopAi church. Mr.. Morrow, besides his
saii I'LL s preacher, il renowned for his
eoio eA Preesions of opinion, his christianity
peing Oh Inc robust type tn at discountenances
c'9oIy IN religion and prudery in social life.
a lew Gays ago the publishers OF the FORTH
eoulng eoiilon OF the Leares requested Mr..
MOTTO" 70 write review Of the book when
tssueu. mar gentleman is now entertaining
the proposition, but for various reasons has
not as yet given any definite answer. Speak
ing yesterday on the subject OF the vice So
netys measure OF interference and his own
Rosiuen IN regard to the Philadelphia pub
nsners Request Mr.. Morrow said:
ine members OF this society are nv
Hienos, ana Its work is my work; but in this
particular instance / think they have made
mistake. Walt Whitman is robust and
yiriie, Dut not obscene. In his poetry he
aItemPts 10 carry out certain ideas of his
eMn-loeas that may not be consonant with
accspteo notions OF morality, but which,
with him, are convictions. He believes h Al
me human form, in all its parts and func-
lions, should be made a commonplace theme
10 Social intercourse, and one or two of his
poems are opponents Of this belief. 1t may
'e tnst 'nis is too radical subversion of
popular Opinions. 1t would probably not be |
;onouclve TO morality were the secrets of the |
iissectlng table known to every street gamin; |
'ul tney serve their purpose in their proper
pneres: 80 1t is with Walt Whitman's |
fleet would undo a Tsrs % nr q every
is species OF literature that cannot find |
xtenslve circuiation, because it can be |
appreciated by only the comparatively few.
The book, were its publication upobsfructeS
rould speedily find its own level and its cir,
rl@tiou would De limited to that level. Tn
has connection question occurs to me asked |
. Whitman hl1seh Do believe in The
ude IN ART ~ 1osxsr 10 him was that
believed IN u . Tar ss 1t was not made 4
nesns 10 foster innaorslity.- The tfrhssf l
ype Of art Is found IN the nude figure, whils +
/ The same time j i made to subserve the
owest purposes q bestiality. This is ths
alsfortune OF ART, not its fault. To remedy
MS evil-and in this accept Whitm.aial
]eas in part-I would say that men, and
omen, too, should be accustomed to such
,rms of art from early youth. Let them
ecome famlliarized with it from early
hildhood. 1 deprecate the attempt to sup
ress the circulation Of book of this char
cter. and fear 1t will not have the good eff
ct intended. In England, where Whitman's
caves Of Grass is looked upon as one OF the
ighest types OF the American classic,
regarded with establishment. As
. exponent Of peculiar form Of
ought, it is entitled to place in American
terature, and, as such, its publication
Iould be unobstructed. / have no wish at
Ie present time to become identified with |
Their side in the eight which is now going |
J over Mr.. Whitman's book. But If you
4 me what think of the book from
oral point of view, would say that it is
'ither lewd nor obscene; not but that TO the
inds Of many readers it may appear % and
30. That depends largely upon the pur-
- fox zAieh- it- 10 read. The obnoxious
ems believe were not written IN spirit
lewdness.
II say that il should be read in the same
irit -as-that in which it was written, and
q as an encouragement to immortality. II
We Whitman crealt- fos-asss@Fssss
ate thoughts which are to him earnest con-
ctions. His doubtful passages differ from !
ose OF Shakespeare and other classical |
cts in that the latter are expressions of the
trent notions of the morality of the day,
lille Whitman's are expressions of his own
sas and are at variance With present con- !
ptions of morality. should not. how
er, for my own use want one line in his !
Ok expunxed. ButifI wanted my daughter !
read II would expurgate many passages. /
" you can understand my reasons Tor
1 book which can only cifculate whsN ne 4
dtenn will b. digested BY mature minds,
d where its capabilities for moral injury =
NULL"