The Arkansaw traveler., 1885-11-14

forced. There are curt. balky, uneasy writers who bring us divine messages in their ungraceful way they leave with us bsrning thoughts leading to higher re- solves and splendid aspirations Their style may be deplorable, but we under stand them. We know tha, they bear a message to us, and do not expect from them facility of verse or even pliancy of language. Their meaning is clear, their thought sharply outlined, their purpose tangible and coherent
 Is Mir, Whitman such a writer? Most assuredly he is not. While it would be unfair to him to judge his work by the "set patterns" it Is certainly allowable to look at 1t from the standpoint of common sense. We have right to insist that all reputable work shall have a meaning, to show where it had failed or sue eceded, 10 point out its beauties or its de- fleets. It is true that the violet-ink nov elists, like Howells and James, decry all purpose in literature but their own pro ductions are sufficient refutation of their theories. The man who writes or acts without a purpose IS a fool.
 What is the raison detre ot Leaves of Grassp Has the author ever stated la intelligibie English the purpose of his bookI Is its aim moral, political, scien- tihc, esthetic2 Is it written in the inter est of democracy, or of the intellectual classesS Very likely it's author would claim that its purpose is collective. Has 1t inspired any one with greater love for humanity; has it caused the torch of pa- triotism in the hand of any individual to burn the brighter; has it lifted a single soul from its despair has it brough sun shine to any heart; has 1t given new hopes; has 1t sweetened religion has it encouraged science; has it given new wings to the imagination has 1t led the intellect into new paths of light and knowledge; has it cleared up any of our doubts or thrown the slightest ray Of helpful nght upon our questionings? If i, has done none of these things, the reason of it's being is not apparent
 But, some of Mir. Whitman's admirers say, 1t IS written from democratic stand point. If this is the case, the people ought to be able to understand it; but the ordinary man would regard Leaves of Grass" as the production of maniac Only the gifted few" can discover any sense in Leaves of Grass;' and what particular message they get from il is ungifted many. The work, of course, Is defective in its literary form. Even its author admits that Moreover, 1t has the faults of bad grammar, incomplete sen tences, misuse of words, and incoherence of ideas. There is about as much con secutiveness in the Song of Myself" as there is in dream originating in too much shrimp salad for supper. A tran script of the dream would be as valuable as the Song Of Myself"
 MT. Whitman says that "the volumes were intended to be most decided, se- rious, bona fde expressions of an idenli- cal individual personality egotism if you choose, for l shall not quarrel about the word" In this connection, MT. Whitman quotes saying of Carlyle's, that "there is no grand poem in the world but is at bottom biography-the life of man" It is noticeable here that Carlyle does not say an autobiography. Mir. Whitman is mistaken. The ego is usually voted nuisance in fiction and works of imagiua. tion. And 1t is just as well for us to con- tinue setting down as vain and disagree able fellow the man who SD sks always of himself as if be were the uh.verse. Ego tism hardly does justice to MT. Whi,man's condition. It should be termed the de- lirium of self-conceit
 The "Sorg of Myself" is probably a fair sample ot Walt Whitman's style and purposes, and there is no injustice in judging him by it. If the critic or the laborious reader were to devote himself 10 this poem" what wouldN he find in it l will attempt a partial summary of it. He begins by saying celebrate myself and sing myself" Alter celebrating and singing himself, he continues t' loafe, and invite my soul" We may define him then to be sort of loafer-poet. Having shown that he is not too much of loafer to be a poet, and vice versa, he continues '' harbor for good or bad. permit to speak at every hazard nature without check, with original energy" In other words, he erases the words restraint, modesty and shame from his vocabulary, and drops the distinction between de- cency and indecency. He would con- found all our previous conceptions oi good and evil and, if his theory were carried out, where would be msidenly modesty and youthful delicaey! He might as well contend that everybo should foreswear clothes and strut about iA puris naturalibus. The poet begins his pilgrimage in houses full of fragrance then he goes out in the air to the bank by the wood and becomes undisguised and naked. |" am mad" he says, "for the air to come in contact with me" This is the language of the lunatic asylum rather than that of poetry. Then follows an enumeration of abstract and concrete things, about which he predicates noth- ing. It reminds one of the negro's story of the storm that blew down the house but left the roof standing. The poet fails to provide an adequst ate support for his words, but leaves them suspended in mid-air. After he has made mince-mea