In Walt Whitman’s poem “I Sit and Look Out,” Whitman observes the “sorrows of the world” and lists several tragedies common to the human condition. Upon reading the poem, Whitman’s words appear as compassionate, as if he really does care for the struggles of the people mentioned in the poem; “I hear secret compulsive sobs form young men at anguish with themselves, remorseful after deeds done.” (408) Furthermore, Whitman seems to involve himself in the private affairs of those he’s speaking to, like secret crying out of shame. The intimacy Whitman writes his poetry with makes him read like a friend who is understanding of your sorrows. That being said, Whitman’s poem struck me so much because of how relatable his words still are over a hundred years after he wrote the poem. Much of the poetry I have been exposed to in the past has been speaking to philosophic, romantic things in life, and looks to draw out of the divine difficult-to-explain events in life. Though Whitman seems to be looking into what the experiences, like the “low-life mother misused by her children,” mean for humanity, he is looking to remind people of the struggles instead of further confusing the topic with overly verbose language. Whitman’s poetry is extremely familiar and intimate.
On the other hand, “I Sit and Look Out” feels disingenuous as well. The entirety of the poem is Whitman discussing several struggles that are familiar to people whether or not they have experienced it themselves. But, even if Whitman uses crystal clear language to describe these events, he is merely just a bystander. Although what Whitman seems to be doing is reminding his readers of difficult adversity, his last line, “All these – all the meanness and agony without I sit looking out upon, see, hear, and am silent.” Whitman describes several events that would have been easy for him to intervene. I feel as though it does not matter what Whitman was intending to do in his poem as it function in society, it seems to me that if he really cared for the “slights and degradations cast by arrogant persons upon laborers, [etc.],” then he would defend these people in his poetry instead of sitting by.
This is an interesting poem and I like the way you objectively analyzed it, but also offered your own opinion at the end. I agree with you in that Whitman could have taken action, either in real life (if he saw what he said he did) or even in his poetry, He could’ve written poetry which explicitly went out to change or solve these problems, he could have ended the poem with words which affected readers so deeply that they would be motivated to help their neighbors. The way I think of Whitman’s writing process is that he may not even know what he wants to do with his poems while he’s writing them. Some of them seem like he channels them through a higher power or maybe he just goes inward to write these lines. Either way, I see this poem as a sort of confession. He saw these things, and he just kept on with his life. Couldn’t we all say the same thing? Even in emergencies you are supposed to put your mask on before you help others. Is that what Whitman does?
This was definitely an interesting poem to focus your discussion on for this week. I especially like your point about how you previously had only been exposed more Romantic works of poetry as opposed to the more Transcendental preaching of Whitman. I agree with you and that is part of why I have been so enthralled by his poetry in this class. William Wordsworth founded most of his writing in trying to relate to the common people and write in their everyday language, but even he tended towards times of overly verbose language that Whitman seems to disregard. Whitman is the people’s poet and I feel as if his writing, although at times disingenuous as you mentioned, is as close as we can get to having a poet that truly tries to relate to the common man and life’s ordeals.
Thanks for the post and comments. Whitman sometimes feels closest to us when he is most honest, most confessional. He can seem rather aloof and distance when flying in his imaginative hot-air balloon and cataloging the sights of the world. Here, he draws out both sympathy and unbearable weight of complicity, as Ivy notes–this sense that so man of us, by default, just sort of sit and look out. Is it enough that we recognize these things? Or is that what leads us (as in Whitman’s case) to fratricidal war? In any case, I really think that tension between Whitman’s closeness and the sense in which he seems to fail us here is precisely the point.