Journal #42

If I lived in the time in which both Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman were alive and writing poetry in their prime time, I am not sure what exactly I would think of their respective writing styles. I think that overall I would enjoy reading Dickinson's poetry more because, to me, she is a little less scandalous. Walt Whitman was commonly known for, at least in his later years and after his death, his homosexual writings, and this ideal was not looked upon with open arms by the community of the time period. I think I would fit into this group if I were alive. I guess that it would not be so much that I were homophobic, but I would not appreciate Whitman promenading his homosexual ideals around for the world to see. Also, I personally enjoy the poetry of Dickinson more than that of Whitman. I believe that Dickinson's writing is more vividly descriptive, and, to me at least, it has deeper meaning. Dickinson seems to speak more about not only nature but society as well. I realize that Whitman's main focus is the impact of his idea of self on society. however, personally, I enjoy hearing more about a supposed outsider's perspective on the current society rather than Whitman's idea of self throughout the world. This idea of self, although intriguing, does not excite me very much. It seems as if he makes some absurd statements in which I do not necessarily agree with. This does keep his writing interesting though. In another sense, I think these loaded statements and ideals from Whitman would certainly not sit well in the time period in which we are speaking. Citizens at that time held, for the most part, strong, normally Christian beliefs in which Whitman occasionally misconstrues. I hold my personal beliefs in high esteem, and if some poet like Whitman thrashes them, I will not be too happy. Although emotional, I do not think that Dickinson creates as much controversy overall as Whitman does.