|
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 92]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
Wednesday, November
14, 1888.
7.55 P. M. W., sitting in his chair, against the light, dozing—his eyes closed.
Aroused by my entrance he was at once cordial and inquisitive. Talked well. Looked well. "To-day has been much like yesterday: I have in
fact been fortunate the past week in being blessed with tolerable relief." Seemed
depressed though. "It is wearisome, almost sad, to be confined in this
way, imprisoned, for days, months, years. Yet I have made up my mind to be cheerful: to
sustain myself by what philosophy I can." Bucke says: "We doctors too often fail to take account of Walt's ancestry—the
wonderful recuperative potentiality of his constitution." W. said: "It is encouraging to a fellow to hear that: it boosts him a little even if he knows better
himself: I do not fail to take account of the arguments the Doctor has to present: but there 's more and more than that." Mrs. Coates said to me at the
Club: "Walt Whitman is Olympian." W. laughed. "That has a new sound—is a new rôle for me." As to
the too cheerful reports of those who visit him: "There is often a
mistake about that: people come: I brighten up: they brighten me up: they go away thinking
that 's the whole story: little do they know the underlying
facts!" Arthur Stedman sent back the Linton cut. Also writes. I gave W. the Millet piece:
he was glad to get it. "I should read it with special care, now that you
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 93]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
fellows have put it to me in your remarkable way." He handed
me Bucke's letter of 11th containing the Millet parallels. "Bucke will
never be able thoroughly to appreciate Millet till he sees some of the original work: the
facts themselves: the backgrounds." We talked about Bucke's letter. W. had me read the
parallels to him.
"1. Both born and brought up near the sea which exerts a profound influence on the mode
of thought and feeling of each.
"2. M.'s books in youth the Bible and Virgil. W.'s Homer and Shakespeare.
"3. Each born of country people and always stuck to these in preference to city and
polished folk.
"4. Each strangely affected by a wreck at sea or coast near home in childhood.
"5. M. left country early: went to Paris. W. left country early: went to New York.
"6. Sensier speaks of M.'s twelve years' apprenticeship in Paris. John Burroughs of W.'s
twelve years of preparation in New York.
"7. The time M.—Le Grand Rustique—revealed himself for the first time
in 1850 (thirty-six years old—born 1814) in Le Sémeur—The
Sower, which was hailed by at least one critic as a fine and original conception. The time
W. came out, 1855 (thirty-six years old) first edition of L. of G. which was hailed by one
critic (Emerson) as a fine and original conception.
"8. The fate of both: constant neglect varied by fierce attacks, relieved by the
passionate faith and friendship of a few.
"9. This, then (the beauty, pathos and grandeur of labor and of the common laboring man)
was M.'s (W.'s) discovery—this the message he had to give the world. Before this
time the peasant had never been held a fit object for art.
"10. 'Here is a man,' said Gautier, 'who finds poetry
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 94]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
in the
fields, who loves the peasant.' 'In the labor of engines and trades,' says W., 'and the
labor of fields I find the developments and find the eternal meanings.'
"11. They wish to drive me into their drawing-room art. No, no—a peasant I was
born and a peasant I will die.
"The list might be greatly extended."
"Is it convincing?" I asked him. "Not
convincing—no: only interesting." Then W. said: "We must n't go peeking about trying to weigh and measure and classify
everything." I had the page proofs of Notes and three extra sheets each. He asked me again
(he has often asked me before): "What do you think is the nature of Mrs.
Coates' feelings for me? I accept her thoroughly but am a little at a loss to explain her: she
is wonderfully sweet, cheery: she is good to look upon." W. said: "You had evolution at the Club last night, did you? What are the limits of evolution as a
theory? I assume that Spencer, Huxley, Darwin, the greatest evolutionists everywhere, take the
ground that evolution is a process: do not pretend that it gives a why for existence: no: only
that it expresses a method of nature." I said: "Huxley says it
can't be made into a dogma: that it is a working hypothesis, no more." W. exclaimed: "That is a striking way to put it: I have never heard it put just in that
way: did Morse state it so? I think that evolution, considered as you explicate it, is
accepted by all who amount to much—for whose opinion we would experience sincere
respect. To go further than that is, I should say, looking at it in a very crude
style—is altogether unjustified. When it comes to explaining absolute beginnings,
ends, I doubt if evolution clears up the mystery any better than the philosophies that have
preceded it. I have felt from the first that my own work must assume the essential truths of
evolution, or something like them."
Agassiz was mentioned. W. said: "It was charged against him that he
showed an anxiety to prove the story of revelation—so-called—true. I never
construed him so: I
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 95]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
heard him speak once in Washington: there had
been a series of lectures at the Smithsonian: two or three or more of them: I
attended—once at least." Was Agassiz as a person attractive? W.: "Let me see: who does he look like? Have you seen Henry Wilson—H.
B. Wilson? Agassiz resembled Wilson, I should say, though not so large a man. Agassiz's voice
was good: his manner was modest, simple—no tricks—perfectly easy: as of a
man confident he was capable of handling his subject. He spoke English as well as he spoke
French—as well as an American: there was no trace of a brogue in it: directly,
clearly, without circumlocution: making his point inevitably, with grace and charm."
Ingersoll was mentioned. W. said: "Ingersoll stands for perfect poise,
nonchalance, equability: he is nonconventional: runs on like a stream: is sweet,
fluid—as they say in the Bible, like precious ointment. It is good to know that
Agassiz's son is more radical, advanced, in his views than his father—that the
father is outgrown."
W. referred to something Mrs. Coates had said to me about him. "Yes, I
often think of it, especially of late days—how fortunate I have been in my friends:
I doubt if any man has been more blessed: such advocates, comrades, men affiliated through
thick and thin: O'Connor, Mrs. Gilchrist, Burroughs, Dowden, Symonds, Rossetti: and there have
been and are others: Bucke, Tom, you: and now Kennedy, too." I said: "It sounds middle-agey with heroics." W. smiled: "So it does: it seems like romance." Bucke says: "If Walt had stayed away from the War he would have been good for
ninety years." W. assented "Yes: but there
's more to the story: I never once have questioned the decision that led me into the
War: whatever the years have brought—whatever sickness, whatnot—I have
accepted the result as inevitable and right. This is very centre, circumference, umbillicus,
of my whole career. You remember Homer—the divine horses: 'Now, Achilles, we 'll take you there, see you safely back again, but only on condition
you will not do this thing again—act unwisely;
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 96]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
will be
steady, peaceful, quiet—cut up no capers': but you know Achilles said:
'No—let what must, come: I must cut up my capers.' So it was with me: I had to cut
up my capers. Why, I would not for all the rest have missed those three or four years." In
this connection spoke of Burroughs' discussion of Drum Taps. "I find no
other complete sets: I suspect from the difficulty I had in finding these—their
scarcity—that I really never had them to give away. I sent a set up to Dr. Bucke
yesterday. I came across the stuff accidentally in looking for something else. As I do not
remember having extra copies I doubted if Bucke had one. The piece itself I have always
clearly enough remembered—always liked." Gurowski mentioned again: "He had a Roman head: circular: it was a powerful top-knot, in and out:
people always stopped to look at him."
We talked about what I called "manners and matters." Dress and
substance. W. said: "We can't always get at a man immediately through
externals. Years ago there was a man who came here to see me—a perfect Dundreary:
came several times: his manners, his talk, the tone of his voice—they were sickish,
nauseating"—here W. pressed his forefinger into his belly,
indicating—: "he lived at Newport—was a man of some
fame, power. Well, he was about the worst. But I learned by and by that back of all the
pretence, affectation, sickishness, Dundrearyism, there were diamonds, pearls—gems
of unquestionable richness: so that after all, so far as currents of the world's meanings were
concerned, he knew as much, he got as close to essentials, as the rest of us." He quoted
another instance—that of "an army man: the case of a
colonel—a dandy: much criticised, talked over; everybody having a whack at him: an
old fellow defended him: 'Here you growlers, let up: try this man in a battle: he 'll be as brave as the rest of you!' and I have no doubt he was."
So W. counselled me in a fatherly way. "It is well to allow a liberal
margin to the dudes, dandies, dawdlers: I know the probabilities
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 97]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
are against you: the average is likely, almost certain, to disappoint you: yet your man may be
there."
W. spoke of Mrs. Gilchrist: "Oh! she was strangely different from the
average: entirely herself: as simple as nature: true, honest: beautiful as a tree is tall,
leafy, rich, full, free—
is
a tree. Yet, free as she was by
nature, bound by no conventionalisms, she was the most courageous of women: more than queenly:
of high aspect in the best sense. She was not cold: she had her passions: I have known her to
warm up—to resent something that was said: some impeachment of good
things—great things: of a person sometimes: she had the largest charity, the
sweetest fondest optimism. But however able to resent she was not able to be discourteous: she
could resent but she resented nobly: for instance, in behalf of Shelley, Tennyson, Browning:
she believed in Shelley: there must have been a heap in Shelley that I never reached to: see
the people who believe in him—Mrs. Gilchrist, Forman, Symonds. She was a radical of
radicals: enjoyed all sorts of high enthusiasms: was exquisitely sensitized: belonged to the
times yet to come: her vision went on and on."
|
|
|