|
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 293]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
Friday, December
14, 1888.
7.20 A. M. Ed said W. had spent an easy night. Did not wait. To town. Wrote Bucke a detailed
letter. Weather to-day extremely blustering—wind N. W.,
dusty, cold. Ed has to keep a strong fire.
7.40 P. M. Things maintained as they were. Every time
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 294]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
the
telephone rings these days I wonder if it is to be a call for me. To W.'s immediately after
supper. W. on bed still dressed. Harned had just been in for a few minutes. Ed reported W. as
not in so good a condition as last night. Walsh had called. Questioned W. Left prescription for
powders. Ed did not go for them. W. said he would not take them. I saw W. for a few, probably
ten, minutes: then away: then later was up again. Was really in poorer shape than yesterday.
Said he had spent "a very bad day—one of the
worst"—yet was hopeful he would "shake off" the "pall" which "seemed gathering about" him. He
had been dressed most of the day but had lain down—up only at intervals and then but
briefly. Spoke about Walsh's visit: "He ordered a resumption of the
powders, but I said to Eddy, 'No, I will not take them—the
effect is too bad': they give me such infernal pains in the stomach and the head, I must
not take them again." Adding: "I am aware of Walsh's
skill—acknowledge it: I like him—like his quiet way: but for all that I
did not feel that I should accept his medicine." I said: "That
sounds like heresy, Walt: anti-medicine: it 's dangerous
blasphemy!" He smiled: "I know what it sounds like to a doctor: to me
it sounds like sense: it 's all got to go—the drug theory:
there 's something wrong about it: it 's a
poisonous viperous notion: it does not seem to fit with what we know of the human
body—with the physical something or other and the mental something or other going
together: they doctor a man as a disease not as a man: a part of him—doctor a part
of him: a leg, a belly, an eye: they ignore the rest: as if it was
n't true that the seat of the trouble in most cases is not at the point of
demonstration but way below somewhere: oh! I am impatient about it: it riles
me—makes me say ugly things." He laughed quietly. "Then
you won't let Ed get the drug?"
"Not a bit of it—not for me."
"Did you say so to Walsh?" He shook his head. "No—I did n't say it to Walsh but I said it to
myself."
W.'s mail has been small. "Nothing from Bucke—
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 295]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
O'Connor: a scratchy ragged postal from Kennedy: but nothing new."
Then he asked: "What's doing with you? What have you learned?" I
said: "I supposed we got ahead of the reporters this time." W.: "Well—did n't we?" I answered: "It seems not: Clifford writes me: See
note of W. in Press. Can I do anything?'" W. asked: "Did
Clifford say that?" Then: "Give him my love: tell him Walt Whitman
is grateful: tell him I am I think slowly wriggling out of this trouble—wriggling
towards the surface—will get there if nothing new occurs to throw me back: the
tendency is upward." Said again: "I have not read the papers now for
four or five days. Time flows on rapidly—for some!" I had met Walsh on the boat.
He said: "I think Mr. Whitman is better: I do not think you need have any
apprehension at present." George Whitman was down from Burlington again, staying only long
enough to make inquiries. W. asked somewhat after Dave—also some others. W. said: "Herbert looked as chipper as a new gold piece last night: he seems to be
getting a lot out of life just now: I 'm glad: I like us to treat our
guests well." The remainder of the hundred and fifty books came this evening. Got talking
a little of the Rossetti letters. He said: "I am not surprised that you
think them wonderfully interesting and valuable: they are quite all you make out of them. If
it should ever happen to be thought worth while to have the history of Leaves of Grass written
the correspondence of William Rossetti with me and others would require to be considered first
of all. It has a significance for this side as well as the other side of the Atlantic: we were
all intensely excited when these propositions were made: William, John—all the
fellows: Charley Edridge—yes, Charley, too: so I do not wonder, knowing the whole
story as intimately as you do, that you find it sort of romantic, too."
"The Romance of Leaves of Grass: some one should write that some
time," I said. W. fervently: "Yes: so they should: not so much
because Leaves of Grass is entitled to it but because you fellows are all entitled to it."
I said to
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 296]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
W.: "I have a few questions to ask
you about the letters." W. replied: "I supposed you would have: well, ask them: not to-night: I 'm not up to it to-night: to-morrow, next day, as soon as you please."
What we have been speaking of as the Rossetti correspondence is a series of letters, one from
Conway to W., one from W. to Conway, one from Rossetti to W., one from W. to Rossetti, two from
Rossetti to W. The letters are given in the order in which W. himself numbered them. W.'s
letter to Conway was addressed 14 Milborne Grove, Brompton W., London. On the envelope of W.'s
letter to R. was written: "Copy of letter sent to Mr.
Rossetti, Dec. 3, probably went from New York Dec. 7, '67, reaching England Dec. 20, '67."
In letter 5 I found two enclosures—a title page of the Rossetti book,
1868—a translation in W.'s hand of the Michelangelo motto used on the title page: "But whether this be the name, or for evil, or for
good—and whatever it be for the world—here they are."
No. 1
14 Milborne Grove, Brompton, W.,
London, England, Oct. 12, 1867.
My dear friend:
I regret to say that our hopes of getting out the complete and arranged edition of
your Poems with O'Connor's Introduction is at present remote. Just as I was beginning to
consult about the master I found that Hohn Camden Hotten had already contracted with W.
M. Rossetti to prepare and edit a volume of selections from your Poems. I found that
Hotten is not yet ready to bring out the whole work as we would wish. My first feeling
at hearing of this arrangement was one of regret. On thinking the whole matter over
however I came to think that such an arrangement as that was not without some
advantages. In the first place it 's a thing which cannot be
prevented. Americans have not granted the English any protection for their works or
choice about bringing them out, and in the absence of a just law
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 297]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
on the subject no one can claim property in his work over here. I may say in
passing, however, that in reply to a letter from me to Mr. Hotten he told me that he
meant to share with you the pecuniary profits of the venture, and spoke in an honorable
tone.
Now the advantages I see in the plan of having Rossetti edit the selected volume are
these: I believe that it is the best means of paving the way for a public demand for the
entire work. The English people are the very ones to desire that which is reserved.
Until there is such a popular demand no publisher can be found to print the poems, which
are now quite extensive. In the next place it is far better, in my opinion and that of
your real friends here, that the introduction of you to the general public will come
much more gracefully from an English literary man than from any American. No
introduction could easily surpass in simple breadth that which O'Connor has written; and
some day it must appear; but his reputation here is confined to the few who have read
his noble pamphlet, and, which is still more important, it can never have so much effect
here for an American to praise American work. It says more for your work that has
kindled enthusiasm in the mind of one of another nation, and one whose good judgments
cannot be ascribed to personal friendship more than to national pride. These facts
together with the assured social and literary position of Rossetti make him of all
persons of my acquaintance the fittest I could name to undertake the work. It at once
secures the
position
of your work. The criticism which he wrote
in the Chronicle will show you the spirit in which his work will be done, and I know
that he is putting a great deal of very careful work upon his introductory essay. I have
passed an evening with him. He tells me that his plan will be to divide up the Poems
according to their subjects:
e.g.,
Poems of Democracy, Personal
Poems, Poems of Friendship, etc. He does not intend to alter any of the Poems he
publishes. His volume will I should judge include about one half you have written. There
will
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 298]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
be foot-notes explaining "phebe-bird" and other things
not known in England so far as he can.
Now for some questions he wishes me to ask you: What is Calamus? I could not tell him,
satisfactorily, either the exact thing you meant or its metaphorical meaning to you.
Rossetti admires very much indeed your introduction ot the first edition of the Leaves
of Grass, and whishes to publish it; but he is deterred by a few words. He writes to
know whether you will not send him a word instead of "father-stuff" (p. 7, 17th line
from bottom) and if on p. 10, bottom lines, you will allow him to alter "venereal sores
or discolorations," "onanist" and "any depravity of young men." These are the only words
he anywhere wishes to modify. The essay is a great one and should have a great effect;
but if you do not permit the alterations he will not print it—as he goes on
the honorable principle that he has not the right to change an author's language.
Now, my dear friend, I hope that on reflection you and O'Connor will think as I do
(who am on the ground) that on the whole we had best feel good-naturedly towards this
plan of Hotten's and Rossetti's. We are not here up to the point yet, but are rising;
and this book will help us I am quite sure. The other day the Saturday Review which once
ridiculed Leaves of Grass began a review of some American's poems by saying that nothing
related to America had appeared in its literature with the simple exception of Walt
Whitman's works. The word had its effect. And now good-bye. Let me hear from you as soon
as you can, and believe me ever cordially your friend.
M. D. Conway.
No. 2
[W. W. to Conway: "sent Nov. 1st '67": from Washington, Attorney General's
office]
My feeling and attitude about a volume of selections from my "Leaves" by Mr. Rossetti,
for London publication, are simply passive ones, yet with decided satisfaction that if
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 299]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
the job is to be done, it is to be by such hands. Perhaps,
too, "good-natured" as you advise—certainly not ill-natured. I wish Mr.
Rossetti to know that I appreciate
his
appreciation, realize his
delicacy and honor, and warmly thank him for his literary friendliness.
I have no objection to his substituting other words—leaving it all to his
own tact—for "onanist," "father-stuff," &c. &c. Briefly, I
hereby empower him (since that is the pivotal affair and since he has the kindness to
shape his action so much by my wishes—and since, indeed, the sovereignty of
the responsibility is not mine in the case) to make verbal changes of that sort
wherever, for reasons sufficient for him, he decides that they are indispensable.
I would add that it is a question with me whether the introductory essay, or prose
preface of the first edition, is worth printing.
"Calamus" is a common word here; it is the very large and aromatic grass, or root,
spears three feet high—often called "sweet flag"—grows all over the
Northern and Middle States—(see Webster's Large
Dictionary—Calamus—definition 2). —The
récherché or ethereal sense, as used in my book, arises probably from
it, Calamus presenting the biggest and hardiest kind of spears of grass, and from its
fresh, aromatic, pungent bouquet.
I write this to catch to-morrow's steamer from New York.
It is every way likely I shall think of other points, and write you again in a week or
so.
No. 3
56 Euston Sq., London, N. W.,
17th Nov., '67.
My dear Sir:
Allow me with the deepest reverence and true affection to thank you for the copy of
your complete poems I have just received from you through our excellent friend Mr.
Conway—and still more for the accompanying letter to him, in which you
authorize me to make, in the
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 300]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
forthcoming London issue of your
poems, such verbal changes as may appear to me indispensable to meet the requirements of
publicity in this country and time.
I feel greatly honored by your tolerance extended to me in this respect, and assure
you that, if such a permission can in the nature of things be used rightly, it shall not
be abused by me.
My selection was settled more than a month ago, and is now going through the press.
The only writing of yours from which I thought it at all admissible (with your consent
applied for through Mr. Conway) to cut anything out was the prose preface to the first
Leaves of Grass. As for the
poems,
I felt bound not to tamper
with their integrity in any the slightest degree, and therefore any of them which
appeared to contain matter startling to the length of British ears have been enetirely
excluded. But now, after your letter, it seems to me that all or most of these poems,
with some minimum of verbal modification or excision, may very properly be included: and
indeed, that there is nothing to prevent a reprint of the revised copy of your complete
poems (which you sent to Mr. Conway) coming out at once,
instead
of the mere selection—subject only to modification or excision here and there
as above named. Of course, I would explain in print that the responsibility for this
shabby job belongs to me—fortified only by your abstaining from prohibiting
it; for such a prohibition would be sacred to me.
I have just written in that sense to the publisher Mr. Hotten. I cannot clearly
anticipate whether or not he will be disposed thus to sacrifice his outlay hitherto on
the selection, and embark at once on the complete edition. If he does, it will please me
all the better. I shall always hold it one of the truest and most prized distinctions of
my writing career to be associated, in however modest a capacity, with the work of so
great a poet and noble-hearted a man as you. The time is fast coming, here as elsewhere,
when to be one of your enthusiastic admirers will only be to be
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 301]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
one of the many. I shall remember, with a degree of self-congratulation, that in 1855
I was one of the few.
Dear Sir, believe me most respectfully and truly yours,
W. M. Rossetti.
No. 4
Washington, Dec. 3, 1867
My dear Mr. Rossetti:
I have just received, and have considered, your letter of Nov. 17. In order that there
may be the frankest understanding with respect to my position, I hasten to write you
that the authorization in my letter of Nov 1st to Mr. Conway, for you, to make verbal
alterations, substitute words, &c. was meant to be constructed as an answer to
the case presented in Mr. Conway's letter of Oct. 12. Mr. Conway stated the case of a
volume of selections, in which it had been decided that the poems reprinted in London
should appear verbatim, and asking my authority to change certain words in the preface
to first edition of poems, &c. I will be candid with you, and say I had not the
slightest idea of applying my authorization to a reprint of the full volume of my poems.
As such a volume was not proposed, and as your courteous and honorable course and
attitude called and call for no niggardly or hesitating response from me, I penned that
authorization, and did not feel to set limits to it. But abstractly, and standing alone,
and not read in connection with Mr. C.'s letter of Oct 12, I see now it is far too
loose, and needs distinct guarding. I cannot and will not consent, of my own volition,
to countenance and expurgated edition of my pieces. I have steadily refused to do so
here in my own country, even under seductive offers, and must not do so in another
country.
I feel it due to myself to write you explicitly thus, my dear Mr. Rossetti, though it
may seem harsh, and perhaps ungenerous. Yet I rely upon you to absolve me, sooner or
later. Could you see Mr. Conway's letter of Oct. 12, you would, I think, more fully
comprehend the integrity of my explanation.
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 302]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
I have to add that the points made in that letter, in relation to the proposed
reprint, as originally designed, exactly correspond with those, on the same subject, in
your late letter,—that the kind and appreciative tone of both letters is in
the highest degree gratifying, and is most cordially and affectionately responded to by
me—and that the fault of sending the loose authorization has surely been, to a
large degree, my own.
And now, my friend, having set myself right in that matter, I proceed to say, on the
other hand, for you and for Mr. Hotten, that if, before the arrival of this letter, you
have practically invested in and accomplished, or partially accomplished, any plan, even
contrary to this letter, I do not expect you to abandon it, at loss of outlay, but shall
bona fide
consider you blameless if you let it go on and be
carried out as you may have arranged. It is the question of the authorization of an
expurgated edition proceeding from me that deepest engages me. The facts of the
different ways, one way or another, in which the book may appear in England, out of
influences not under the shelter of my umbrage, are of much less importance to me.
After making the foregoing explanation, I shall, I think, accept kindly whatever
happens. For I feel, indeed know, that I am in the hands of a friend, and that my pieces
will receive that truest, brightest, of light and perception coming from love. In that,
all other and lesser requisites become pale.
It would be better, in any introduction, to make no allusion to me as authorizing, or
not prohibiting, &c.
The whole affair is somewhat mixed, and I write off-hand to catch to-morrow's New York steamer—but I guess you will
pick out my meaning. Probably, indeed, Mr. Hotten has preferred to go on after the
original plan—which, if so, saves all trouble.
I have to add that I only wish you could know how deeply the beautiful personal tone
and passages of your letter of Nov. 17 have penetrated and touched me. It is such things
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 303]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
that go to our hearts, and reward us, and make up for all
else, for years. Permit me to offer you my friendship.
I sent you hence, Nov. 23, a letter through Mr. Conway. Also a copy of Mr. Burrough's
Notes, Mr. O'Connor's pamphlet, and some papers containing criticisms on Leaves of
Grass. Also, later, a prose article of mine, named Democracy, in a magazine.
Let me know how the work goes on, what shape it takes, &c. Finally, I charge
you to construe all I have written through my declared and fervent realization of your
goodness to me, nobleness of intention, and, I am fain to hope, personal, as, surely,
literary and moral sympathy and attachment. And so, for the present, farewell.
Walt Whitman.
No. 5
56 Euston Sq., London, N. W.,
8 Dec., 1867.
My dear Sir:
Your letter of 22 Nov. reached me the other day through Mr. Conway. You no doubt will
by this time have received the one I addressed to you two or three weeks ago; but
perhaps it may occur to me to repeat here some things said in that letter. I think the
most convenient course may be for me first to state the facts about my Selection.
Some while back—I suppose before the middle of Sept.—Mr. Hotten
the publisher told me that he projected bringing out a selection from your poems, and
(in consequence of my review in the Chronicle) he asked whether I would undertake to
make the selection, and write any such prefatory matter as I might think desirable.
Proud to associate myself in any way with your writings, or to subserve their diffusion
and appreciation here, I gladly consented.
I at once re-read through your last complete edition, and made the selection. In doing
this I was guided by two rules—1, to omit
entirely
every poem which contains passages or words which modern squeamishness can raise an
objection
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 304]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
to—and 2, to include, from among the
remaining poems, those which I most entirely and intensely admire. The bulk of poems
thus selected is rather less than half the bulk of your complete edition; and, before my
selection went to the printer's hands, I had the advantage of revising it by the
corrected copy you sent some while ago to Mr. Conway. I also added the prose Preface to
Leaves of Grass—obtaining through Mr. Conway your permission to alter (or
rather, as I have done, simply to
omit
) two or three phrases in
that Preface
(only). THus my selection is a verbatim
reproduction of a good number of your poems, unaccompanied by the remainder. There is no
curtailment or alteration whatever—and no modification at all except in these
three particulars —
1. I have given a note here and there:
2. I have thought it better, considering the difference of a selection from the sum
total, to redistribute the poems into five classes, which I have termed—Chants
Democratic—Drum Taps—Walt Whitman—Leaves of
Grass—Songs of Parting:
3. I have given
titles
to many poems which in your editions are
merely headed with the words of the opening line.
The selection being thus made, I wrote a Prefatory Notice and Dedicatory Letter; and
then consigned the whole aaffair to the publisher and printer, somewhere in the earlier
days of October. My prefatory matter and something like a third (I suppose) of the
poems, were in print before your letter of Nov. 1, addressed to Mr. Conway, reached me;
and now the Preface to Leaves of Grass is also in print, and I fancy the whole thing
ought to be completed and out by Christmas, or very soon after.
The letter which I wrote you on receipt of yours of Nov. 1 said that I was about to
consult the publisher as to dropping the mere selection, and substituting a complete
edition, only with slight verbal modifications. This, however, the publisher proved
unwilling to do, the Selection being so far
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 305]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
advanced,
advertised, &c. Therefore the Selection will come out exactly as first put
together; and on reflection this pleased me decidedly better.
I now proceed to reply to the details of your letter of 22 Nov.
If any blockhead chooses to call my Selection "an expurgated edition," that lie shall
be on his own head, not mine. My Prefatory Notice explains my principle of selection to
exactly the same effect as given in this present letter; and contains moreover a longish
passage affirming that, if such freedom of speech as you adopt were denied to others,
all the great literature of the whole world would be castrated or condemned.
The form of title-page which you propose would of course be adopted by me with thanks
and without a moment's debate, were it not that my own title-page was previously in
print: I enclose a copy. I trust you may see nothing in it to disapprove—as
indeed in essentials it comes to much the same as your own model. However, I have
already written to the publisher, suggesting that he should decide, according to the
convenience of the printing arrangements, which of the two shall eventually appear.
In making my Selection I preserved all (I believe
all
) "the
larger figures dividing the pieces into separate passages or sections," but did not
preserve the numbers of the stanzas,—the
separation
of
stanzas, however, continuing as in your edition. I am sorry now that I did not meet your
preference in this respect, and that the printing has already proceeded too far for me
to revert to the small numbers now. My wish was to get rid of anything of a merely
external kind which ordinary readers would call peculiar or eccentric. Parrot-like
repetitions of that charge have been too numerous already.
I need scarcely assure you that the most glorious poem on Lincoln
is
included in my Selection. It shall appear with your title President Lincoln's
Funeral Hymn. I had previously given it a title of my own, Nocturne for the Death
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 306]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
of Lincoln; and in my Prefatory Notice it is alluded to under
that title. A note of explanation shall be given.
I await with impatience the receipt of your paper on Democracy. It will find in me no
reluctant hearer, as I have always been a democratic republican, and hope to live and
die faithful to the meanings of that glorious creed. The other printed matter you have
so kindly sent me I received two evenings back from Mr. Conway. The newspaper articles
are new to me; with the publications of Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Burroughs I was also
familiar, and I entertain a real respect for those publications and their writers.
Believe me, I am grateful to you for your kindness in these matters and for the
indulgent eye with which you look upon a project which perhaps after all you would
rather had never been entered upon. I am in some hopes that your indulgence will not be
diminished when you see what the Selection itself actually looks like. In consequences
of the correspondence which has passed since the Selection was made, I may possibly find
occasion to add a brief P. S.: it shall contain nothing you could object to. If the
Selection aids the general body of English poetical readers to understand that there
really is a great poet across the Atlantic, and to demand a complete and unmutilated
edition, my desires connected with the Selection will be accomplished.
Believe me, dear Sir, with the deepest respect yours,
W. M. Rossetti.
No. 6
56 Euston Sq., London N. W.,
16 Dec., 1867.
Dear Mr. Whitman:
The receipt of your letter of 3 Decr. this morning would have made me feel miserable
were it not that before then the matter had already been set right, and my letter
notifying that fact very nearly (no doubt) in your hands by this time. My first letter
to you was written too much from the impulse of the moment; and, finding
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 307]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
soon after from the publisher's statement that the original plan
of the Selection
could
not be altered, I felt that it was also
much better it
should
not be altered. I congratulate myself
therefore on being quite at one with you concerning that point. Not one syllable of any
one of your poems, as presented in my Selection, will be altered or omitted: that is the
first intention and the final result.
Pray believe me however that, while I understood the latitude of your first letter
honored me within its widest sense, I still meant to take all proper precautions before
acting upon it. I write at once to Mr. Conway enquiring whether he put the same
interpretation upon it; and his letter in reply (18 Novr. now before me)
replies—"I agree with you that Whitman's letter gives you all the liberty you
could desire." I am now perfectly satisfied that it would have been most undesireable
for you to give or for me (even if given) to act upon such liberty.
To be honored by your friendship is as great a satisfaction and distinction as my life
has presented or ever can present. I respond to it with all warmth and reverence, and
the Atlantic seemed a very small space between us while I read and re-read your letter.
I read your paper on Democracy (received a few days ago) with great pleasure and
interest. I have always felt—and did so markedly while our own recent Reform
discussions were going on—one main truth involved in your paper. That, after
one has said that such and such people or classes are not exactly fitted to make the
best use of political enfranchisement, one has said only a small part of the truth, the
further point remains that to induct these people or classes into the combined national
life, and to constitute that life out of them along with all other classes, is an
enormous gain. The consequence is that, with the intensest respect and admiration for
Carlyle, I find constantly that to acquiesce in the express views he takes of late years
of particular questions would be simply to abnegate my own identity.
| |
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 308]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
| |
The Selection goes on smoothly though not fast—the proofs now approaching
their close. I suppose the volume will not fall much if at all short of four hundred
pages. You may possibly have seen the advertisement of it repeated several times in
publications here, as enclosed (slip cut from the Athanaeum). The "Portrait" is a
re-engraving (head and shoulder only, I believe) of the one in the first Leaves of
Grass, which was a capital piece of art work. I have not yet seen the reproduction, but
trust to find it adequately done.
Always yours,
W. M. Rossetti.
In the advertisement enclosed by Rossetti I read this: For
twelve years the American poet Whitman has been the object of widespread detraction and of
concentrated admiration. The admiration continues to gain ground," &c.
|
|
|