| | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 455]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | |
Friday, January 4, 1889. 8 P. M. W. reading. Ed stretched out on sofa lazily regarding him. Everything went well to-day. W. had a | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 456]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | | bath. Visitors few. Harry
Stafford. One other. Health just about as it has been for a week past. I addressed Ed: "Are you trying to see how he does it?" W. said: "I hope not, I think not: I don't believe Ed is going to worry himself much
about writing—literary matters." To W.: "Did you? I
guess you did not worry.""No—I cannot say I did: I never prodded myself on: I just let
things come—on the fly. Like Topsy in Uncle Tom's Cabin, I just growed." Then he
continued: "That made a wonderful good play in its time, did n't it?" It contained "half a dozen good
characters," had "very distinct virtues," was "to be credited with a history." W. asked what
particular persons or things" I had seen to-day?. Not many. But I
had The Ethical Record in my pocket (January issue). Adler's address on The Influence of Manual
Training on Character there. W. put on his glasses and looked it over. "That is genuine—that is pointed." It contained an account of the Sunday at
Harned's when W. asked: "But what kind of men are you raising here?"
Did he remember the day? "Oh—well—well! It was a
memorable day." Had he met Adler before that day? He rather thought so: "but if so it was but casually." I reminded W. of Adler opposite W. in the parlor: Dudley grown earnest, standing
up—back towards the fire—Walt holding his cane: W.'s searching question
after Dudley's statistical boasts. "Oh I see it all!" he exclaimed.
Asked me about The Record. Was it Adler's "personal mix-up
mainly?"—then of the Ethical societies: their purposes, &c. Back again to
Harriet Beecher Stowe. Had he ever met her? "No—nor those who
knew her, either"—adding, on my reminder, however: "Yes,
Henry Ward, of course": and as for the latter: "I have every reason
for believing he was a great absorber of Leaves of Grass—that perhaps quite
unconsciously he imbibed, accepted, its spirit: molded many of its formulas into his own work.
I think I met dozens of people in New York and Brooklyn those days who said to me (it was of a
Monday or Tuesday): | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 457]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | | 'I heard Henry Ward Beecher last night (or night
before) and his whole sermon was you, you, you, from top to toe.' I have always said to myself
then: Well, this is a sign that we are growing." W. asked me to "look out" for The Critic to-morrow. "If you can see it anywhere look if it contains a
little poem of mine." I said: "I usually get my copy Saturday
anyhow." W.: "Well, look in that: you need not buy me a copy: I
shall get one anyhow Sunday or Monday. What I want to know is simply this—whether
the poem is there. It is a little matter of eight or nine lines. I am anxious to have Doctor
see it: I have slips of it here: if I find it has turned up I shall send a slip to
Doctor—not otherwise. It is a point of honor: I argue that the man who pays for an
article owns it till it appears: I never till then give copies to any one: never break the
rule." Says little to me even about what he writes till it has appeared in print. I
suppose this is his strong New Year's poem. I did not ask him. Frances Emily White speaks at the Club next Tuesday on the Evolution of Ethics. W.: "You should have Bucke come before you and talk on that subject: give you
twenty minutes or so. It would be worth while: he knows it: is full up." I said: "Unfortunately he won't be here till next week." W.: "Well—some other meeting then: arrange for it." I said: "I would rather have him speak on Walt Whitman: Rhys did not treat you
radically enough." W.: "No: Rhys could not: I do not count Rhys
among my out and out endorsers: Rhys wants the lilt—whatever that is: insists upon
it: I have not the lilt, therefore I am not his man." Gilchrist, however, is more
positive. "Herbert gets it probably from his mother: there was no
compromise in Mrs. Gilchrist's position: it was clean—cut: and she never abandoned
it. Did I ever give you a copy of The Radical containing her Woman's Estimate?" He had. I
think the first time I took Clifford to see him. "Well—then you
know it: it has never been beaten: it stands at the top still." I said: "I think the only thing in you at which | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 458]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | |
Herbert's admiration halts is your opinion of Shakespeare.""What opinion is that?""The doubt of the Shakespearean authorship.""Oh! I see! I am sorry but it cannot be helped—facts is
facts!" He attributed "much of the English feeling on the
subject" to "a wholesale patriotism: it is like rushing to the
defense of the household: and the defense is often by no means a milk and water one: They get
angry: they try to crowd you out: how dare you? what right have you?" Is it necessary to
know who wrote the Plays? "No! nor is it. Remember the old Homeric
debates: they are about as trivial. I suppose, however, that all such controversy helps things
along—some things, anyhow." I told him Bucke had finished his W. W. address and would deliver it at Germantown while
here. I spoke of it as three quarters of an hour long. "That 's to much," W. said: "cut 'im down! cut
'im down!"—then after a laugh: "I suppose half an hour 's as little as any man could ask and three quarters is not much
more." He asked me some questions regarding Bucke's position on W.'s diet. Was Bucke a
teetotaler? "Up to two years ago I know he was not—but it may
be that he is now: Bucke has always been a temperate man, however—temperate in the
real sense." Later: "In fact, I am obeying most of the Doctor's
injunctions: I don't eat much—overcrowd: don't drink much—in fact never
did: but I do take some—a swig now and then—a swig of sherry: I know the
Doctor would not approve of that: I realize that Doctor is right: he has his science reasons
for declaring his objections." Here W. paused—looked doubtingly at me. "But still—but still"—which I knew to mean, "but I
can't make any absolute rule": told him so: he laughed: acknowledged that was "about the amount of it." Had Walsh recommended the sherry? "No: I don't think he means to: he did at the time I was down: a sherry and
milk: but I can only infer now: I know nothing about his present opinions. The Doctor's main
purpose now is to give me | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 459]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | | strength: to build up the system: and
indeed I feel as if it was building up—but very
slowly—slowly—slowly. I had my fine bath to-day:
no bad results from it—not even weariness: I can well go to the bathroom: the
trouble, difficulty, clumsiness, in getting about—it 's
rather that than pain." W. stopped talking for a while. Then he said: "The big bottle of sherry
Harned brought me was downstairs: somebody made love to it: when the bottle came back there
was hardly anything in it." Spoke of the comfortable lap-robe: made by George's wife: then
described George's occupation—inspector of pipes, &c. "He has been solely occupied with that: years and years now: even to—day New York
is putting up some new reservoir: George is inspecting the pipes furnished. It is important:
the interests are immense: one of the conditions usually being (or always) that an inspector
may be placed on the ground: many of the biggest contracts were given to the Starrs out
here." W. handed me an old Redpath letter which he said I "might keep." He
said: "Redpath was one of the men in at the birth: just see when that
was—1860: I had few friends back there: I was practically alone. What Redpath was
then he was always: he stayed so: he helped me in many ways: he was not only
loyal—he was militantly so: he was a perpetual challenge: he would say: if you don't
like this Walt Whitman I'd like to know the reason why: yes, why?
why? and he would hold people up—make them stand and deliver. I was never of that
sort myself—always felt rather like slinking away: it did not seem to me I could say
yes when another man said no: I could live yes, as you say: but I was not disposed to put my
confidence in myself into blatant affirmations." I said: "Walt,
some people think you blew your own horn a lot—wrote puffs on
yourself—sort of attitudinized and called attention to yourself quite a bit." He
was quizzy over this. "Do they say so? Do they? Who are some people? What
are puffs? I have often talked of myself: I talked of myself | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 460]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | | as I
would of you: blamed and praised just the same: looked at myself just as if I was somebody
else: I am not ashamed of it: I have never praised myself where I would not if I had been
somebody else: I have merely looked myself over and repeated candidly what I saw—the
mean things and the good things: I did so in the Leaves, I have done so in other places:
candidly faced the life in myself—my own possibilities, probabilities: reckoned up
my own account, so to speak. I know this is unusual: but is it wrong? Why should not everybody
do it? You, anybody? If you did it for the sake of aggrandizing yourself that would be another
thing: but doing it simply for the purpose of getting your own weight and measure is as right
done for you by yourself as done for you by another." All this time I held the Redpath
letter opened in my hand. W. said now: "Read Redpath: it
's playful: it 's valuable for its data and for the
unequivocal note it strikes." Malden, June 25th, 1860. O rare Walt Whitman!
I said I would write to you about your Book when I found time to read it as it was written
to be read. But I take back my promise. For if you are not sane what will writing avail? and
if you are sane your writings are alive with richest sanity. Now, if I do not understand them, or any parts of them, what good will it do to say
so—silence, it seems to me, is a duty till I do understand them; and then again,
if I do understand them, or when I shall do so, what good will it do
to tell you of the fact? It is a waste of breath for my friend to tell me I am healthy when
my pulse records the circumstance so often every minute. I love you, Walt! A Conquering Brigade will ere long march to the music of your barbaric
jawp. Ever and truly
James Redpath.
Redpath's letter was addressed to W. in Brooklyn. W. said: "It 's a jolly letter: underneath its little pleasantry, | | |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 461]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| | | jokiness, was a conviction: Jim held on to that—was loyally my friend
when I had no friends to spare." I asked: "Have you friends to
spare to-day?" He said: "No friends: a few
flatterers, perhaps." Then: "Jim brings in his little fun about my
sanity: well, so it goes: I got a letter from a doctor up in New England—a small
town—he was an elietist or something: he assured me that there was a screw loose in
me somewhere: he said I was a subject for a pathologist—that he had gone into Leaves
of Grass definitively: that nothing else could explain its jumble of sense of nonsense, of the
sublime and the ignoble: that I assuredly had a squirt or two of talent but that on the whole
I was simply a verbose windbag. I was amused over his letter: I 'll
find it some day: I want you to have it. He said he had once talked with Emerson about his
theory and that Emerson said it was very likely true. In one of my meetings with Emerson I
alluded to the thing in an airy sort of way: he denied all knowledge of such a person. Emerson
said: 'I have been so often called insane myself I always feel very
closely drawn to the insane': which was very cute." No letter from Bucke. Had read
neither Tolstoy nor Carlyle to-day. |
| |