A poststructural reading of Walt Whitman’s Leaves of Grass offers new definitions of self, democracy, and nationhood. Whitman is not only the poem’s author, but also its speaker, a fact which challenges the reader to decenter Whitman’s assertions and meanings. While the poststructuralist temptation may be to ignore Whitman’s persistent first person viewpoint  the reader can arrive at his or her own interpretation of the text by embracing it. By appropriating the “I,” the reader challenges Whitman’s facile assumption that he speaks for every man. By rendering this poststructuralist reading, the reader forces Leaves of Grass to become a chorus of possibilities rather than Whitman’s solo.

Whitman, whose poems have been popular for more than 100 years, has been described as the great “democratic poet,” (Erkkila & Grossman 5), a kind of literary Everyman (Pannapacker, 80). Whitman represents a distinctly American perspective that emphasizes self-reliance, individualism, and the right to creative expression and self-determination (Erkkila & Grossman 19). These values are central to Leaves of Grass and Whitman shares his philosophy by referring himself repeatedly. This creates an intimacy with the reader that many of his literary contemporaries seem to lack (Pannapacker 60). Whitman is a constant presence, and readers may find it difficult to make their own interpretation because of his insistence about his own perspective. A creative alternate reading strategy must be employed. One such strategy, drawn from the concepts of poststructural theory, is to ignore Whitman as the “I” of his poems and to insert oneself as the narrator. In this way, the reader assigns and attributes meaning as he or she sees fit (Culler 103).

When the reader becomes the narrator, Whitman is decentered (Browitt & Milner 106). The reader does not have to accept Whitman’s observations and claims simply because he or she has appropriated Whitman’s identity and voice. Rather, the reader can—and should—pause to consider whether Whitman’s observations fit with his or her knowledge and experience. Readers can contest Whitman’s conclusions because they have claimed interpretive agency. Every time the reader utters “I” he or she is immediately called to question Whitman’s assertions. Whitman does not speak for every man. He articulates his own dream of America, but the very nature of America is its multiplicity of identities and differences of opinion. The poststructuralist reader understands that Whitman’s attempt to speak for all men is an impossible undertaking.

The opening eight lines of “Leaves of Grass” include the words “I” or “self” six times. The speaker begins by stating that he is a “simple separate person” (l. 1), but then abruptly contradicts himself, “utter[ing] the word Democratic, the word En-Masse” (l. 2) to say that he speaks for the common man. Indeed, by the end of this short stanza, the speaker purports to speak for “the Modern Man” (l. 8); this claim is established in order to be refuted. As the new narrator, the poststructuralist reader can decide whether this claim is reasonable or arrogant and a new way to offer an analysis of “Leaves of Grass” by Walt Whitman emerges.

In the next section of the poem, “As I Ponder’d in Silence,” the speaker is visited by a ghost who contends that war is the only “theme for ever-enduring bards” (l. 9). The poststructuralist reader performing an analysis of “As I Ponder’d in Silence”, however, forces alternative interpretations, insisting that war is not the only subject worthy of poets.In fact, the reader points out that Whitman himself explores a wide range of other subjects. The poststructuralist reader must constantly contest Whitman’s limiting claims, which are rampant in Leaves of Grass. For example, in “To Foreign Lands,” the speaker collapses all other countries into a single, indistinguishable mass. America is vaunted as the solution to the ills that plague the rest of the world.. Readers who are uncomfortable with the egotism that poses as democratic humility may challenge such claims. America is an impressive social experiment, but the postructuralist knows that each country, much like each person, must identify its own problems and their solutions. In this way, democracy and nationhood are redefined.

This state of tension continues to build for the reader who has assumed the identity of the speaker. In “To a Historian,” the speaker chastises the historian for having “treated…man as the creature of politics, aggregates, rulers and priests” (l. 3) and suggests that he is better for treating man “as he is in himself in his own rights” (l. 4). This claim is patently false and hypocritical, for true democracy is characterized by each individual having the authority, space, and voice to articulate his or her own truths. A few poems later in “Leaves of Grass”, however, Whitman’s speaker rebels against the idea of anyone speaking for him once he is dead. If the voice of the poem is inauthentic to the reader, then he or she must reject at least some of the proclamations that are being made. This rejection, in turn, results in a revision of the claims or a set of counterclaims that are internalized in the act of reading. In this way, the reader fulfills the poststructuralist objective “to scrutinize the act of meaning itself” (Jones Guetti 33).

Throughout “Leaves of Grass,” Whitman’s speaker returns to his original assertion that he sings for “the one” (“Still Though the One I Sing,” l. 1). He challenges various authorities, arguing that he writes about the most important subjects and that he must be remembered and defended by future poets. In perhaps his most subversive claim, the speaker addresses the reader directly by suggesting that their “life and pride and love the same” (“Thou Reader,” l. 1). This assumption provokes the reader to enter into a dialogue with himself or herself to decide if he or she is in agreement.

“Leaves of Grass” represents a certain evolution in Whitman’s conceptualization of himself as the speaker. It is not surprising that the reader undergoes a parallel process. At the end of the collection, Whitman offers an intriguing departure from his earlier assertions, stating “that the strongest and sweetest songs yet remain to be sung” (“As idly drifting…, l. 4). Interestingly, in “Leaves of Grass” Wal Whitman does not imply that the singer will be himself. Is Whitman’s “I” inviting the reader to add his or her own song to the chorus? This is only one possibility. The poststructuralist reading strategy resists facile and obvious notions of the aesthetic (Jones Guetti 33) in favor of a more nuanced and layered reading. Such a reading can create acute discomfort in the reader, who is called to assess the meaning and implications of the text.

 

Works Cited

Browitt, Jeff, & Andrew Milner. Contemporary Cultural Theory. Crows Nest, New South Wales,  New Zealand: Allen & Unwin, 2002.

Culler, Jonathan. Barthes: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Erkkila, Betsy, & Jay Grossman. Breaking Bounds: Whitman and American Cultural Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Jones Guetti, Barbara. “Review: Resisting the Aesthetic.” Diacritics 17.1 (1987): 33-45.

Pannapacker, William. Revised Lives: Walt Whitman and Nineteenth Century Authorship. New York: Routledge, 2004.

Whitman, Walt. Leaves of Grass. Retrieved on April 11, 2007 from  http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/modeng/modengW.browse.html/