Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Hey there, Allen!


There are many similarities between Allen and Walt.  Rightly so since I read that Allen wanted to be the poet to continue Walt's voice.  First off, the very obvious similarity would be that they both use the free verse form.  Allen's use of free verse seems more like paragraph prose though.  In Part I, the listing of the types of individuals in which he starts with who, are so descriptive and long.  Speaking of the "who", the individuals Allen speaks of, reminds me of Song for Occupations in which Walt lists all the types of jobs he is familiar with.  Not only are both these poets using this form of free verse, but they love lists.  They are listing people/jobs that they are familiar with.  If you really think about it, these are the jobs and people of America.  These are the real people, not just images of what America could be or should, but I think their image of the America person is a reality and shows a vulnerability, especially Allen's description.

Now I'm not sure if this is a similarity or difference, especially because of all the changes Walt made through his different editions of Leaves of Grass.  The way that both poets are trying to get their message across, the words they use, the things they describe are not censored, especially Allen.  The only reason I would think there is a difference is because Walt took multiple lines about people of color out from Song of Occupations as the editions of Leaves of Grass was published.  It doesn't seem like Allen did this, but I haven't researched that.  However, he does not feel the need to censor himself.  Instead he lets it all hang out.  He says, "who let themselves be fucked in the ass by saintly motorcyclists" and "...a vision of ultimate cunt and come eluding the last gyzym of consciousness" and "with dreams, with drugs, with waking nightmares, and alcohol and cock and endless balls."  Speak on Allen! Say what you gotta say!  He definitely could have used less explicit words, but fuck it, those are the words that he needed to use to get his point across.  Yes, they both wrote in COMPLETELY different times, but then tell me why Walt removed those parts about colored people.  I think he was censoring himself.

1 comment:

  1. Fuck yeah! You made some great points Andreana. Especially with regard to the blunt, realistic language used by both writers. Great discussion of Whitman and Ginsberg's attempt to speak to and about the "real people" of America. Ginsberg's observations shine a light on all kinds of seedy behavior in cities across the country, from rooftops to alleyways to cold water flats, but he does so without objectifying or judging them too harshly. It seems both writers were concerned with showing what America really is, and Ginsberg's dirtier language shows the changes that have taken place since Whitman's day. Good job being smart and stuff!

    ReplyDelete