This is just bad

This is just bad
What am I missing here?

a sense of history and poetics probably

A brain

Abysmal taste desu

No I've actually read every major English poet from Chaucer up starting last year, and knew Whitman was supposed to be a kind of singularity of style, and I can see that, and that he draws on American transcendentalism. It just isn't very good, I feel you could easily translate it without losing much. I'd appreciate specific points

I'd appreciate specific points instead if vague insults*
I know I have better taste than most of you so it doesn't lead anywhere

You're asking for specifics but don't elaborate yourself on what you mean by "not very good." What are YOU talking about? For good or ill, Whitman is the origin of modern poetry. He was an uneducated man with no training in style or meter. He published the first edition of Leaves of Grass himself and was met with the same criticism you're giving him. But if you read Song of Myself especially the part about the white trapper marrying the Indian maiden and compare it to Longfellow's Song of Hiawatha it is EASY to see why Whitman's stock today is higher than Longfellow's. From Houseman to Kerouac, Corso and Ginsburg Whitman is the main influence. Also to Henry Miller and Steinbeck. Why can't you see this?

He was also influential on pretty much every great American poet in the 20th century: Eliot, Crane, Stevens etc

> For good or ill, Whitman is the origin of modern poetry. He was an uneducated man with no training in style or meter. He published the first edition of Leaves of Grass himself and was met with the same criticism you're giving him.
>Why can't you see this?
Oh I can see that, I know his influence, I just don't think it's a good one. He really is the American poet in that sense. I'm sure there are plenty of scholars who would btfo that opinion but I'm stuck in the resentful Classicist and Romanticism phase

>Eliot, Crane, Stevens
I feel like they made something of it though, they created great work with aesthetic appeal, structure and depth. Guess it worked out

Some notice (line or two) that exemplifies your revulsion would be helpful. With a brief comment as to why. This should be easy.

Your reaction is appropriate and immature

Wow, someone not brainwashing into thinking this shit is poetry. Gives me hope desu.

>What am I missing here?
apparently everything.

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Leaves of Grass. The poems are extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of the burger lifestyle most of the lines will go over a typical readers head. There's also Whitmans pseudo-transcendentalist outlook, which is deftly woven into his poetry- his personal philosophy draws heavily from romantic literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these poems, to realise that they're not just aesthetic- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Walt Whitman truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the poetic genius in lines, like "Winds whose soft-tickling genitals rub against me it shall be
you!," which itself is a cryptic reference to Shakespeare. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Whitman's genius wit unfolds itself on their pages. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, i DO have a Walt Whitman tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

YAWP

translation()
>It is extremely hard to understand free verse.
>+1

Whitman's most famous work is Leaves of Grass, which he continued to edit and revise until his death. No thanks to Oscar Wilde, who never even had the decency to return Walt's phone calls. In its early stages of development, some people who pretended to be his friend so they could get access to his "friends only" posts grabbed some of his poetry and made a book from it called "Ode to Faggotry." When they found out other goth kids would actually read it, they changed the name to "Leaves of Grass" and it sold like gothcakes. Walt Whitman to this day doesn't know they're selling his poems and making a fortune off of him. They still don't invite him to any parties though, because no one likes him.

The first few versions of Leaves of Grass were self-published and poorly received. Wilde, meanwhile, would sneeze into a handkerchief and then sell it for mad money. Prick. Several of his poems featured graphic depictions of Oscar's sexy man-body, endlessly enumerated in Whitman's innovative and filthy "cataloguing" style. Despite its revolutionary content and structure, subsequent editions of the book would continue to evoke critical indifference in the literatti, who were too busy trying to get close to Oscar Wilde at parties to give a shit about poems about some yokel's lawn. But abroad the book was a sensation, especially in France, where were they couldn't read english and instead focused on the erotic lithography and the centerfold

It's his only poetic work. He kept adding to it. His other writing's beautiful.

We get it, you are insecure about things you can't understand. Making a meme over it isn't going to make you feel better

You're not gay enough

Any poem reccs from Whitman fans? Bloom sucks him off a lot and pairs him with Melville, who I am really enjoying, so I figure it best to read him alongside

Sleepers

People like different things