whatever, although sometimes he may have fully as much poetry
as Whitman. The whole of Whitman's work is deliberate and
preconceived. A man born into a society comparatively new,
full of conflicting elements and interests, could not fail,
if he had any thoughts at all, to reflect upon the tendencies
around him. He saw much good and evil on all sides, not yet
settled down into some more or less unjust compromise as in
older nations, but still in the act of settlement. And he
could not but wonder what it would turn out; whether the
compromise would be very just or very much the reverse, and
give great or little scope for healthy human energies. From
idle wonder to active speculation is but a step; and he seems
to have been early struck with the inefficacy of literature
and its extreme unsuitability to the conditions. What he
calls "Feudal Literature" could have little living action on
the tumult of American democracy; what he calls the
"Literature of Wo," meaning the whole tribe of Werther and
Byron, could have no action for good in any time or place.
Both propositions, if art had none but a direct moral
influence, would be true enough; and as this seems to be
Whitman's view, they were true enough for him. He conceived
the idea of a Literature which was to inhere in the life of
the present; which was to be, first, human, and next,
American; which was to be brave and cheerful as per contract;
to give culture in a popular and poetical presentment; and,
in so doing, catch and stereotype some democratic ideal of
humanity which should be equally natural to all grades of
wealth and education, and suited, in one of his favourite
phrases, to "the average man." To the formation of some such
literature as this his poems are to be regarded as so many