Reaction to "Whitman's Language of the Self"

Mark Bauerlein, analyst of Walt Whitman's poetry in "Whitman's Language of the Self", seems to take Whitman's writings of Self as narcissistic and against an actual definition of Self. Though this narcissism is present in form, I feel that Whitman only seeks to better himself through his poetry. Rather than loving oneself regardless, Whitman finds what is good about himself and finds praise for those such things. This is nothing but human nature in a pure form. Whitman only differs from the norm in that he wrote about his good self-esteem in great detail through his poetry.

Bauerlein cites Whitman's definition of Self as not just a steady and rigid but a scatter-brained randomly plotted assessment of human nature. This, however, defines Self in itself. People cannot be defined for just a few traits! We are complex beings, ever-changing, ever-growing. Sure, we do have some distinguishable traits built into our souls, but we are generally very fickle creatures. Spontaneous. Random. And that is part of the appeal of being an individual. And that is why we strive to be freethinking individuals. To say, "To affirm one's presence as eternally everywhere is to disintegrate one's individuality and historicity, precisely what Whitman wanted to preserve," Bauerlein is completely misjudging Whitman's poetry. Whitman defines HIS Self the same way that EVERYONE defines their own Self.

"'These are the thoughts of all men in all ages and lands, they are not original with me….'" In this quote, Whitman clarifies the universality of Self brought on by human nature. He does not mean that his thoughts and all others' thoughts are exactly the same, but through our nature, we define Self in the same way. "Self" is what we do. It is quite difficult to place exactly what this entails, but it is endowed to us as humans to understand just exactly what Self is. Through having this Selfdom, we are all the same. And in our commonality, we are all individuals.