This afternoon I was disappointed and angered (but not shocked, which is sad) to read this article about author VS Naipaul, a Nobel laureate, saying a bunch of really demeaning things about women writers (including Jane Austen). In a recent interview, Naipaul made a few awful statements about how there is no woman writer as good as he is because of feminine “sentimentality” and its “narrow view of the world.” He also apparently has the power to tell within one paragraph if a woman wrote something. (You can see how good you are at making this distinction yourself by taking this quiz! I’m thrilled that I only got 4 out of 10 correct).
Here’s one winner quote for you from Naipaul:
“…inevitably for a woman, she is not a complete master of a house, so that comes over in her writing too.”
So, to get over my disgust at reading this, I spent the day reading Walt Whitman, one of the most hardcore 19th-century feminist poets I know. What an awesome guy! In “Song of Myself” and lots of other poems he wrote, Whitman constantly discussed equality of the sexes, classes, and races. Whitman was all about gender equality and getting rid of slavery–before the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation and WAY before women’s suffrage.
His poetry is also filled with references to male lovers, which didn’t make him the most popular poet of his time. In fact, after the first edition of Leaves of Grass came out, with its references to a same-sex lover, Walt was immediately fired from his government job and slammed in the literary community. But he didn’t back down. Ok, he backed down a little bit and started coding some of his homoerotic messages, including changing the word “man” to “woman” in some of his love poems.
BUT he also wrote a whole series of “out” gay love poems in “Calamus” AND he wrote this awesome poem:
I hear it was charged against me that I sought to destroy institutions,
But really I am neither for nor against institutions,
(What indeed have I in common with them? or what with the
destruction of them?)
Only I will establish in the Mannahatta and in every city of these
States inland and seaboard,
And in the fields and woods, and above every keel little or large
that dents the water,
Without edifices or rules or trustees or any argument,
The institution of the dear love of comrades.
When I read this poem today, more than 100 years after Walt wrote it, I still see it as a huge, strong, and smart slap in the face to Religious Right and Republican opponents of gay marriage. It’s like Walt is yelling his barbaric yawp from the grave to these NOM people and saying, “GUESS WHAT, GUYS? The institution of marriage is about PEOPLE and LOVE, not about bad rules!”
And Walt, boy I love you for it.
Moral of the story? If you’re annoyed, upset, infuriated, or discouraged about the comments VS Naipaul made, don’t worry– it’s not a step backwards, just some lone weirdo who Walt Whitman would want to punch in the jaw.
I’ll leave you with this, from “Song of Myself“:
“I am the poet of the woman the same as the man,
And I say it is as great to be a woman as to be a man.”
And this, from “A Song for Occupations“:
“The wife–and she is not one jot less than the husband,
The daughter–and she is just as good as the son,
The mother–and she is every bit as much as the father.”
Thank you for this post, Alyse! I know almost nothing about Whitman, but now I feel like I would want to know some about him. Also, for the record, VS Naipaul doesn’t have much affinity towards brown and middle eastern people, as well, so we can add that to his “un”feminism.
VS Naipaul is gay, too, but is closet and talks against gay persons. He is a self-hating disaster area. For a much better experience, read his brother’s stuff – Shiva Naipaul – who, sadly, died young.