1. If nothing else, it’s a relief to actually have an election that ended ‘clean’. No talk of cheating or collusion, no ‘too close to call’, just a clear outcome arrived at in the space of a single night. Seems to me that used to be the norm, once upon a time.

2. I really do not like I Hear America Singing (though it was the poem I had some of my students read this week, and they seemed to like it). In fact, the more I read it, the more I dislike it. It’s so flat and repetitive and empty; just a single idea: “the different experiences of America make up a kind of chorus” stated baldly over and over, often accompanied by the blandest of imagery.

The mason singing his, as he makes ready for work,
    or leaves off work;

Even setting aside the pedantically dull idea of “as he makes ready for work or leaves off work,” what about this is distinct to the mason? You could drop that same idea on any other figure and it would be just as fitting and just as dull. If the poem is about the different contributions of Americans working their own jobs, creating a chorus of ‘voices’ in America, how about actually making those jobs sound different and distinct? How about making the singing actually sound like singing. As it is, it’s just blank assertion: “I hear America singing. The carpenter sings. The Mason sings. The ploughboy sings. He sings what is uniquely his own.”

Maybe instead you say something about the ‘The Mason builds his song, an even, sturdy tune, a song to last for ages,’ somehow tying the image of his work with the idea of his music. At the least you really should include something approaching a poetical idea in this poem.

3. Incidentally, the Poetry Foundation claims him as the American successor to Homer, Virgil, Dante, and Shakespeare. Which, frankly, I would call an insult both to that quartet and to American poetry in general: we can do a heck of a lot better than Whitman (of course, we haven’t produced anyone even remotely in that league yet, but from what I’ve read so far, Whitman definitely isn’t at the front of the pack).

4. That said, I intend to read a lot more Whitman. Love him or hate him, he’s one of the quintessential American poets, and so is necessary reading to anyone who wants to grasp our national character. Maybe I’ll like his other work better.

5. I generally dislike free verse, though if you’re going to do it, at least have some interesting, evocative ideas and turns of phrase to express. Like in T.S. Eliot: “April is the cruelest month,” “This is the dead land. This is cactus land.” “In my beginning is my end.” “Beware of death by water.” “No! I am not prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be.” And so on.

(By the way, I unfortunately don’t think he can count as an American poet, since he reverted to Britain. I’ll leave others to extract symbolic meaning from the fact that arguably the greatest American-born poet preferred the mother country).

6. My history class is learning about the rise of Islam (short version: long-established bureaucratic governments lose to tough, zealous desert warriors). I have to say, Muhammed does not strike me as an impressive figure, as far as holy men go. He isn’t completely ridiculous like a mega-church pastor (in that he apparently spent a lot of time in prayer and did some forms of ascetic practice even before his ‘visions’), but not very convincing. He has no even claimed miracles to his name, he had an extremely prosaic death (of a fever at about age 60), and his followers almost immediately turned on each other with petty backstabings and political infighting. As in, less than a decade after his death his immediate disciples and family members were assassinating each other to try to claim succession.

In short, in the ‘non-true religions’ sweepstakes, Islam doesn’t seem to me to even rise to the level of basic credibility in its historical context (though I would like to read the Koran to get a better grasp of what it actually teaches before I talk about its content).

Omar seems like he was pretty cool, though: the kind of guy who conquers city after city, but still sleeps on a mat on the floor and eats the same porridge as in his desert warlord days. Strong ascetic practices are, of course, not the only thing that makes a religious figure worth paying attention to, but I think they are a necessary component. That is, if you’re not acting like you’re prioritizing something beyond this world, then I probably won’t believe you do.

7. I think, from what I’ve gathered so far, that the best-of-the-pagan award has to go to Buddhism. I like the strong ascetic element, the rejection of worldly goods and concerns, and it seems to have had an overall positive effect on the civilizations its touched. And then Buddha himself, from what I can gather, seems to have been a pretty thoroughly admirable figure. I also like what I’ve learned about Shintoism so far (which, admittedly, isn’t a whole lot). Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion, so that doesn’t count.