As of tomorrow, former poet laureate Robert Pinsky undertakes the duties of the Washington Post Book World Poet’s Choice columnist. His inaugural column presents for consideration the claims of “our national poets [Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson], both writing about poetry.” Contrasting Dickinson with Whitman, Pinsky writes:
Dickinson takes what seems to be a different view of the poet, and of how poetry works across the generations. Her image is not the voice of a swooping hawk, but a lamp, even a part of a lamp. But her terrain, like Whitman’s, expands to the largest proportions and her vision too extends into the future:
The Poets light but Lamps —
Themselves — go out —
The Wicks they stimulate —
If vital Light
Inhere as do the Suns —
Each Age a Lens
Disseminating their
Circumference —
Dickinson’s “vital Light,” like Whitman’s “good health to you nevertheless,” projects itself beyond mortality. You could argue that of the two she makes the grander claim: Whitman shakes his white locks at the runaway sun, whereas Dickinson imagines a genuine poem (“If vital Light”) emulating the sun, with a radiant optical precision, infinitely enlarged. Both poets, in their radically different manners, declare that the poem endures on an immense scale — and yet lives on an intimate scale in the reader.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.