Transatlantic Traffic and (Mis)Translations

6. Walt Whitman and William Blake: The Prophet-Artist and Democratic Thought

133 chapte r six Walt Whitman and William Blake The Prophet-Artist and Democratic Thought Linda Freedman M I n the twentieth century, Walt Whitman and William Blake have been repeatedly yoked together as bards of the people and the prophetic qualities of their verse have been used in the fight against tyranny of all forms. But the myth surrounding Blake and Whitman was developed in the context of an emerging democratic poetic that was keenly engaged with republican ambition in Europe and anxieties of nationalism in America. The comparison between Blake and Whitman, which was first drawn by Algernon Charles Swinburne in 1868, is so accepted today that the tensions inherent in its inception have been largely lost in its success. This essay argues that looking back to 1868 shines peculiar light on the relationship between the transatlantic exchange of prophet-artists and the social reach, and limitations, of the prophetic imagination in the second half of the nineteenth century. Swinburne’s Comparison The year is 1868; the Civil War is over; Lincoln is dead; but the republican experiment of America has survived. It might be fair to say that a new era of Anglo-American relations began around this time. The ruling classes of Britain had evidence that the American republic wasn’t doomed to failure and both Britain and America began to shape themselves into democracies. A sense of anticipation characterized republican thought at this time and the decade between 1865 and 1875 has sometimes been called the false dawn of republican antitheism in Britain.1 As a result of the success of continen- 134 linda freedman tal democratic movements, the victory of the North in the American Civil War and a surge in anti-monarchial sentiment in Britain, a new dawn of republicanism seemed close. But hope was fraught with doubt. Although the second Reform Act of 1867 enfranchised urban male householders and fundamentally altered the rationale behind suffrage from a theory of interest to one of representation, a number of people who had long wanted such reforms were disillusioned by the politics that surrounded the new legislation . Liberal supporters of Gladstone such as his biographer John Morley, who edited the radical publication the Fortnightly Review, had wanted the reforms to be passed by a liberal government. But in the end it was Disraeli who was responsible for the legislative changes in the voting system; many liberals were thoroughly disillusioned with what they saw as a cynical and politically motivated coup. Disraeli argued against Gladstone’s idea of a “moral entitlement to vote,” accusing him of “introducing American principles which must be fatal to this country.”2 When Disraeli introduced the bill in February 1867 he was careful to present it as a conservative measure. He was keen to emphasize that this was not a prelude to democracy, but a bill necessary to preserve the constitution. Disraeli was hoping for cross-party support. Trying to bring the reforms closer to his original ideas, Gladstone attacked the bill so vehemently that he alienated a great number of his own supporters in the process and inadvertently strengthened Disraeli’s position. He was so determined to spite Gladstone and ensure that the Reform Act was passed by a Tory, that he accepted a liberal amendment, which fundamentally changed the nature of the legislation from a modest conservative bill to a radical widening of the franchise. The amended bill was approved in both Houses and Gladstone was thoroughly humiliated. It is no surprise then that those loyal to Gladstone expressed disillusionment with the bill that had caused him such mortification and seemed, to them, to be a cynical piece of political maneuvering empty of true democratic spirit. In an article entitled “The Chambers of Mediocrity,” published in December 1868, Morley complained that “the persons who believe that a mere change in political forms, without a change in moral or religious ideas, or in the material circumstances of the community, is able to produce a revolution, ought to have their eyes opened.”3 Morley’s reaction, motivated no doubt by anger against Disraeli and loy- Walt Whitman & William Blake 135 alty toward Gladstone, led him to announce the moment of the intellectual and poet, the prophet-artist who would be able to bring about social revolution through poetic revelation. The Fortnightly Review served as a focal point for republican and antitheist thought in the late 1860s and attracted a...