Ralph Waldo Emerson, a major contributor to the Transcendentalist Movement in American literature during the mid-1800s, deifies the role of the poet in his essays “The Poet” and “The American Scholar,” thus developing a most interesting relationship between the poet and God in his writing. In “The Poet,” Emerson defines a poet as “the man without impediment, who sees and handles that which others dream of, traverses the whole scale of experience, and is representative of man, in virtue of being the largest power to receive and to impart” (top of page 2). By defining the poet as being the highest of mind, Emerson elevates the poet to a similar (if not the same) level as God. For instance, Emerson follows his original definition by saying that the poet “is a sovereign, and stands on the centre” (top of page 2). Emerson describes the poet as having immense skill in observation and interpretation of the surrounding world that puts the poet above the rest of the population, thus deifying poets. While this idea is most prevalent in “The Poet,” Emerson’s “The American Scholar” supports the same idea, especially when Emerson writes that a scholar, in this case a poet, “learns that in going down into the secrets of his own mind he has descended into the secrets of all minds. He learns that he who has mastered any law in his private thoughts is master to that extent of all men” (around #38). Here, Emerson deifies the poet by defining him as the representative of all mankind through his supreme understanding of the minds of men.
I have isolated a few more passages that may also take on the idea of the relationship Emerson builds between the poet and God:
- At the bottom of the first paragraph on the first page of “The Poet,” Emerson calls the poet “the man of Beauty.” In the middle of the second page, Emerson writes that “God has not made some beautiful things, but Beauty is the creator of the universe.” Here, it seems that Emerson reduces God in order to specifically elevate the poet as the “man of Beauty.”
- On the bottom of page two into the top of page three of “The Poet,” Emerson writes, “For, as it is dislocation and detachment from the life of God that makes things ugly, the poet, who re-attaches things to nature and the Whole, […] disposes very easily of the most disagreeable facts.” Contrary to some of the passages I have already mentioned, Emerson seems to elevate God here. But is Emerson perhaps not elevating God, but rather the concept of God? If Emerson is elevating the concept of God, he may also be arguing that the poet takes on a God-like role.
- In “The American Scholar,” when Emerson discusses the importance of creating to the figure of Man Thinking, he writes that “man hopes. Genius creates. To create, – to create, – is the proof of a divine presence. Whatever talents may be, if the man create not, the pure efflux of the Deity is not his” (#27-#28). It is interesting that Emerson seems to parallel the poet here with a deity in the context of creating because God is commonly associated with the role of creator.
Similar questions emerge when considering all of these passages. Ultimately, what is the relationship between the poet and God or a deity according to Emerson? How does Emerson establish this relationship in “The Poet” and/or “The American Scholar”? How does creating and creativity contribute to defining this relationship? What are your thoughts on Emerson’s view of a deity in terms of defining the poet?
Hi Vanessa! My response is in no means as eloquent as how you stated the question, but I would say that the poet is supposed to be the voice of God or the voice of all things natural , at least in the eyes of Emerson. As I was reading both “The poet” and “The American Scholar” I started to list out in the margins what the poet was expected to do, what he was expected to be. The poet is the sayer and the namer, a power giver, a perceiver of thoughts and all things, someone who sees, and is able to receive “the true nectar”. The poet is supposed to breath in all that is divine and soak up all that God wants them to create and write about. Emerson establishes the relationship between God and the poet by continuously expressing how the poet is basically supposed to be the prophet for God. Emerson creates a difficult task for scholars and poets by saying they have to have the characteristics of all men without being swayed by the thinking of another person. I’ll be real, it’s at this point where things get kind of muddled for me but that’s what I’ve been able to think about so far!
I really like what you’re thinking here, Kenz. I especially like that you paint the poet as a kind of prophet, a go-between connecting mankind with a God figure. I find this idea interesting though because I’m a little shocked that Emerson asks poets to take on this role. He’s asking them to assume a position above the rest of mankind, a position that approaches the supernatural and otherworldly. But I also think Emerson’s request falls into the parameters of the Transcendentalist Movement, and as we read Whitman, I predict that we may see this idea come through more clearly in his writing.
When I read “The Poet,” I honestly saw Emerson as portraying the poet as this interpreter, a person who gives life to language and thought that we wouldn’t be able to understand without them. He mentions how they stand “one step nearer to things,” and continually brings up what we talked about in class today with this idea of transcendentalism that flows through us all, that we are closest to in nature, but that only a few can truly tap into and find a sort of epiphany with. To me, that’s how he was describing the role of a poet.
I also recall from some of my old theology classes that many believe the Bible was written via “divine intervention,” wherein all these stodgy white male scholars sat down and wrote as God willed them, putting pen to paper in the exact way that God wanted it done. In those moments, these writers were part of God, and all are renowned in Christianity as men of great spirituality. Here, I see Emerson as coming to this almost more secularly, acknowledging the presence of something bigger than ourselves that can guide a poet to connect with the nonspecific divine. I think it’s interesting to have Emerson speak of this, and then to also have this tangible example with the way Christianity pictures their most holy book having been written.
Emma, I’m so fascinated by your connection to the Bible authors being divinely inspired. Divine inspiration, or a similar concept, may be Emerson’s way of bringing the poet as close to a deity as possible. I find this interesting though as I read Whitman, because I get a selfish, self-absorbed tone from some of this poems. But in this context, Emerson is to an extent calling poets to first believe in or take stock in a deity that is of the highest power over people. Only then does it make sense for poets to attempt to get closer to the deity in order to gain insight. It’s a fascinating juxtaposition, poets who are above the rank of the rest of mankind, but who are still well beneath the ultimate power of a God figure.
Vanessa, I truly enjoyed reading your thoughts on this weeks readings. As I was reading I also noticed the apparent relationship between God and the poet that was fleshed out extensively. When I was reading I got the sense that the poet is chosen as a mouthpiece for God, an oracle of sorts. The lines out of “The Poet”, “He stands among partial men for the complete man” and “He is isolated among his contemporaries, by truth and by his art” lend to my conclusion. I also think that Emerson hints at the idea that poets are chosen by God. The line “This insight, which expresses itself by what is called Imagination, is a very high sort of seeing, which does not come by study”, illustrates the idea that the ability to be a poet is a gift from God. Emerson also presents that God is the creator of all things beautiful so in order for the poet to be the mouthpiece of God the poet must be the creator of beautiful things.
This is a great response, Kat, and I especially like your take on the poet as being chosen by God for a greater calling. I find it interesting that this interpretation further elevates God. I suppose though that we could look at it both ways: on the one hand, the poet being called to service by God elevates the God figure in power, authority, and ultimate mystery, but on the other hand, the poet is elevated to a position above the rest of mankind that approaches the otherworldly. Perhaps Emerson is elevating both God and the poet in his writing, giving them each the respect they are due.