When considering the word “divine,” the next word that comes to mind is naturally not “mediocre.” Something divine is holy, otherworldly, and divine: the exact antithesis of something mediocre. Why, then, in his poem "From Paumanok", Walt Whitman combines these opposites and proudly declares: "O, divine mean!" (Whitmann)? This divergence from the popular interpretation of the word "divine" gives readers insight into Whitman's understanding of the world: Whitman saw divinity in everything, from the extraordinary power of the cosmos to something as mediocre as a blade of grass. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Unlike “From Paumanok,” Whitman’s poem “Song of Myself” says nothing about the “divine mean.” After first reading "Song of Myself", one might assume that Walt Whitman believed that divine forces - that is, a divine force - existed exclusively within him. The poem is saturated with religious imagery, most of which places the narrator, presumably Whitman himself, in the role of God. One of the most striking examples of this inflates Whitman to an inhuman scale: "I travel... I sail... my elbows rest in the empty spaces of the sea, / I coast the sierras… my palms cover the continents” (Whitman, Reynolds 23). Other lines compare Whitman to a sacrificial Christ figure – someone who sees pain in others and accepts it as his own or, in other examples, supports other men and women with his supernatural strength. “To whoever is dying,” he writes, “I give it to you with tremendous breath…I hold you up” (Whitman, Reynolds 35). Phrases like these imply that Whitman saw himself as similar to, if not the embodiment of, God and Jesus Christ. He believed he was divine. The word “divine” comes from the Latin divus, which has a similar origin to deus, or God (Emily Dickinson Lexicon). The Oxford English Dictionary therefore defines “divine” as “Of or pertaining to God or a god” (“Divine”). Webster's 1828 dictionary offers a broader, but equally powerful definition: "Divine... apparently above what is human" (Emily Dickinson Lexicon). Regardless of the definition, the word "divine" carries with it heavy connotations: thoughts of noble kings, wise soothsayers, and pious priests are often associated with the word. Thus, when Walt Whitman – a poet, not a king – writes lines like “Divine I am inside and out” (Whitman, Reynolds 17), it is easy to dismiss his statements as the product of rampant egotism. This apparent egotism extends beyond religious imagery. Phrases like “I celebrate myself” (Whitman, Reynolds 1) and “I worship myself” (Whitman, Reynolds 18) could easily be interpreted as arrogant. However, nowhere did Whitman claim that he was the only one with divine characteristics that deserved to be celebrated. In fact, he explicitly wrote that God is within all people: “In the faces of men and women I see God, and in my own face in the mirror” (Whitman, Reynolds 42). The most direct definition of Whitman's religious beliefs may be that he saw the divine in the abstract human self - something that belongs to every living person. If "divine" means being "above what is human," how is it possible that any man and woman can bear such a powerful label? The answer may lie in the theology of deism, a set of beliefs that influenced Whitman's life and writings (Pettinger). Deists often reject the beliefs of most organized religions, instead seeing God and divine forces through nature and human reason (Emily Dickinson Lexicon). In his research on deism, Peter Byrne wrote: "The link between the mind andGod is strengthened through the thought that the existence and content of natural instinct make us partakers of the nature of God" (Byrne 33). Perhaps this statement, that human reason is the work of God, could explain Whitman's belief that we are all divine. Take the 1844 Webster dictionary definition of “divine”: “Pertaining to the true God; as, the divine nature;perfections" (Emily Dickinson Lexicon). Considering the revivalist America in which this dictionary entry was written, it is fair to assume that "the true God" is that of the Christian tradition. Indeed, the most popular of the word "divine" - divine right, divine providence, divine law - at least connote organized religion, if not Christianity specifically, Whitman, however, did not identify as a Christian (Pettinger). Perhaps it is ignorant, therefore, to analyse Whitman's use of the term "divine" offered by Webster's 1844 dictionary. Perhaps, to a man who did not adhere to traditional religious beliefs, the word "divine" meant something completely different from the dictionary definitions." Starting with Paumanok,” Whitman used the word “divine” four times. , all of which are incongruous with Webster's definition of “eternal progress,” he wrote, “the kosmos and modern accounts. This, then, is life... Underfoot the divine soil - above the sun" (Whitman). Notice how Whitman did not describe the sun, something humans have worshiped since the dawn of humanity, as divine, but instead gave him the label Later in “Beginning with Paumanok,” Whitman used the phrase “O divine mean!” in a section describing not only the power of religion, love, and democracy, but also the simple pleasures of "a daily kiss" (Whitman). According to Whitman, divinity is not reserved exclusively for the greatest forces in our universe - God, the "kosmos" or love - but for seemingly insignificant things like the ground does being divine mean then? Is a beanstalk as powerful as a human being, and is a blade of grass as important to the universe as the sun is? It seems Whitman threw the word around carelessly in his writings with the principles of deism; Peter Byrne wrote about the divinity of human reason, not filth. If the Oxford English Dictionary defines “divine” as “pertaining to God,” and if Whitman believed that everything in the natural world came from a god, it stands to reason that he considered the soil divine. This explains his repeated, almost casual, use of the word and his belief that everything is divine. Divinity cannot be measured; one either has it or not, and according to Walt Whitman, everything in the universe is divine. In "Song of Myself," Whitman wrote, "I guess I have some intricate purpose? Well, I have... for April it's got rain, and it's got mica on the side of a rock" (Whitman, Reynolds 13). He later reflected, “I believe that a leaf of grass is nothing but the work of the stars” (Whitman, Reynolds 22). Divinity and meaning are not synonymous, but for Whitman it seems that the two are interchangeable. To him, everything was created for a specific and important purpose, and removing even a single element from the universe would create chaos. Perhaps a blade of grass is not as large, complex, or intelligent as a human brain, but the same supernatural force created them both, and therefore both are indispensable to the universe. A modern reader can only imagine how offensive this theory must have been to the modern world. puritan to whom he was introduced. Patrick Henry, who died twenty years before Whitman's birth, once said of deism, a philosophy that is, arguably, a more watered-down version of Whitman's personal theology: "our country...is greatly clouded by the prevalence general of deism". , which, to me, is nothing more than another name.