June 28th, 2012
In my opinion, anyway. Here’s the poem, When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer (and “heard” does rhyme with “Learn’d” better than “listened to”), from Leaves of Grass.
WHEN I heard the learn’d astronomer;
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me;
When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them;
When I, sitting, heard the astronomer, where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon, unaccountable, I became tired and sick;
Till rising and gliding out, I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
I don’t think an unreasonable interpretation is that the viewpoint character (probably safe to assume Whitman) doesn’t warmly embrace scientists getting quantitative about nature, and that a direct experience of nature is better. Some suggest that it’s popular among English teachers because of the digs to math and science.
To be fair to Whitman, most people do listen and applaud. Just not him. He’s the rare bird, so that saves it for me, and I do recognize not everyone’s first inclination is quantitative.
But I have to say that for me, a “Learn’d Astronomer,” the direct experience of enjoying the stars in perfect silence is merely nice, and greatly enhanced by my quantitative understanding of what they actually are. I mean, come on, they’re faint points of light in the sky in some vague, ill-defined patterns. I enjoy looking at them, but I enjoy looking at a lot of things.
For me, the science enhances everything I look at. Let me provide some evidence that Whitman and the Whitman’s of the world today, can be turned on to science with how it has enhanced the experience of stars:
Star Size comparison:
Carl Sagan on humans as “star stuff”:
Living in the age of stars:
Life cycle of stars:
And don’t forget…without astronomers essentially nothing would be known about black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, cool M stars invisible to the naked eye, what stars are made of, how far away they are, how big they are, how energetic they are, how long they live…essentially nothing.
When I look up in perfect silence at the stars, my experience is, in my opinion, much more profound and meaningful due to the knowledge science has provided us about what they are. They are super amazing fantastic objects!
I think we need more scientist poets… (Ellie Arroway agrees, I’m sure.)
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
It’s not just stars; anywhere I look I enjoy it more if I know the how and sometimes the why. For me knowing why tea leaves gather in the middle when you stir a cup of tea, or knowing how the leaves change color in fall enhances the wonder not lessens it. I guess that’s why I’m a scientist and he is not.
I agree. Learning about anything tends to make it more interesting.
And plenty of things still mysterious left to wonder about. Science and understanding usually creates more questions than it answers.
I absolutely agree, and what is more, so did Whitman I am sure.
Just because he wandered outside to look “up in perfect silence at the stars” doesn’t mean that he was suddenly unaware of their measured grandness.
The two things don’t need to preclude one another, they are not antipathies. I quite often swoop from the one feeling to the other, then back again, when “the air is clear as crystal, and the white stars fairly blaze, At midnight in the cold and frosty sky”.
You can look, and feel them in your heart, and your mind, all at once.