Summary

Download PDF PDF Page Citation Cite Share Link Share

In the wake of a pivotal moment in American politics, New Hampshire Senator Daniel Webster delivered a speech on March 7, 1850, advocating for the Missouri Compromise, which allowed new slave states into the Union. This move shocked many abolitionists, including long-time supporter John Greenleaf Whittier. In response, Whittier penned "Ichabod," a poem expressing his profound disappointment and sense of betrayal.

Webster's Surprising Stance

For nearly two decades, Whittier had supported Webster, making the senator's backing of the Missouri Compromise particularly jarring. Abolitionists across the nation were taken aback, feeling as though Webster had abandoned the cause of freedom. In a dramatic response, James Russell Lowell, writing for the National Anti-Slavery Standard, posed the question, “Shall not the Recording Angel write Ichabod (inglorious one) after the name of this man in the great book of Doom?” This rhetorical cry captured the growing sense of betrayal and set the stage for Whittier's pointed poetic response.

A Poetic Castigation

In "Ichabod," Whittier channels his sorrow and anger into biblical allusions, beginning the poem with a lamentation: “So fallen! so lost!” He portrays Webster as a fallen angel akin to those in John Milton’s Paradise Lost, suggesting that Webster's once brilliant soul has been cast out “From hope and heaven!” By likening Webster to these celestial beings, Whittier underscores the magnitude of his perceived fall from grace. The poem conveys a deep sense of loss, not just of Webster’s honor, but of the admiration and loyalty once held by his followers.

Embracing Pity Over Rage

Rather than advocating for anger or scorn, Whittier calls for "pitying tears" and a "long lament" as the nation's appropriate response to Webster's actions. By choosing to reject "passion’s stormy rage," he invites a more compassionate approach, urging his contemporaries to regard Webster with the respect of "old days." In doing so, Whittier suggests a more sorrowful than angry mourning of Webster’s tarnished reputation.

Symbolic Allusions

In an artful turn, Whittier concludes "Ichabod" by drawing an analogy with the biblical story of Noah. Just as Noah’s sons approached their father’s shame "backward, with averted gaze" to cover his disgrace, Whittier suggests that the nation should similarly acknowledge Webster's shame without direct confrontation. This metaphor serves to universalize the poem's themes, presenting Webster’s betrayal as a cautionary tale against moral failure.

A Timeless Denunciation

Despite never explicitly naming Webster or detailing his speech, Whittier’s "Ichabod" transcends its immediate context, resonating as a powerful political denunciation. This choice lends the poem a timeless quality, allowing it to speak to broader themes of honor, betrayal, and the complex interplay of personal and political integrity. Many regard "Ichabod" as a classic example of a philippic, a literary form devoted to fierce denunciation, rooted in the tradition of public admonishment and moral critique.

Overall, Whittier’s "Ichabod" remains a striking example of how literature can capture the tumultuous emotions and ethical conflicts of its time. Through his potent use of biblical allegory and deep emotional resonance, Whittier’s poem continues to serve as a poignant reminder of the enduring struggle between political expedience and moral conviction.

Get Ahead with eNotes

Start your 48-hour free trial to access everything you need to rise to the top of the class. Enjoy expert answers and study guides ad-free and take your learning to the next level.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Next

Quotes

Loading...