While reading “A Supermarket in California” from my Bedroom in Illinois, I experienced Confusion in Large Quantities.
Like a bucket of ice-cold water, the speaker made it immediately clear who their audience was: Walt Whitman. Intuitively, it seemed that Whitman was acting as some sort of symbol for a broader idea, but I didn’t have a clue as to what this idea was. In previous poems we’ve read, the symbols have always been at least somewhat established objects or places. Even if the speaker subverts the established use of the symbol, at least there’s an established idea to subvert in the first place. However, I didn’t know of any established symbolism for Walt Whitman, so I had little to operate off except some vague prior knowledge. Thus, the central question that guided my read of the poem was: What does Walt Whitman represent?
I discovered an answer to my question in two main ways: historical context and textual evidence.
The Beat Generation.
When I read, I often contextualize the poem in the time period when it was written. I knew from APUSH that Ginsberg was one of the leading writers from the Beat Generation, a mid twentieth-century movement that often criticized mainstream American consumerism and culture. I noted that the examples of produce given were all foreign imports, suggesting a preoccupation with obtaining as many goods as possible. In addition, the phrase “shopping for images” seemed to reference the idea that we buy goods to create an illusion of wealth rather than out of actual necessity. With regards to Whitman, I also knew (from APUSH) that he was part of American literature’s Romantic movement, which emphasized individuality and a return to nature. These ideas directly contrasted the artificial, materialistic conformity the supermarket represented, and I began to sense that Whitman symbolized these Romantic tenets.
There’s also another more direct reference to consumerism at the end of the poem – the blue automobiles. I immediately thought of the bright blue Volkswagen beetles that dominated the ‘50s and ‘60s; perhaps nothing exemplifies materialism better than an excessively flashy car. This car is contrasted with the “lost America of love past,” the America, presumably, of Whitman’s time, an America that embraced authenticity and individualism over consumerism.
Finally, a nod to one “Garcia Lorca” helped support my theory. Unlike Whitman, I had never heard of them, so a Google search revealed that Lorca was an early 20th century Spanish poet who was executed for refusing to hide his leftist beliefs or homosexuality against Spain’s fascist regime. This seemed consistent with the counterculture ideas of Ginsberg, and it bolstered the idea that Whitman could also serve as a symbol of a counterculture in his own way.
Having racked my brain (and Google), I shifted my attention to the text, hoping to find evidence to either confirm or deny my suspicions.
Within the second stanza, I was initially confused by why the speaker, who seems to heavily respect Whitman, spends the first line blatantly insulting him, breaking this consistency. However, once I began thinking that Whitman represents a rejection of the consumerist, superficial society represented by the supermarket, I realized that Whitman’s solitary lifestyle could also be seen as a rejection of social norms, such as the nuclear family of the ‘50s. Being a “childless, lonely old grubber,” at least to the speaker, may not necessarily be a bad thing.
Similarly, the final stanza reinforced the idea that Whitman serves as a role model for the speaker because of the ideals he represents; the speaker reveres him as sort of a grandfatherly, virtuous figure, calling him a “courage-teacher”. They also direct a string of questions towards Whitman, as if they depend on Whitman for guidance (Whitman’s beard appears to act as a moral compass). Indeed, when I looked closer, even the punctuation seemed to hint at the speaker’s attitude towards Whitman. In the first stanza, the repeated use of exclamation marks paralleled the tile of Whitman’s most famous poem, O Captain! My Captain!. By emulating his writing style, the speaker hints at both the ideological and the literary influence Whitman has had on them.
I found my final clue in the poem’s ending reference to Greek mythology. Out of all the references throughout the piece, these couple of lines gave me the most trouble because of how random they felt – it was almost jarring to experience this sudden switch from the balmy California night to the bleak banks of the underworld.
I knew Charon was the ferryman who transports souls from the living world to the underworld, but I had never heard of Lethe. After another Google search, I discovered that those who drank from the waters of Lethe would experience complete forgetfulness. This led me to believe that America itself was the ship sailing down the Lethe, and the continually referenced darkness outside the supermarket was that of the underworld. The speaker was making the point that the country had sailed past a point of no return, hopeless to the point that even Charon had abandoned it, having completely forgotten the Romantic ideals of Whitman’s time.
Upon deciphering the entire poem, I began to wonder: why would Ginsberg choose such an unconventional, specific symbol, one whose meaning wasn’t immediately obvious?
Ultimately, I believe it’s because Whitman’s presence allows for the expression of a much more precise idea. While there are established symbols that express similar beliefs, no object specifically expresses the ideals of 19th century American romanticism as accurately as Whitman does – his name allows Ginsberg to nest a much more complex idea into one reference, one that a “conventional” symbol can’t necessarily reflect. Inventing a symbol allows for the formation of an idea that most directly and powerfully juxtaposes the commercial American supermarket.
Thus, although the comprehension of this piece posed a unique challenge by demanding that I draw on prior knowledge or consult outside sources, for me, one of the most exciting things about reading anything is finding ways to connect what I’ve learned in one subject to another. Especially because I haven’t had a chance to do so as thoroughly in any poem we’ve read before, I enjoyed discovering the intersections between history and literature in the space carved out by “A Supermarket in California”.
Hey Evelyn,
I was very confused reading this poem!!! Allen sounds like a Whitman fanboy; truthfully, I thought Allen had a crush on Whitman until he referred to him as “dear father.” Moving on. I really liked the line “shopping for images.” My favorite line from my poem by Jean Valentine is “a window in my side.” I guess I just have a penchant for strange images. It was interesting to read more about the background of these two poets; I knew nothing of this history that is integral to understanding your poem. Without it, I would have never been able to come up with the same theory as you did. Looking up the timelines of their lives, it is interesting how someone who passed could hold such an active influence within someone’s life. Though Whitman would have been dead at the time, this poem depicts him presently, still kicking. I enjoy the flow of the poem: it reads as though we are taken along on their adventure, painting a scene with the specific details and images of a supermarket.
Overall, I really enjoyed reading this poem and understanding the deeper subtexts. Using the conventional American supermarket as a platform for a commentary on consumerism and rebellion is incredibly creative, and the setting allowed for many images to be starkly portrayed.
Hey Evelyn,
When I first read through your poem before your analysis it was way over my head. As someone who did not take APUSH, rather I took regular US History online over the summer (where I definitely gave 100% of my attention to during my vacation…) I did not have the contextual background you brought when reading “A Supermarket in California”.
Your breakdown was honestly amazing. The only thing I picked up similar to your was the punctuation and the Greek reference at the end of the poem. Other than those to obvious points, I had no idea what was going on in the poem. Also, I appreciate the research you did. I feel as though this poem is not one someone could understand without knowing all the background.
While reading your analysis, literally right before you discussed why Whitman would be used as the symbol the question popped into my head as well. Your explanation was enlightening because I have always thought poems should usually have a broad audience, but having a unique audience makes the poem more precise and distinct, which you explained was Ginsberg’s intention.
Your overall analysis was extremely in depth and I can tell you put a lot of time and effort into it! I loved reading it!
Hey Evelyn!
Immediately, the title of this poem intrigued me; supermarkets in California are quite pleasant. I found myself vaguely relating to this piece since the speaker seems to be a silent, creative overthinker with the ability to create stories of the strangers around them in their head. Although I don’t entirely relate to the silent part, I find it interesting to read of someone else who tries to uncover the meaning behind the actions of strangers, trying to create a cohesive story of who each stranger you run into may be solely based on outwardly mannerisms. I find the repetition of Walt Whiteman to be very intriguing, and I love the amount of questions placed in this poem. I admire the imagery throughout because it allowed me to really visualize what was occurring. Unfortunately, with this imagery as a perfect distractor, I felt like the deeper meanings went over my head, causing me to feel a bit lost.
I really admire how you dug deeper into the history of the writer and the importance of individualism during this time period, displaying a deeper understand of the purpose of the poem, one that I would not be able to uncover without a great amount of research. I loved how your connections really came together to highlight the true meanings and deep references weaved throughout this poem. Great job and I’m excited to read more from you this semester!
Evelyn, I was immediately confused by your poem, so I think this was a good choice. I think one of the most obvious complexities of this poem is its unconventional format, and I felt that I was reading paragraphs in a book, as opposed to stanzas in a poem. Additionally, I think the continual and direct reference to Walt Whitman as the audience was shocking, as you addressed. Once you started to mention history I was a little intimated, but I felt that this greatly contributed to your understanding of the poem, and provided helpful context.
When I first read through the poem, the phrase “shopping for images” stuck out to me as well, as it is such an odd way to discuss buying groceries. While going to a supermarket is often rooted in necessity, it can easily turn to excess and overconsumption. With Whitman being a symbol against materialism and consumerism, it almost feels like the speaker is continually reminding themself of their values, holding them close to get through an otherwise dreadful experience.
As you began to explain more about Whitman’s values, and turning away from the conventional, it made me think back to the general format of the poem, and how it aims to be different from a “more typical” style and ultimately reflect Whitman.
I enjoyed reading your analysis of this poem and the brief lecture on American history. You found connections that required a lot of research and knowledge, and I was quite impressed.
Hi Evelyn,
I’m pretty sure they ask about this poem in Scholastic Bowl. Though, I’m not positive because I usually tune out the second that I realize a question is about anything literature related. As usual, I didn’t understand anything after the first read. So it was especially helpful for me that your essay provides a great deal of historical context and reads easily. Thank you for that, I would not have understood anything otherwise. You were able to pick up on a lot of the more nuanced parts of the poem – take the foreign produce bit – and it showed in your analysis of the piece as a whole. I think your poem was different because, like you said, while we encounter symbols and metaphors frequently in poetry, they rarely take the form of a specific person. Because Ginsburg uses Whitman as a metaphor or symbol, readers need to understand what Whitman means. And I think you not only understood this point, but helped provide background as to who Whitman was. So because of your very well written analysis, I didn’t have to experience a great deal of confusion from my bedroom in Illinois while reading A Supermarket in California.