"Who am I?" by Carl Sandburg

Poem Reflection


WHO AM I?
By: Carl Sandburg

MY head knocks against the stars.
My feet are on the hilltops.
My finger-tips are in the valleys and shores of
universal life.
Down in the sounding foam of primal things I
reach my hands and play with pebbles of
destiny.
I have been to hell and back many times.
I know all about heaven, for I have talked with God.
I dabble in the blood and guts of the terrible.
I know the passionate seizure of beautyAnd the marvelous rebellion of man at all signs
reading "Keep Off."
My name is Truth and I am the most elusive captive
in the universe.



While aimlessly scrolling through an endless laundry list of different poems on the internet, the title of this poem caught my attention. “Who am I” was coincidentally the theme of one of our class sessions as well as the name of this poem by masterful writer, Carl Sandburg.
I assumed the poem was going to explain “Who is Carl Sandburg?” because the title of the poem automatically gave me the impression that the poem was referring to the author, Carl Sandburg. However, my intuition, once again, failed me…
The poem has very similar characteristics of a riddle. The title, “Who am I?” acts as the question. Sandburg uses personification to describe whoever or whatever “I” is (“My head,” “My feet,” “My toes”). His first three lines describe a omnipresent force (“stars,” “hilltops,” “valleys and shores”) that could be either metaphoric or literal. The phrase, “Universal life” caught my eye and made me think, “Why did the author say ‘universal life,’ when life itself already has a universal implication?” This phrase can be interpreted many different ways (aside from being a type of life insurance…); however, this is the way I see it: Carl Sandburg is trying to make a social comment about life. The phrase “Universal life,” is actually a statement by the author that life is universal; every life on earth should be appreciated. The descriptions are contrasted by the author’s use of personification. Sandburg’s use of personification reassured me that the poem is about the author.
Rather than using a “clean” line break, Sandburg uses single words and phrases to signify the end of a stanza (“universal life,” “Destiny”, “Keep Off”) All three lines are very powerful, broad terms that could have many different interpretations, which I feel was Sandburg’s intention. Also, the phrases act as an abrupt syllable change, which catches the reader’s attention.
In the fifth line, the author rhymes “Down” and “sound(ing).” This lightens the mood of the poem and gives it a smooth flow. The phrase, “sounding foam” had me scratching my head… What the heck is sounding foam? I looked up “Sounding” in the dictionary, which Merriam-Webster defines as, “n: measurement of depth especially with a sounding line.” This could be plausible because line 6 mentions “I reach my hands,” which arguably could be a method of sounding. If “sounding” is intended to be an adjective, the phrase “sounding foam,” could be interpreted as an oxymoron, since foam is pretty silent. But what does it mean? “Sounding foam” refers to “primal things.” “Primal” can be interpreted two different ways. The first definition of the word primal, defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is, “first in importance.” If we accept this definition, “Down in the sounding foam of primal things,” could be interpreted as the things in life which we deem as important are really pointless fluff, or “foam.” If we interpret “primal” to mean “original,” lines 5-7 could represent this mystery character’s ability to manipulate life, the ability to, “play with the pebbles of destiny,” which is also an example of alliteration (“play” and “pebbles”), used by the author to lighten the mood of the poem and to give it flow.
Lines 8 and 9 mention that this “mystery” thing has “been to hell and back,” and has, “talked with god.” Since this mystery thing is “truth,” (sorry if I ruined the ending for you) lines 8 and 9 represent the ideology of the author, along with the majority of Americans during the early 20th century. Heaven and Hell were simply “truth,” and anyone who defied God’s existence would probably be considered “un-American.”
Line 10, “blood and guts of the terrible” is another example of personification, which gives the line emotion. “Blood” and “dabble” is another example of alliteration, used to lighten the mood of the poem and to give it rhythm.

“Passionate seizure,” similar to “sounding foam,” can be interpreted multiple ways. If you define “seizure” as “the physical manifestations (as convulsions, sensory disturbances, or loss of consciousness) resulting from abnormal electrical discharges in the brain (as in epilepsy)” the phrase “passionate seizure” is nearly oxymoronic, since seizures tend to not be very passionate. Though this interpretation is not very plausible, it is a legitimate literal interpretation. The other interpretation, which seems to be more plausible, is if seizure is defined as: “to possess or to take hold of by force.” “The passionate seizure of beauty” could be interpreted that beauty seizes a person through the burning emotion of passion. True beauty differs from external beauty by one thing; passion.

Lines 12-13 act as a historical comment of the discrimination of Blacks and new immigrants during the early 20th century. The word “signs” can be interpreted both literally and metaphorically. Signs like, “no Irish Need Apply,” were posted in front of businesses, while signs on restaurants stating “whites only,” legally prohibited blacks from restaurants and bathrooms. “All signs,” could also represent the rich industrialists, who wanted to bask in the wealth of their monopolies, discouraging competitors through prejudice and corruption. The phrase “Marvelous Rebellion,” romanticizes the struggle of the working man, similar to his poem, “Chicago.”

Finally, in the end of the poem, we find that the poem it about “Truth,” “The most elusive captive in the universe.” “Elusive captive” is another oxymoron, which seems to be a common theme throughout the poem. I feel that the multiple oxymoron throughout the poem act as a comment about truth, that truth often contradicts a false perception of reality. Who defies truth? Truth can not truly be defined, which is why it is described as an “elusive.” Truth is characterized as being a “captive,” because if a person accepts something as “true,” that thought or perception captures the person and molds the person into an individual, one person among “the valleys and shores of universal life.”