Sunday, April 11, 2010

And now for an extraordinarily serious discussion:


Who would win in a fight:

Dr. Seuss (aka Theodore Geisel) or Walt Whitman??

I know, I know. Its terribly tough to decide.

Don't worry, we're going to seriously examine both sides here.

Now out of curiosity, I put up a poll on the blog, and I also asked my little faceybook friends their opinions on this troubling, perplexing topic. Overall, the general census was that Dr. Seuss, aka Theodore Geisel, would ultimately come out on top if it came to a physical altercation with Mr. Whitman. Here I present some quotes of what they noted as their rationalization:

My sister in law Wendy said:
Seuss would win because his vocab is gigantic and so is his imagination.

My elder brother stated:
Think of all the cool characters would come to Dr. Seuss' rescue even if Walt started beating him up. No chance in heck Walt would win.

Seth, my FHE brother, reported:
I don't know what Walt Whitman is packing, but no doubt Dr. Seuss would just own with his Whompa Thompa stick, or his Boozle Bazooka.

Ginny, a friend from my youth, noted:
The answer's pretty obvious to me, but maybe it's not so clear to some...maybe this'll help: LINK

If you've clicked on the link that dear Ginny posted, you have found an interesting exam paper. As much as we may wish that Walt Whitman was that hardcore, unfortunately, I doubt its legitimacy. Regardless, I feel that Walt Whitman would be more than capable of holding his own in this fight.


As you can see here, Walt Whitman looked pretty hard core back in the day. The way his hat is slightly askew, with his gruff and tumble facial hair, which we shall see for years to come. Also, during the civil war, he thought his brother was wounded, so he walked down south.... Literally. Walked. Through the war-ridden south. That IS hardcore, no doubt about it.

Keep in mind that I did my very best to find the most hardcore pictures of these two fellows. With that, I present this photo of Theodore Geisel, taken graciously from the "famous pipe smokers" web site. And he truly does look pretty hardcore here. Not only that, but I have found evidence, through wikipedia, that Dr. Seuss himself, in the pre-Seuss days at Dartmouth, was a rebel. According to my sources, he was caught, possibly on multiple occasions, drinking alcohol on campus... during PROHIBITION! I feel like this would also qualify him as hardcore.

Also, It appears that Whitman was actually very much FOR prohibition.
It looks like, had these two gentlemen met, they would have actually had true disagreements, therefore making our hypothetical situation much more plausible, and therefore interesting.

As for their writings, while Dr. Seuss indeed did create pretty much his own vocabulary and funky little creatures, Walt Whitman has been credited as "The Father of Free Form." He was not afraid to write about sexuality and death and rotting leaves and, I quote, "debris." Dr. Seuss, however, was not afraid to stand up for environmentalism, against fascism, and even once wrote a poem after the Watergate scandal, entitled, no joke, "Richard M. Nixon, Please Go Away!" Then again, Walt Whitman has also been declared, very boldly, "America's First Poet of Democracy." Come on. That is impressive.

Now for the most important point of discussion:

The Topic of Beard.

When you look at a photo of Theodore Geisel, it is observed that he does indeed have a fine display of facial hair. White, and sturdy, evenly distributed with no signs of patchiness, and well groomed.

In the case of Walt Whitman, it is quite apparent from first glance that quantity is at his advantage, in terms of bearding. His beard, throughout his life, in pretty much every picture I have been able to observe of the man, is thick, luxurious, and solid of color. A fine specimen of facial hair indeed.

So. The Ultimate Question to be answered. Who would win in a fight?
Dr. Seuss or Walt Whitman?

The Answer I have determined, after diligent study and research of both sides, is...


Chuck Norris.

Because Chuck Norris ALWAYS wins.

No comments: