What Enumerations Does Ginsberg List

Introduction

Allen Ginsberg’s 1956 poem “Howl” is not merely a landmark of the Beat Generation; it is a seismic event in American literature, a raw, roaring, and meticulously crafted howl against the destructive forces of modern society. Central to its unforgettable power is a poetic technique Ginsberg inherited from Walt Whitman but radicalized for the atomic age: enumeration. Far more than a simple list, Ginsberg’s enumerations are cascading, breathless catalogues that build emotional and intellectual momentum, creating a panoramic portrait of a generation’s torment and transcendence. To ask “what enumerations does Ginsberg list?” is to ask about the very architecture of “Howl” and the key to decoding its frenetic, prophetic voice. This article will provide a comprehensive exploration of Ginsberg’s masterful use of enumeration, moving from its basic definition to its profound psychological, rhythmic, and social functions within his most famous work.

Detailed Explanation: What is Enumeration in Poetry?

In poetry, enumeration (or the catalog) is a rhetorical device involving the extended listing of details, names, images, or ideas. Its purpose transcends mere description; it is a tool for amplification, creating a sense of overwhelming abundance, chaos, or comprehensive scope. Historically, its most famous American antecedent is Walt Whitman’s “Song of Myself,” where lists of occupations, body parts, and landscapes celebrate the democratic, boundless self and nation. Ginsberg, a devoted student of Whitman, adopted this technique but infused it with the specific anxieties of post-World War II America—conformity, mechanization, mental illness, and sexual repression.

For Ginsberg, enumeration was not a decorative flourish but a spiritual and physiological practice. He believed in “first thought, best thought,” a principle of spontaneous, unedited composition that aimed to capture the raw flow of consciousness. The list, in this context, mimics the mind’s associative leaps, the way memory and perception bombard us with connected fragments. It is also deeply tied to his Buddhist-inspired practice of observing reality without immediate judgment, allowing phenomena to pile up in their terrifying, beautiful multiplicity. Therefore, when we examine Ginsberg’s enumerations, we are looking at the structural embodiment of his poetic philosophy: a form that mirrors content, where the how of the poem’s construction (the listing) is inseparable from its what (the critique of “Moloch”).

Step-by-Step Breakdown: Enumeration in the Three Parts of “Howl”

Ginsberg structures “Howl” into three distinct parts plus a footnote, each employing enumeration differently to serve a unique narrative and emotional arc.

Part I: The Diagnosis of “Best Minds” This section is a monumental, sustained enumeration of destruction. The famous opening line, “I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,” sets the template. Ginsberg then proceeds to list how they were destroyed:

• Through societal rejection: “who were expelled from the academies for crazy & publishing obscene odes on the windows of the skull...”
• Through poverty and vagrancy: “who poverty & tattered & underfed...”
• Through mental illness and institutionalization: “who were taken seriously by the insane...”
• Through drug use and spiritual seeking: “who burned cigarette holes in their arms...”
• Through sexual deviancy and persecution: “who let themselves be fucked in the ass by saintly motorcyclists...”
• Through political radicalism: “who threw potatoes at the cops...”
• Through artistic obsession: “who scribbled all night rocking & rolling...”

This is not a random list but a cumulative indictment. Each “who” clause adds a new layer of suffering, a new mode of persecution by the “iron-hearted” institutions of the time—government, psychiatry, academia, police. The relentless “who” anaphora (repetition of “who”) creates a hypnotic, incantatory rhythm that feels both liturgical and accusatory, building an overwhelming case against the culture that produced this carnage.

Part II: The Naming of “Moloch” Here, the enumeration shifts from people to the abstract, personified force of oppressive, industrial, militaristic America: Moloch. Ginsberg lists the attributes and symbols of this god, creating a terrifying composite portrait.

• Physical/Mechanical Form: “Moloch whose eyes are a thousand blind windows... Moloch whose skyscrapers stand in the long streets like endless Jehovahs...”
• Sustaining Offerings: “Moloch whom I abhor... Moloch whose mind is pure machinery... Moloch whose blood is running money...”
• Domains of Influence: “Moloch the incomprehensible prison! Moloch the crossbone soulless jailhouse... Moloch whose fate is a cloud of sexless hydrogen!...”

This enumeration builds Moloch as a totalizing system. By listing its parts—windows, skyscrapers, money, hydrogen bombs—Ginsberg argues that the evil is not in one person or policy but is embedded in the very architecture, economy, and physics of modern life. The list makes the abstract concept of “conformity” or “the military-industrial complex” viscerally tangible and monstrous.

**Part III: The Search for Liberation (“Holy! Holy! Holy

!”) The final section shifts to a litany of the holy. Ginsberg lists the sacred elements of life and consciousness that persist despite the Molochs of the world.

• The Sacred in the Mundane: “Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy