There is no argument that Bidart’s “Herbert White” is, although rather unspeakably disturbing, a masterpiece with regard to storytelling and humanizing what would be the personification of evil.  In this manner, it is definitely possible to say that the poem was a success, especially as Bidart’s attempt to describe the antithesis of himself. This was likely a successful adventure on a personal level, causing Bidart to fully understand himself before he could understand his opposite, but I wonder if it is an equal success in the grander scheme of things. That is, is there purpose in exposing people to something so dark and gruesome? Does the humanizing of Herbert White improve the reader’s capacity for understanding (or improve them in some other respect), or is that effect reserved for Bidart himself?