716.1863.Shells from the Coast mistaking—

Shells from the Coast mistaking—
I cherished them for All—
Happening in After Ages
To entertain a Pearl—

Wherefore so late—I murmured—
My need of Thee—be done—
Therefore—the Pearl responded—
My Period begin

The word “pearl” occurs 29 times in ED’s 1789 poems, mostly as a metaphor for cherished things: friendship, love of all kinds, Susan Gilbert Dickinson (Sue), Charles Wadsworth (CW), a particular poem, poetry in general. The word “pearl” first appears in F16 (1858), ’The feet of people walking home’ and last in F1012 (1865), ‘Best Things dwell out of Sight’.

Oddly, the word “pearl” doesn’t occur in any of the 777 poems written during the last 20 years of her life, 1866 – 1886.

ED tried twice to establish permanent relationships with lovers, but both attempts failed because of impossible impediments, financial security for Sue and solid long-standing marriage/family ties for CW. By 1863, ED had abandoned dreams of lifelong stability from loving relationships and, instead, committed her life to poetry, the pearl she knew she could trust for the duration.

In this poem “wherefore” probably means “for what reason”. The word dates from before 1200 AD and is now rarely used (OED).

An interpretation of ‘Shells from the Coast mistaking’ (F716):

Stanza 1:

When I was young, I thought all shells from the coast were pearls
When I grew older, I still cherished shells
Because they reminded me of Pearls
I have loved [Sue and CW].

Stanza 2:

Why has it taken me so long – I murmured –
Before my need of Thee [CW] – be done? –
Therefore – the Pearl [Poetry] responded –
My Time begin[s]

What a life-affirming last line.

HOME

After commenting on Poems 1-763 (Franklin) on The Prowling Bee’, I am convinced that (virtually) all of Emily Dickinson’s (ED’s) poems have a factual historical level in addition to their various poetic levels of meaning. The reason for her instant and continuing public adulation (1890 - present) was and is, by far, poetic. She is one of the "Greats" that she always dreamed to be, despite her lifelong refusal to publish. That refusal freed her from criticism and allowed her to explore the outer boundaries of poetic power.

More than a century of scholarly research has resulted in somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 books and published academic papers about ED. A large majority of these publications focus only on the “poetic levels” of one or more of ED’s poems. Publications that consider both the “historic level” and “poetic levels” comprise a small minority. Publications that focus only on the factual history of her life probably number less than 100. (All numbers in this paragraph are my estimates.)

Unfortunately for ED’s universe of readers, these two basic levels (historical and poetic) cannot be separated into two ivory towers. Every history-level publication that I know of includes at least some discussion of the poetic level(s).

The reverse is not true. In fact, authors of the “poetry-level” school seem to avoid commenting on the historical level, sometimes admonishing that a poem must stand on its own, without concern for its historical roots. To my knowledge, there are (virtually) no published “history-level” books or articles that totally ignore ED’s poems and their poetic levels.

Of course, ED’s refusal to publish her poems was only possible because of lifelong financial and daily social/housekeeping support by her family, especially her father and sister, respectively. In addition, throughout her life, the Dickinsons hired servants, first Negro and later Irish, some of whom became much more than housekeepers for ED.

My point is that our appreciation of ED's poems can be enhanced by understanding both poetic and historical levels of her sound and sense. We impoverish ourselves if we ignore their historical base.