836.1854.Color — Caste — Denomination —.ED-LarryB

836.1864.Color — Caste — Denomination —

Color — Caste — Denomination —
These — are Time’s Affair —
Death’s diviner Classifying
Does not know they are —

As in sleep — All Hue forgotten —
Tenets — put behind —
Death’s large—Democratic fingers
Rub away the Brand —
.
If Circassian — He is careless —
If He put away
Chrysalis of Blonde—or Umber —
Equal Butterfly —
.
They emerge from His Obscuring —
What Death — knows so well —
Our minuter intuitions —
Deem unplausible —
.
.
.
In a genetic sense that ED could not know, not just humans share death, but every individual organism: plant, animal, bacterium, fungus, and even, in a sense, virus, with their single-stranded genetic code of RNA. Death’s “Democratic Fingers” end existence for every “individual” of every “species”.
.
What we know now is that ED’s obsession with individual human “Death” was completely anthropocentric. What really matters is transmission of genetic code from each parent generation to its descendants. Genetic codes are “immortal” in a sense, but their “immortality” does not mean they stay the same; they change continually by natural selection and its consequence, evolution.

We organisms pass from existence to non-existence. Death of an individual organism doesn’t matter, so long as it leaves at least one copy of its DNA in the next generation. The only complete failure of a DNA or RNA molecule is extinction of its “species”. If we humans cause that extinction, we have committed a biocentric sin. Of course, we humans may intentionally cause extinction of a pathogen “species” like smallpox for our own anthropocentric benefit, but if we do we have intentionally committed a biocentric sin for a good reason.
.
.
All of this is not to say that ED’s poems don’t matter. We love their rhythm and rhyme, their sound and sense. When we enjoy a poem, biology doesn’t matter. We can always learn biology later, when we aren’t reading ED’s poems.

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.