All Poems

Drama’s Vitallest Expression
is the Common Day
That arise and set about Us—
Other Tragedy

Perish in the Recitation—
This—the best enact
When the Audience is scattered
And the Boxes shut—

“Hamlet” to Himself were Hamlet—
Had not Shakespeare wrote—
Though the “Romeo” left no Record
Of his Juliet,

It were infinite enacted
In the Human Heart—
Only Theatre recorded
Owner cannot shut—

 

For me, Stanzas 1-2 translate as a single enjambed eight-line stanza (octave or octastich):

“Life’s most Dependable Event
Is the Common Day.
Defined by sunrise and sunset,
Everything else vanishes,
Like actors on a stage.
The Common Day enacts its best scenes
When we aren’t watching,
Our box seats empty.”

Stanza 3:

ED may have known or not known that Shakespeare based his stage play, ‘Hamlet’, on Saxo Grammaticus’s (c. 1150 – c. 1220) ‘Gesta Danorum’, Books 3 and 4, where a legendary Scandinavian prince, Amleth, feigned madness and murdered his uncle. As with most legendary heroes, there may have been one or more real human “legend-seeds”. ED’s point is that that each actual human “legend-seed” was someone who, during their lives, knew he/she existed, even though we have no physical evidence of their existence. To quote René Descartes, “Cogito, ergo sum”, “I think, therefore I am”.

Stanza 4:

“If that legend-seed’s exact life story
Were recorded in his/her Heart,
Only a theatrical script could tell the tale.
The seed itself could not shut down its own legend.”
……………………..

Neither EDLex nor OED recognizes “vitallest” as an English word, but EDLex does define “vitalless”: “Dead; lifeless; limp; impotent; powerless; very weak; unable to provide energy; not able to recover; [fig.] ineffective; not motivating.” Nevertheless, ED’s invented comparative communicates the opposite of “lifeless” to me. She used the word “vitallest” only once in all her 1789 known poems.

……………………………….

We have an actual letter from Wadsworth to ED, expressing concern over her health, so their “relationship” was not “purported”. What is purported is the exact nature of that relationship. We have circumstantial evidence in poem after poem that “Master” was, in ED’s mind, a romantic interest, sexual or not, that lasted several years. What ED was in Wadsworth’s mind was probably a completely different story, which fits perfectly as an example of ED’s point in this poem, don’t you think?

We also have lots of circumstantial evidence that Wadsworth was “Master”, and, more importantly, in all her poems and letters or elsewhere, we have no actual evidence to prove that Wadsworth was not “Master”. That cannot be said for any other candidate.

I know, absence of actual proof is not proof of the contrary, but if it quacks like a duck ….

I think I was enchanted
When first a sombre Girl
I read that Foreign Lady
The Dark — felt beautiful

And whether it was noon at night —
Or only Heaven — at Noon —
For very Lunacy of Light
I had not power to tell —

The Bees — became as Butterflies —
The Butterflies — as Swans —
Approached — and spurned the narrow Grass —
And just the meanest Tunes

That Nature murmured to herself
To keep herself in Cheer —
I took for Giants — practising
Titanic Opera —

The Days — to Mighty Metres stept —
The Homeliest — adorned
As if unto a Jubilee
‘Twere suddenly confirmed —

I could not have defined the change —
Conversion of the Mind
Like Sanctifying in the Soul —
Is witnessed — not explained —

Twas a Divine Insanity—
The Danger to be sane
Should I again experience
‘Tis Antidote to turn —

To Tomes of Solid Witchcraft —
Magicians be asleep —
But Magic — hath an element —
Like Deity — to keep —

What a biographical, atypically long poem, complex beyond ED’s trademarks, happy as her happiest, full of mystical allusions, sweet after so much pain. ‘I think I was enchanted’ feels like a turning point. Or is it a passing manic among passing hills and valleys? ED lures us on; stay tuned for another addictive episode.

This poem, ‘I think I was enchanted’, reminded Adam DeGraff of F620 (1863):

“Much Madness is divinest Sense –
To a discerning Eye –
Much Sense – the starkest Madness –
‘Tis the Majority In this, as all, prevail –
Assent, and you are sane –
Demur – you’re straightway dangerous –
And handled with a Chain.”

 

 

777.1864.Life, and Death, and Giants—

 No alternate words.

 Life, and Death, and Giants—
Such as These—are still—
Minor—Apparatus—
Hopper of the Mill—
Beetle at the Candle—
Or a Fife’s Fame—
Maintain—by Accident
that they proclaim—

Could ED be riffing on Romans 8:38-9?:

“For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Gatta 2009).

By 1864 ED was well aware of Darwin’s theory of evolution (‘Origin of Species’, 1859). However, when she says “Minor—Apparatus—” are maintained by accident “that they proclaim”, she may be repeating claims by “they” (creationists?) that Darwin believed species, including humans, evolved simply by accident.

ED’s closing pronoun “they” (Line 8) may grammatically refer to “Hopper, Beetle, and Fife”, but it could easily also refer to scientists. No modern scientist would attribute the proximal causes of natural selection to “accident”; distal causes are another matter.

Perhaps some exuberant scientists of ED’s day proclaimed species exist by pure accident, but natural selection is no accident. It is true that genetic mutations are random, but survival of those mutations isn’t random, nor are today’s species simply “accidents”, as Lines 7-8 suggest.

Rather, eons of winnowing, both biotic and abiotic, extinguished far more species than exist on Earth today. It is no accident that “warm-blooded” mammals and birds replaced “cold-blooded” reptiles that dominated before a massive meteorite struck Earth 63 million years ago, creating a global climate too cold for too long for most large reptile species to persist.

Was that meteorite an accident? Yes, but species survived by no accident, rather by possessing inherited traits enabling their survival. Their ancestors had survived gauntlets that genetically prepared their offspring to inherit the devastated Earth. Of course, ED had no knowledge of scientific advances during the 150+ years since her death, just as we possess no knowledge of advances of the next 150 years. What we do know is that in 2175 AD there will still be new evolution questions to answer.

PS. ED knew her Latin well (F2, “Sic transit gloria mundi”), probably to the depth of fourth-declension-noun plurals such as “apparatus”. Google AI, for whatever it’s worth, tells me the plural of “apparatus” is spelled identically, but the third “a” is pronounced long, as in “curator”. ED did not share that obscure Latin grammar with us 2025 readers, probably assuming our modern educational apparatus would be equal to hers. Anywho, it really helps this nerdy reader enjoy ‘Life, and Death, and Giants —’ more when plural “apparatus” is pronounced with a long third ” a”.

 

Della Gatta, Carla. 2009. Performing for God and “Maintain”ing In His Absence.
Pennsylvania Liteary Journal 1(1): 52-62

780.1863.The Birds reported from the South —

ED copied this poem into Fascicle 37 about late 1863 (Franklin 1998)

ED’s original poem with alternative words and phrases in parentheses.:

The Birds reported from the South –
A News express to Me –
A spicy Charge, My little Posts (friends)-
But I am deaf – To day – (you must go away)

The Flowers – appealed – a timid Throng –
I reinforced (only sealed) the Door –
Go blossom to the Bees – I said –
And trouble (harass) Me – no More –

The Summer Grace, for notice strove –
Remote – Her best Array􀁸
The Heart – to stimulate the Eye
Refused too utterly –

At length, a Mourner, like Myself,
She drew away austere –
Her frosts to ponder – then it was
I recollected (rose to comfort ) Her

She suffered Me, for I had mourned –
I offered Her no word –
My Witness – was the Crape I bore –
Her – Witness – was Her Dead –

Thenceforward – We – together dwelt (walked)-
She – never questioned Me –(I – never questioned Her – )
Nor I – Herself – (Nor She – Myself –)
Our Contract (Compact)
A Wiser (Wordless, silent, speechless) Sympathy

The capitalized “Her” in Stanzas 1,4,5,and 6 clues us that the female gender is camouflage and the poem is really about Reverend Charles Wadsworth, the only name other than “God” that ED honored with capitalized pronouns. He was from Philadelphia, 250 miles south of Amherst (Line 1). ED felt abandoned when he moved to San Francisco in May 1862 and blamed it on him but later learned he moved because his Arch Street Presbyterian congregation would not tolerate his belief that the Bible condoned slavery. The “Crape” in Stanza 5 is camouflage for “White”. Beginning in 1862, ED wore only white to symbolize her pledge to remain faithful to Wadsworth (Stanza 5). For ED’s history with Wadsworth, see the extended comment on poem F652, ‘That I did always love’:

Biographic History of ED and Reverend Charles Wadsworth’.

An interpretation of ‘The Birds reported from the South’ (in italic font):

Stanza 1

The Birds reported from the South  —
A News express to Me —
A spicy Charge, My little Posts —
But I am deaf — Today —

Wadsworth’s letter from Philadelphia,
Told me he was moving to San Francisco.
My replies to Him were angry.
Now I’m deaf to his explanation.

Stanza 2

The Flowers — appealed — a timid Throng —
I reinforced the Door —
Go blossom for the Bees — I said —
And trouble Me — no More —

Wadsworth appealed in timid letters,
I reinforced the door to his pleas
“Go preach to your Calvary Congregation”, I said
And trouble Me — no More —

Stanza 3

The Summer Grace, for Notice strove —
Remote — Her best Array —
The Heart — to stimulate the Eye
Refused too utterly —

Memories of our summer promise to marry in Heaven begged remembrance,
But it was too late, despite Wadsworth’s best efforts.
My heart tried to convince my head, but
Failed utterly.

Stanza 4

At length, a Mourner, like Myself,
She drew away austere —
Her frosts to ponder — then it was
I recollected Her —

At length, a Mourner, like Myself,
He drew away austere,
His frosts to ponder, and then it was
I forgave Him.

Stanza 5

She suffered Me, for I had mourned —
I offered Her no word —
My Witness — was the Crape I bore —
Her — Witness — was Her Dead —

He apologized, for I had mourned —
I offered Him no word;
My Witness was the White I bore;
His Witness was dead dreams.

Stanza 6

Thenceforward — We — together dwelt —
I never questioned Her —
Our Contract
A Wiser Sympathy

Thenceforward, we corresponded;
I never questioned Him.
Our Agreement was
A Wiser Sympathy

What I can do – I will –
Though it be little as a Daffodil –
That I cannot – must be
Unknown to possibility –

If  ‘What I can do – I will’  sounds familiar, here’s the original version of the ‘Serenity Prayer’, currently attributed to American theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr (Wygal 1932):

• “The victorious man in the day of crisis is the man who has the serenity to accept what he cannot help and the courage to change what must be altered.”

Rearranged and reformatted, Niebuhr’s ‘Serenity Prayer’ matches exactly ED’s poem, idea-for-idea:

• The victorious man in the day of crisis
  Is the man who has the courage to change what must be altered
  And the serenity to accept
  What he cannot help

This poem, ‘What I can do – I will’ (Fr461, “late 1863”, Franklin), suggests that after more than two years of healing, ED was emerging from her well documented episode of depression and “terror”:

• “I had a terror – since September [1861]– I could tell to none – and so I sing, as the Boy does by the Burying Ground, because I am afraid.” (L338 to Thomas Wentworth Higginson, April 28, 1862).

My hypothesis is that ED’s “terror” began when Rev. Charles Wadsworth told her he was considering a move to San Francisco to rescue the failing 10-year-old Calvary Presbyterian Church. He sailed from New York Harbor with his family on May 1, 1862. He more than exceeded Calvary’s wildest hopes; even anti-Christian Mark Twain attended and praised his sermons.

Did Niebuhr read ED’s newly published (1/1/1929) book of poems? In 1929, Winnifred C. Wygal was a graduate student at Union Theological Seminary attending Reinhold Niebuhr’s lectures. She was the first to notice the similarity of Niebuhr’s prayer and ED’s poem (Wygal’s diary entry Oct. 31, 1932).

As further circumstantial evidence that Niebuhr may had read ED’s newly published book of poems, later in 1929 Niebuhr wrote:

• “[R]eligion is poetry . . . religion [becomes] more compelling when vivified by adequate poetic symbols than by the poor prose of the average preacher.”
• The ultimate nature of reality cannot be grasped by science alone; poetic imagination is as necessary as scientific precision.”
• “How can an age which is so devoid of poetic imagination as ours be truly religious?”

.

References

Dickinson, Emily. The Letters of Emily Dickinson (2024). Eds. Cristanne Miller and Domhnall Mitchell. Harvard University Press. Kindle Edition.

Niebuhr, Reinhold, 1929, ‘Leaves from the Notebook of a Tamed Cynic’, Chicago, Willett, Clark, and Colby.

David R. Bains. 2004. ‘Conduits of Faith: Reinhold Niebuhr’s Liturgical Thought’. Church History, Mar., 2004, 73(1): 168-194.

Death sets a Thing significant
The Eye had hurried by
Except a perished Creature
Entreat us tenderly

To ponder little workmanships
In Crayon – or in wool –
With “This was last Her fingers did” —
Industrious until —

The Thimble weighed too heavy —
The stitches stopped —themselves —
And then ’twas put among the Dust
Upon the Closet shelves —

A Book I have — a friend gave —
Whose Pencil — here and there —
Had notched the place that pleased Him —
At Rest — His fingers are —

Now — when I read — I read not —
For interrupting Tears —
Obliterate the Etchings
Too Costly for Repairs.

Stanza 1 sets us up with contrasting responses to mementos of dead acquaintances, both close friends who treated us tenderly and those who, though generous, didn’t leave mementos of what we needed most during childhood and adolescence, unconditional nurturing and encouragement.

Stanza 2 gives examples of mementos left by dead friends and family, a child’s “Crayon” drawings, a knitted wool sweater. Then death stopped the crayons and the “stitches”, and the mementos, now forgotten, gather dust on closet shelves. Exceptions are gifts from someone who treated us “tenderly”. Those mementos bring tears to our eyes, leave teardrop stains on book pages, metaphorically “Too Costly for Repairs” because of our memories of being “Entreated tenderly” by those who loved us deeply.

This poem, while perhaps superficially sentimental, hints at inner neediness and a limited ability to love.

…………………………….

Indirect evidence suggests the “Book” (Line 13) was Emerson’s ‘Poems’ (1847), which Benjamin Franklin Newton gave ED in 1850:

“She [ED] wrote her friend Jane Humphrey in January, 1850, ‘I had a letter-and Ralph Emerson’s Poems – a beautiful copy – from Newton the other day. I should love to read you them both – they are very pleasant to me’ [Letter L30]. Benjamin Newton, a student in her father’s law office, is the ‘dying Tutor’. Dickinson mentions in her third letter to Higginson, June 7, 1862 [Letter L265], the friend who encouraged her to be a poet and whose gift of Emerson’s Poems of 1847 she treasured. The two events – Newton’s – encouragement to write and her discovery of Emerson as poet – became closely associated in her mind as seminal for her own art . . . .” (Mann 1978, p 470)

Thomas H. Johnson (1955) had this to say:

“In the late Forties Benjamin Franklin Newton was a law student in the office of Emily’s father, Edward Dickinson. . . . Ben Newton had been one of Emily Dickinson’s earliest “preceptors,” and his memory always remained with her. Newton awakened in her a response to intellectual independence and a delight in literature which later made her call him the “friend who taught me Immortality”. . . . .

“It would thus appear that when Emily Dickinson was about twenty years old her latent talents were invigorated by a gentle, grave young man [Benjamin Franklin Newton] who taught her how to observe the world. Their friendship was cut off by his early death [in 1853]. She made the statement to Higginson that “for several years” after her tutor’s death her lexicon was her only companion. Perhaps during the five years after Newton’s death she was trying to fashion verses in a desultory manner. Her muse had left the land and she must await the coming of another. That event occurred in [1855] in the person of Charles Wadsworth.”

Thomas H. Johnson. 1955. The Poems of Emily Dickinson. Harvard Belknap Press, Vol. 1 of three volumes, p.xx of 1266 pp.

John S. Mann. 1978. Emily Dickinson. Emerson, and the Poet as Namer. The New England Quarterly 51(4): 467-488.

ED’s alternate words are in (parentheses). Verse-by-verse interpretations are in [brackets]. Presumably, in Stanza 4, if posthumous “Honor . . . . is the Second Gain”, the First Gain is Self-Honor, while the poet lives:

Had I presumed to hope —
The loss had been to Me
A Value — for the Greatness’ Sake —
As Giants — gone (claimed) away —

[Had I presumed to hope for fame before I died —
The lack of that fame would have been to me,
A valuable lesson, because such fame —
Would have been a flash — it would have soon vanished —]

Had I presumed to gain
A Favor so remote —
The failure but confirm the Grace
In further Infinite —

[Had I presumed it possible to gain
Such Earthly fame —
The failure would confirm the grace
In further waiting for readers to discover my poems —]

‘Tis failure — not of Hope —
But Confident (diligent, resolute) Despair —
Advancing on Celestial Lists —
With faint — Terrestrial power —

[Lack of lifetime fame — is not a failure —
Rather it creates confidence that my poetry will be discovered —
Composing before death advances a poet’s posthumous place among great poets —
Though my efforts — depend on mere terrestrial powers — ]

‘Tis Honor — though I die —
For That no Man obtain
Till He be justified by Death —
This — is the Second Gain —

[‘Tis honor while I live — though I will die —
To labor for that fame, even if it
Be unattainable before I die —
Posthumous fame — is the Second Gain —]