Literary critic F. O. Matthiessen referred to the American literature written during the period beginning in the early 1830s and carrying through the Civil War (1861-1865) as the “American Renaissance.” For the first time, a distinctively American literary style began to emerge in philosophy, the novel, the short story, and poetry. The most prominent authors from this period were Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Melville, and Nathaniel Hawthorne, all of whom were known for their philosophical prose or brilliant fiction writing. But this period, also known for Westward Expansion and heated debates over the nature of freedom and personhood in the young nation, also produced some of the nineteenth century’s most pioneering poets, Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson.
The differences between these two poets, in terms of both form and content, are readily apparent. Let’s see if we can talk about some of the features of one or both poets here.
Emily Dickinson – 632
One of my favorite poems from Emily Dickinson is 632, “The Brain– is wider than the sky–” It is a very interesting relationship between the sky and people’s mind. Dickinson’s poem highlights not only the extent of our mind but also relates it to the power of God. In this case, I believe she tries to tell us that the source of our brain’s capacity is God.
Dickinson’s poem has three stanzas, and every word is powerful enough to describe what she wants to convey. In her poem, she capitalizes some words that she considered very important. When she describes the brain’s power, she uses nouns like “Sponges” and “Buckets” which specify our capacity of absorcion when we learn. Dickinson’s writing style and themes are hard to understand, but when you read them more than twice, they become fascinating.
Do you think Emily Dickinson had a special reason to write about the extent of our mind? Do you think our mind is wider than the sky?
This is a reply to o.palominorios. As in trying to review for the midterm, I’m understanding the reason more and i believe i can discuss the question that is posted. What is the most interesting is that Emily Dickinson was not a social person. With that said, she wasn’t as exposed to the Renaissance period; the only way to get exposed is really getting out there (but she never left her house….except that one time to visit a church). Which CAN lead us to conclude that she might be the one that started it (radical thought…probably needs more research…wish i have concrete evidence). Her poem, 632, is about spirit, as well as all her other poems. They focus primarily on love and erotic desires; characteristics of the spirit, hence the Renaissance period.
Hi Yuki, I agree with you about Dickinson style of writing. I think she was a great writer. I event think of her as one of the great thinkers that world ever had. However, her poem “The Brain–is wider than the sky–” was not one of her best once because, in my opinion, she declared huge claim and did not prove it of or even try to. Instead, she went on and made even bigger claim and said, “The Brain is just the weight of God”. Also this is a lot of optimism form her.
I believe that Emily Dickinson did have a special reason to write about the extent of our mind. This is because Dickinson spent most of her time at home writing and valued her mind. I think that she wrote about this because of how much she admires and is amazed by what the brain is capable of. I believe that our mind is wider than the sky because it is capable of doing so many things such as learning many things, analyzing many things, and creating many things. The extent of our mind is unlimited and is evident throughout human life in technological advancement. The most amazing and impactful being the world wide web being created just about thirty years ago by a computer scientist. The human mind is capable of so much and is so powerful because of the brain’s unlimited imagination.
I agree with the idea that she believes that the brain is the ultimate object in the world, the almighty never to be stopped creation. However, the thing that concerns me about the poem is that she is a very “in the head” person, which leads me to believe that she would do everything based on thoughts and trust less her emotions or instincts. And because she puts the brain as the ultimate all powerful relic, it shows she is very narcissist.
Emily Dickinson style of writing her poems is quite unusual, the dashes make not much sense to me. I believe that they were not meant to serve any purpose at all but are somewhat used as her signature that her work makes me easily recognized. I however could be totally wrong. Of all the poems I was drawn to “Much Madness is divinest Sense”. It is a simple poem with a few lines but I believe is is saying so much more than what meets the eye. Dickinson is stating that what many people may view as madness may actually be the most sensible and intellectual thing. I am certain that many inventions which are no valued were first seen as madness because it could not be understood. This poem may be her defending herself from those who thought she was insane but she was very much aware that she was in her right mind but just very misunderstood. She is condemning all those who judge her and the society which she lived in. When sometime did not followthe social order (as she didn’t) it would be “handled with a chain” meaning they would be violently locked away from society because they were “ crazy”. Why do we still today hate the things we cannot understand ?
What do you think when you think about the truth? Is it good to always tell the truth, is it okay to slightly ‘stretch’ the truth? Are white lies really harmless? Emily Dickinson touches on this idea in her short but prolific poem “Tell all the Truth but tell it slant”. She speaks of how the truth may be “too bright”, and that that is possible it is its “superb surprise”. She is saying that the truth could be too much for one to bear at once. This is backed up by the first sentence as well when she says “Tell all truth but tell it slant”. She ends the short poem with “the truth must dazzle gradually or every man be blind”. I think here she is trying to say that the truth must be delicately handled for the truth to really be effective. I agree with Dickinson and think that the truth is something that is as delicate as a flower. Treated right the flower could spark an entire garden to grow and treated wrong it will die and yield nothing. The truth is only as true and good as it’s beholer and method of coming to fruition. Sometimes ‘truth’ needs to be slant, it holds power and with that power comes great responsibility. What do you guys think about truth construing it for the betterment of others?