Kenzie’s CS for March 23

In class today, we spent some time anlayzing different versions of poem 80. Each version where a comma was added or a dash was removed added a different meaning to the line or stanza of the poem. I found this particularly interesting when analyzing this four line poem because as we kept listing the small changes and their attached meanings, it made it very clear that even a small edit regarding grammar or punctuation can greatly affect the poem’s original content. In class we also talked about a feeling of loss when reading the article, “Editorial History I. Beginnings to 1955”, written by Martha Nell Smith. Throughout the article, Smith wrote out various ways Dickinson’s work was ripped apart, pieced back together, and heavily edited by various figures such as Todd, Higginson, Bianchi, and Bingham. Stanzas were excised and heavily edited due to Dickinson’s experimental use of punctuation, rhyme, and grammar. 

One of the most upsetting things I personally read in this article was regarding Dickinson’s manuscripts and how “Todd ripped it apart, cutting leaves up and inking over poetic expression, all in an effort to obliterate Dickinson’s love for her sister-in-law” (277). This article and the analysis we did in class showcased the lack of care many editors took in editing Dickinson’s work. The discussion we had in class regarding the heavy edits of her poetry enticed me to choose another poem we read for class today and try and anlayze the various edits and changes of poem 121. In the same archive, I found three other versions with various edits and word changes that I think effect the poem’s meaning. For example, I found that the fifth line had various changes, such as the replacement of the word “home” with “rest”, or writing home as “home” in the F121A version. This focus on changing home to two other variations is interesting because home feels safe and familiar, whereas rest seems more distant and reserved. What changes do you notice throughout these four different versions? What remains consistent throughout each poem and what changed? Can you apply this feeling of loss we had to this poem as well? I’m really interested to see what you guys find in these poems and what changes you end up tracking.

In the R.W Franklin version:

Her breast is fit for pearls, 

But I was not a “Diver.”

Her brow is fit for thrones –

But I had not a crest.

Her heart is fit for home –

I – a sparrow – build there

Sweet of twigs and twine

My perennial nest. 

In the Johnson poems 1955 edition (J84): 

Her breast is fit for pearls,

But I was not a “Diver” —

Her brow is fit for thrones

But I have not a crest.

Her heart is fit for home —

I — a Sparrow — build there

Sweet of twigs and twine

My perennial nest.

In the Franklin Variorum 1998:(F121A)

Her breast is fit for pearls,

But I was not a “Diver” –

Her brow is fit for thrones

But I have not a crest.

Her heart is fit for home –

I – a Sparrow – build there

Sweet of twigs and twine

My perennial nest.

In the Franklin Variorum 1998: F121B

Her breast is fit for pearls,

But I was not a “Diver.”

Her brow is fit for thrones –

But I had not a crest.

Her heart is fit for rest –

I – a sparrow – build there

Sweet of twigs and twine

My perrennial nest.