Jim Asher's Blog

Dickinson v. Dickinson?

Recently I posted two blog entries on teaching "word choice" (see the entries dated August 12th and 13th). Prior to that, I wrote about a comparison of two different "complete" editions of Emily Dickinson poetry, one published in 1955 by Thomas H. Johnson and the other in 1998 by R. W. Franklin (see my blog posts dated July 25th, 27th, 30th, and 31st). Today, I combine the two ideas -- with teaching word choice with different versions of poems by Emily Dickinson.

In my blog entry dated 7/30 I said,

I think these different adaptations (of Dickinson poems) offer teachers of writing and poetry a unique opportunity to have students explore the development and progression of the writing and artistic process. What mood is evoked through the use of one word versus another? How does the poet’s message change by shifting the placement of a word, a phrase or a sentence? What different direction does a poem’s meaning take with the use of one image or metaphor as opposed to another? Teachers can have students examine and explore these kinds of questions using Dickinson’s own variations.

I'm about half-way through the Johnson/Franklin books, and here are a few Dickinson poems you can use with students to explore/discuss differences:

J 41 / F 57: I robbed the woods
Besides a few differences w/word choice, a major difference is the shift from 1st person to 3rd person pornouns.

J 57 / F 55: To venerate the simple days
The Franklin edition includes additional lines.

J 216 / F 124: Safe in their Alabaster Chambers

J 217 / F 295: Savior! I've no one else to tell

J 311 / F 291: It sifts from Leaden Sieves

J 341 / F 372: After great pain, a formal feeling comes
Only lines 6 & 7 are switched-- does it make a difference?

J 446 / F 344: I showed her Heights, she never saw

There are others -- but these poems with their differences jumped out at me. I've compared about 750 poems in the Johnson & Franklin editions, so later when I finish comparing all of them, I'll let you know if I come across other Dickinson poems with different versions in the two books.

The Importance of Word Choice -- Part 2

On August 12, 2012, I posted a blog entry with a lesson on teaching the importance of word choice. Below are some other activities that support that lesson. The final one includes the poem Dear Mrs. McKinney of the Sixth Grade, by David Kheridan.


A. Prepare a chart with the ten words below. One column in the chart should be labeled, “Does the word describe you?” and students should respond “yes” or “no.” Then the students should look up synonyms for each word. The next column in the chart should be labeled, “Are there synonyms of the word that describe you? If so, list them here.” The final column on the chart should say, “Are there synonyms of the word that do NOT describe you? If so, list them here.” Once students have completed their charts, they can discuss the words, their synonyms, and the different shades of meaning with each-- and why it is that certain synonyms describe them and others don't.

Here are the ten words :

Competitive
Enthusiastic
Independent
Bashful
Imaginative
Casual
Assertive
Critical
Calm
Determined

B. In a similar exercise to “B” above, have the students create a chart with a list of ten words that describe themselves. Then have them fill in the other columns (as above) with synonyms of the words that either do or do NOT define them.

C. Have the students read the poem below, Dear Mrs. McKinney of the Sixth Grade. After reading the poem, have them list synonyms for the following words from the poem (I have noted the words in bold in the poem):

Favorite
Stern
Austere
Objective
Patient
Respect
Punishment

For each of the words, have students write about or discuss the differences in meanings between the words that poet David Kherdian used and the words’ synonyms. Other questions for discussion: “What words (anywhere in the poem) did Kherdian use that you think are particularly effective? Why? Are there words you would change and replace with a synonym? If so, give examples and explain why.”

Here’s the poem :

Hands down, you were my favorite
teacher at Garfield Elementary,
or at any school since:
your stern, austere face, that
held an objective judgment of
everything in charge;
the patient way you taught,
out of a deep belief and respect
for learning,
and the good books you chose
to read aloud –
in particular, Mark Twain;
and the punishment you handed
out (a twin cheek twist, just
once, with forefingers and thumbs)
embarrassed us only because
we had failed ourselves,
for we had wisely learned from you
the need for discipline and regard.

Long after I left that place
I saw you once waiting for a bus,
and though I returned your warm
smile, I hurried on.
Why didn’t I stop, as I could
see you wanted me to? I deeply
regretted it for weeks, and there
are moments when I remember it still.
And nothing, not poem, not time,
not anything for which I might
stand proud, can erase that seeming
failure of feelings and regard on
my part.
I loved you, I really did, and I
wish now that in stopping and chatting
with you for a moment I could have
shown it to you then,
instead of now, in this poem,
in which only time and loss, not
you and I, are the subject to be held.


D. Have students compare the following pairs of sentences and write or discuss explanations as to how the meanings of each pair changes by using the words in bold.

1a. Mary wears old-fashioned clothes.
1b. Mary wears outdated clothes.

2a. Ben’s comments angered Shawn.
2b. Ben’s comments enraged Shawn.

3a. Marva negotiated with the salesperson.
3b. Marva haggled with the salesperson.

4a. Jim took the pen from Waylon.
4b. Jim snatched the pen from Waylon.

5a. Monica is stingy with her money.
5b. Monica is careful with her money.

6a. Ben’s comedy act was amusing.
6b. Ben’s comedy act was hilarious.

7a. The child is alone.
7b. The child is lonely.

8a. Ann had a plan to raise the money.
8b. Ann had a scheme to raise the money.

The Importance of Word Choice -- Part 1

In several recent blog entries entitled “The Case of Johnson v. Franklin,” I compared Thomas H. Johnson’s 1955 collection of Emily Dickinson poetry to R. W. Franklin’s 1998 edition. In the entry dated July 30, 2012, I suggested that

these different adaptations offer teachers of writing and poetry a unique opportunity to have students explore the development and progression of the writing and artistic process. What mood is evoked through the use of one word versus another? How does the poet’s message change by shifting the placement of a word, a phrase or a sentence? What different direction does a poem’s meaning take with the use of one image or metaphor as opposed to another? Teachers can have students examine and explore these kinds of questions using Dickinson’s own variations.

A great way to introduce such lessons and discussion is an activity that starts with a scavenger hunt and ends with an examination of the importance of word choice. Here’s what to do:

1) Go to a hardware store and get multi-shaded paint color strips for each student.

2) Allow students a specified amount of time to find objects in the room that match – or closely match – the shades on the strips. If possible, the students should collect items to present to the class at the end of the scavenger hunt. If this is not possible (i.e., an item is too large, etc.), then the students should record names/descriptions of the items on paper to report to the class.

3) When the time limit is up, allow for some “show and tell.” What did the students find? Discuss how closely the colors of the objects match the shades on the paint strips. Do some objects match exactly? Which items are a close match? Ask, “If you had ordered that object to be the color on the paint strip, and it arrived the color that it is, would you be satisfied? What if it arrived this color…or that color?” [Point to deeper or lighter shades of the same color.]

4) After the discussion, turn the focus to color words. For example, ask who is wearing anything red. What shades do the students have on which they identify as red? Are there other words for “red” that would more accurately describe the colors which the students are wearing? [Ex: crimson, maroon, scarlet, brick, etc.]

5) Next, discuss the following: “When a person uses the word ‘red,’ one person might think of the color of rubies; another may picture the color of bricks. The same is true when we use other words – not just color words.” Then have the students consider the following two sentences:

• Joe was late to class. He was tardy by five minutes.
• Joe was late to class. He was delayed by five minutes.

Ask, “What does ‘tardy’ make you think versus ‘delayed’?”

6) Here are some additional examples you can use:

• George is a trusting person.
• George is a gullible person.
• George is a naive person.
• George is a unsuspecting person.

• Chris and Pat love to chatter.
• Chris and Pat love to gossip.
• Chris and Pat love to blab.
• Chris and Pat love to tattle.

Obviously, the scavenger hunt with the color chips and the discussion of color words and synonyms are lead-ins to further examination of the significance and importance of word choice. I have other examples and approaches to continue this study, so I’ll share more in my next entry.

What Makes A Reliable Source -- Part 3

In my blog posts dated August 3rd and 7th, I wrote about two classroom activities for teaching the idea of “what makes a source reliable?” Often times I would follow those two lessons with an analysis of Robert Frost’s poem Out, out – :

The buzz saw snarled and rattled in the yard
And made dust and dropped stove-length sticks of wood,
Sweet-scented stuff when the breeze drew across it.
And from there those that lifted eyes could count
Five mountain ranges one behind the other
Under the sunset far into Vermont.
And the saw snarled and rattled, snarled and rattled,
As it ran light, or had to bear a load.
And nothing happened: day was all but done.
Call it a day, I wish they might have said
To please the boy by giving him the half hour
That a boy counts so much when saved from work.
His sister stood beside him in her apron
To tell them "Supper." At the word, the saw,
As if it meant to prove saws know what supper meant,
Leaped out at the boy's hand, or seemed to leap -
He must have given the hand. However it was,
Neither refused the meeting. But the hand!
Half in appeal, but half as if to keep
The life from spilling. Then the boy saw all -
Since he was old enough to know, big boy
Doing a man's work, though a child at heart -
He saw all was spoiled. "Don't let him cut my hand off -
The doctor, when he comes. Don't let him, sister!"
So. The hand was gone already.
The doctor put him in the dark of ether.
He lay and puffed his lips out with his breath.
And then - the watcher at his pulse took a fright.
No one believed. They listened to his heart.
Little - less - nothing! - and that ended it.
No more to build on there. And they, since they
Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs.


Of course, you might wonder why I share this particular poem with the students after our examination of what makes a source reliable. According to Frost’s biographers, the event that prompted Frost to write this poem was reported in the following news item in The Littleton Courier, a New Hampshire newspaper, on March 31, 1910:

Raymond Tracy Fitzgerald, one of the twin sons of Michael G. And Margaret Fitzgerald of Bethlehem, died at his home Thursday afternoon, March 24, as a result of an accident by which one of his hands was badly hurt in a sawing machine. The young man was assisting in sawing up some wood in his own dooryard with a sawing machine and accidentally hit the loose pulley, causing the saw to descend upon his hand, cutting and lacerating it badly. Raymond was taken into the house and a physician was immediately summoned, but he died very suddenly from the effects of the shock, which produced heart failure.

Here is how I usually present the poem and article:

1) First I read just a portion of the poem, until about the 9th line or the word “Supper” in the 14th line. Then I stop and ask the students about the elements of poetry to that point (onomatopoeia, imagery, alliteration, etc.) and what they think they think is going to happen.

2) After a short discussion, I finish the poem. The students are always quite startled by how the poem ends. Again, we discuss the elements of poetry, and Frost’s meaning and implications in the poem – especially through the seemingly insensitive final line, “And they, since they / Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs.”

3) Next, I ask them what they think the title means. Usually they have no idea. I provide quite a bit of wait time for the students to ponder, and sometimes some of them do offer ideas, but generally they are unsure about the title, Out, out –

4) Before I divulge the meaning of the title, I share the newspaper article about the death of Raymond Fitzgerald. At that point, I ask about the elements of reporting a journalist should include in writing about such an incident and/or any news-worthy item. I tie this to the previous lesson of reliability, and we compare/contrast what facts, opinions, details and images a reporter would include versus a poet.

Some possible questions:

• Many details in the poem could not properly be included in a newspaper story because they are inferences and opinions rather than facts. What are examples of these details? Why does the poem omit certain details that the newspaper account includes?

• What lines, phrases, and words in the poem hit at the catastrophe to come?

• The accident is shocking, but it is not so plainly detailed as to be gruesome. How does Frost handle/avoid horrific details?

• Do the last two lines of the poem mean that the family does not care about the boy? How else can one account for their seeming callousness?

5) After a comparison of the elements of a poem versus a newspaper account, I usually have the students write a poem tied to a current newspaper account of their choice and/or I would have them write a news account of a poem. Later I would have them present their works, and we would again compare/contrast the elements of reliable reporting versus the features of creative writing.

6) Finally, I would re-ask about the title of the poem. After any discussion of the ideas offered, I would share Shakespeare’s lines from “MacBeth” (Act V, Scene 5):

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.

7) Following some discussion of Shakespeare’s lines, I would then share the lyrics to Candle in the Wind, Elton John’s ode to Marilyn Monroe – and the altered lyrics to the same song in his tribute to Lady Diana. Both of these versions of the song can be tied to the study of the news accounts of both women – how factual and/or sensational are the reports of their lives and their accidental deaths? What facts did Elton John include and/or embellish in his songs? How “reliable” and/or “creative” must a reporter, lyricist, or poet be?

What Makes A Reliable Source -- Part 2

On August 3rd I posted a blog entry with an idea on how to teach and determine with students the criteria for a reliable source—certainly an important skill if students are to read historical documents, interpret analytical texts, report current news events, conduct research or evaluate websites. I’ve even used the activity in conjunction with a quick follow-up lesson (described below) prior to a discussion of Robert Frost’s poem, “Out, out–” (and I’ll explain that connection later).

The follow-up activity involves eight situations (or more if you add your own), and a table to rate the reliability of each one:

A. First, make a table of 9 columns and 11 rows (or more if you add your own situations/statements and/or criteria).

B. Next, create a header for the top row of the table as follows: Column 1 should be titled “CRITERIA,” and then the other columns should be numbered 1 through 8 (for the eight statements). Then, the fields in the first column should be labeled as follows:

• The observer has first-hand knowledge.
• Observer is considered an expert/authority in this field.
• Observer is careful.
• Observer is impartial; has no vested or emotional interest.
• Observer is honest.
• Observer is skilled in the area in question.
• Observer’s credentials are known or can be verified.
• The statement is recorded.
• The statement is recent/timely.
• The statement is verified or corroborated.

C. Using this chart, have students read the situations below and check which criteria are true for each of the eight:

1. Dr. Green examined the patient closely, took X-rays, wrote on the chart, and then gave the patient good news!

2. Transportation Secretary Andrea Clark told reporters 30 minutes after the deadline that the striking air traffic controllers’ demands would not be met.

3. Robert Redford, the movie actor, reported that automobile traffic in the Yosemite Valled is causing pollution which is destroying the trees.

4. The police officer reported, “A man wearing a Mickey Mouse T-shirt handed a note to the teller at the South Coast Plaza Bank.”

5. My sister told me she was a passenger in her friend’s car last night, driving to the movies, when a truck hit the car from behind. She took the license number of the truck and reported the accident to the police.

6. Our insurance man, Hal Blakely, told me that since we have a new governor, taxes will be going up.

7. Lady Gaga has signed a deal to make three movies with Justin Timbelake, according to the clerk at the Sear’s store in the mall.

8. My hairdresser’s husband works for a man who cuts trees, and he told her that the record temperatures this past summer will mean significantly higher prices for all the produce at the grocery store—so be prepared to pay more for everything you eat!

D. Once students have completed their charts, discuss their work. Do they all agree? Are there areas of disagreement? Why?

Once I’ve worked through these two activities (the one above and the one described in my 8/3 entry), I then introduced Robert Frost’s poem, “Out, out–”, and I’ll explain how I make that connection next time!

What Makes A Reliable Source -- Part 1

Below is a fun lesson to use with students about determining what makes a source "reliable", but first...

If it's on the Internet, it must be true? Right? Have your students check out Dog Island. Or have them Google-search Emmett Lee Dickinson, Emily Dickinson's third cousin, twice removed (at her request). They can even check out artifacts from the Emmett Lee Dickinson Museum here. It's all on the Internet-- so it must be true!

Before you begin teaching how to check the reliability of a website (or any other source), try this quick activity on what makes someone "reliable" in the first place:

A. Distribute the following scenario to your students:

There has been a serious plane crash in which a light plane clipped the right wing of a jumbo jet. A federal government commission has been set up to investigate the accident. As a clerk for the investigative committee, it is your job to sift through a list of those who wish to appear before the committee to give evidence and to decide which ones should be called to give reliable data to the government commission.

Below is a list of witnesses and (in some cases) the location of the witnesses at the time of the accident. I would like you to circle the names of those sources whom you believe could supply the most reliable data; circle EIGHT of the sources. Beside each name on the list, give reasons why you chose the circled names and did not choose the ones not circled.

B. Then provide this list of possible witnesses:

1. Captain of the jet's flight crew
2. Pilot of the small plane (who bailed out prior to impact)
3. Steward on the jet who was in the galley preparing food at the time of impact
4. Passenger #1 (who was sitting on the left front side of the jet)
5. Passenge #2 (who was sitting over the left wing)
6. Air traffic controller
7. Airline official in the terminal
8. Manufacturer of the light plane
9. Widow of a man who was killed in the crash
10. Representative of the aircraft insurance company
11. Federal Aviation Administration official who inspected both aircraft after the crash
12. Pathologist who performed autopsies on those killed in the accident
13. Farmer who was plowing his field below the site of the crash
14. Steward on the jet who was in the cockpit at the time of the crash
15. Film crew from a local TV company who shot film of the crash from their helicopter

C. Have students work individually or in pairs. The key to the entire lesson is that students must document WHY they circled (or did not circle) names as possible witnesses.

D. When students (or pairs of students) are ready, have them discuss which EIGHT of the possible witnesses were selected. Be sure to have them explain WHY they picked or did not pick someone. The important part here is not the answer -- but the reasoning! If "better" persons are on the list as possible witnesses, what makes them "better."

As they compare/debate their answers and explain their reasons "why," have the students formulate a list as to who/what makes a reliable source. Here are some of the characteristics (among others) that they will propose:

* First Hand Knowledge (a participant)
* Direct Observation (a witness)
* Expertise -- one skilled in the area
* Unemotional Information (the person has no vested interest in outcomes)
* Timely Information
* Factual Information -- not opinionated
* Corroborated Evidence (especially when corrobrated by others with expertise)
* A Reputation for Truthfulness & Accuracy

Once your students have worked through and discussed this activity, you now have shared background knowledge and vocabulary as to what makes a reliable source.

Next time -- a related exercise on "what makes a reliable source," and how I've followed these activities with a lesson using the poem, "Out, out-" by Robert Frost.

The Case of Johnson v. Franklin -- Part 4

If you’ve been following my “Johnson v. Franklin” blog posts (July 25, 27 and 30), you know that I’ve been comparing The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson, edited by Thomas H. Johnson, to The Poems of Emily Dickinson, edited by R. W. Franklin. This all started when I found out that more than a dozen poems by Dickinson had been discovered after the 1955 publication date of Johnson’s collection, and that the missing poems were now to be found in Franklin’s anthology.

I started my appraisal of the two books a couple of weeks ago, and the most obvious difference between the Johnson and Franklin collections is the ordering and numbering of the poems (discussed in my first post on July 25). However, I was surprised to uncover many other differences in the poems as they appear in both volumes. Variations between poems (that is, a specific poem in Johnson’s book compared to the same poem in Franklin’s book) range from the negligible (with very minor differences in capitalization or punctuation) to the noteworthy (with substantial alterations to structure, lines, images and/or other elements).

Of course, as you know, my examination of the Franklin and Johnson collections began with a mystery: Why wasn’t Fly – fly – but as you fly in my “complete” volume of Emily Dickinson poetry? While I did resolve that issue, I have to relate that my investigation of the two anthologies – at least to this point – ends with yet another (and greater?) mystery: there are poems in Johnson’s 1955 volume that do NOT appear in Franklin’s book – which asserts on its back cover,
“Ralph Franklin, the foremost scholar of Dickinson’s manuscripts, has prepared an authoritative one-volume edition of all extant poems by Emily Dickinson – 1,789 poems in all, the largest number ever assembled.” If so, then why are poems from the Johnson text not included in the Franklin?

When I started this analysis, I began – very appropriately so – with the first poem in each book, Awake ye muses nine, sing me a strain divine, J 1 and F 1. Then I turned to J 2, There is another sky, with its earliest known manuscript date noted by Johnson as 1851. However, this poem is NOT included in Franklin’s book. As a matter of fact, Franklin’s book doesn’t include any poem with a manuscript date of 1851. Both editors report 1850 as the date for the first poem, but then Franklin’s collection moves to 1852.

Much to my surprise, I soon discovered that other poems from Johnson’s volume are missing from Franklin’s collection:

• I would distil a cup, J 16
• A darting fear – a pomp – a tear, J 87
• While Asters, J 331

I don’t know why these poems are not included in the “authoritative one-volume edition of all extant poems by Emily Dickinson.” Once again, I’m confused and perplexed.

For now, I’ll keep comparing the Johnson and Franklin collections. Perhaps continued analysis of the two anthologies will get to the bottom of this new mystery. Stay tuned.

The Case of Jackson v. Franklin -- Part 3

On July 25 and 27 I posted blog entries about the similarities and differences of two “complete” volumes Emily Dickinson poetry, one edited by Thomas H. Johnson, and another edited by R. W. Franklin. I started this appraisal of the two books when I discovered that my copy of Johnson’s collection, published in 1955, did not include additional poems by Dickinson that had been discovered late in the twentieth century.

Of course the most discernible difference between the two volumes is the ordering and numbering system employed by the two editors (see my post dated 7/25). Other differences range from minor changes in spelling and punctuation to substantial modifications in structure, word choice, and complete lines and stanzas (due to the process each editor used in selecting alternate versions of Dickinson’s poems to publish).

I have to admit, as I was comparing the poems in the two books, I was even surprised to discover a subtle difference in two different versions of “After great pain, a formal feeling comes” (J 342 and F 374). See if you can spot it.

Here is the version in Johnson’s book :

After great pain, a formal feeling comes –
The Nerves sit ceremonious, like Tombs –
The stiff Heart questions was it He, that bore,
And Yesterday, or Centuries before?

The Feet, mechanical, go round –
Of Ground, or Air, or Ought –
A Wooden way
Regardless grown,
A Quartz contentment, like a stone –

This is the Hour of Lead –
Remembered, if outlived,
As Freezing persons, recollect the Snow –
First – Chill – then Stupor – then the letting go –

Here is the poem as it appears in Franklin’s collection :

After great pain, a formal feeling comes –
The Nerves sit ceremonious, like Tombs –
The stiff Heart questions ‘was it He, that bore,’
And ‘Yesterday, or Centuries before’?

The Feet, mechanical, go round –
A Wooden way
Of Ground, or Air, or Ought –
Regardless grown,
A Quartz contentment, like a stone –

This is the Hour of Lead –
Remembered, if outlived,
As Freezing persons, recollect the Snow –
First – Chill – then Stupor – then the letting go –


Franklin’s version of the poem, of course, added single quotation marks in the first stanza to indicate the stiff Heart’s questions: “was it He, that bore,” and “Yesterday, or Centuries before.” But other than that new punctuation, the poems are almost identical – except for one other interesting modification. Did you spot the altered line order in the second stanza? Which order do you prefer? Why?

Typically, both Johnson and Franklin included a single version of each poem. However, in a few cases, Johnson included a second adaptation. For example, he included two adaptations of “Safe in their Alabaster Chambers” (J 216), one from 1859 and the other from 1861. The poem from 1861 matches the one Franklin’s book (F 124), although Franklin has the poem dated 1859.

Johnson also included two variations of “Going to Him! Happy Letter!” (J 494). Both poems date from 1862, but only the first version appears in Franklin’s book (F 277) – and Franklin’s copy seems to have remained true to Dickinson’s spellings (for example “did’nt” versus “didn’t”; “was’nt” instead of “wasn’t”; and “Boddice” in place of “Bodice”) and structure (for example, “And begged to be ended –
What would it hinder – so – to say?” appears in two lines instead of the one line in Johnson’s version).

I’m not sure why Johnson decided to include two versions of some poems but not for most others. Why two renderings of J 216 and J 494 (mentioned above) but not J 217 (“Savior! I’ve no one else to tell”), J 311 (“It sifts from Leaden Sieves”), or others? However, whether comparing two versions from the Johnson text or by contrasting one version in Johnson to another in Franklin, I think these different adaptations offer teachers of writing and poetry a unique opportunity to have students explore the development and progression of the writing and artistic process. What mood is evoked through the use of one word versus another? How does the poet’s message change by shifting the placement of a word, a phrase or a sentence? What different direction does a poem’s meaning take with the use of one image or metaphor as opposed to another? Teachers can have students examine and explore these kinds of questions using Dickinson’s own variations. After all, it was Dickinson, herself, who said in J 412 / F 432:

I read my sentence – steadily –
Reviewed it with my eyes,
To see that I made no mistake
In it’s extremest clause –


Well, I’ve veered off track a bit from my discussion of poems found in Johnson’s collection compared to those in Franklin’s, and there is still one very perplexing mystery I’ve uncovered. I’ll try to wrap up my take on this topic next time and reveal that final riddle.

The Case of Johnson v. Franklin -- Part 2

In my Goodreads blog post on July 25, 2012, I began a discussion about the differences between two “complete” volumes of Emily Dickinson’s poetry, one edited by Thomas H. Johnson, and another edited by R. W. Franklin.

A major difference between the two books, of course, is that poems were discovered after Johnson’s 1955 anthology, so Franklin’s includes more than a dozen additional poems. Plus, the two editors had dissimilar criteria for ordering the poems (explained in my 7/25 post), so many of them differ beyond an alternate number. Some of them vary almost insignificantly (for example, a capital letter in place of a lower case one). Others have different structures, word choice, or both. Still others change significantly. For example, check out the differences between two versions of “It sifts from Leaden Sieves,” (J 311 and F 291, both from 1862).

Here’s the version in Johnson’s book:

It sifts from Leaden Sieves –
It powders all the Wood.
It fills with Alabaster Wool
The Wrinkles of the Road –

It makes an Even Face
Of Mountain, and of Plain –
Unbroken Forehead from the East
Unto the East again –

It reaches to the Fence –
It wraps it Rail by Rail
Till it is lost in Fleeces –
It deals Celestial Vail

To Stump, and Stack – and Stem –
A Summer’s empty Room –
Acres of Joint, where Harvests were,
Recordless, but for them –

It Ruffles Wrists of Posts
As Ankles of a Queen –
Then tills its Artisans – like Ghosts –
Denying they have been –


Below is the same poem in the Franklin book. It will be easy to spot differences beyond the fact that the poem was condensed from five stanzas to three:

It sifts from Leaden Sieves –
It powders all the Wood.
It fills with Alabaster Wool
The Wrinkles of the Road –

It scatters like the Birds –
Condenses like a Flock –
Like Juggler’s Figures situates
Upon a baseless Arc –

It traverses yet halts –
Disperses as it stays –
Then curls itself in Capricorn –
Denying that it was –

Another difference with some of Dickinson’s works is that a single poem in Johnson’s book is offered as multiple poems in Franklin’s book. For example, “The Gentian weaves her fringes,” J 18 in Johnson’s book, is a 3 stanza, 19 line poem. In Franklin’s book, the same work is divided into three different poems, F 21 (“The Gentian weaves her fringes”), F22 (“A brief, but patient illness”), and F 23 (“In the name of the Bee”). The sixteen line poem J 20, “Distrustful of the Gentian,” is two eight-line poems for Franklin, F 26 (“Distrustful of the Gentian”) and F 27 (“Flees so the phantom meadow”). A third example is J 22, “All these my banners be.” In Franklin’s volume, the poem is split into three: F 29 (“All these my banners be”), F 30 (“To lose – if one can find again”), and F 31 (“To him who keeps an Orchis’ heart”).

There are other distinctions between similar poems in the two editions. For example, some of the poems in Franklin’s book have titles (not found, as far as I know, for any of the poems in Johnson). F 208, “A feather from the Whippowil” (spelled “Whippoorwill” in the Johnson book, J 161) is titled “Pine Bough.” F 198, “Teach Him – when He makes the names” (also J227), is called “Baby.” Other poems differ by their number of lines. For example, J 57 and F 55 are identical at the start:

To venerate the simple days
Which lead the seasons by –
Needs but to remember
That from you or I,
They may take the trifle
Termed mortality!

The Franklin version, F55, includes a second stanza with five additional lines:

To invest existence with a stately air –
Needs bu to remember
That the Acorn there
Is the egg of forest
For the upper Air!

So far I’ve compared a little over 300 of the poems, and while many do not differ at all (aside from their order and number), others vary substantially. One day (probably later than sooner), I’ll invest in Franklin’s three-volume variorum edition of Dickinson’s work which includes editorial emendations and information on the publication history, including variants, for each poem. I would love to delve deeper into the evolution of Dickinson's work and study the reasons behind the transformations of her poems. And yet, for all the types of variations I’ve mentioned so far, there is still one perplexing mystery between Johnson’s and Franklin’s editions. I’ll divulge that puzzlement next time!

The Case of Johnson v. Franklin

This blog entry continues my discussion of The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson, edited by Thomas H. Johnson, and The Poems of Emily Dickinson, edited by R. W. Franklin (see my Goodreads blog post dated July 23, 2012).


When I found out that The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson edited by Thomas H. Johnson was not, in fact, complete – due to the fact that additional poems were discovered much later than Johnson’s publication date of 1955 – I purchased a copy of R. W. Franklin’s anthology to “complete my collection” of Dickinson’s poems. Recently, I began inspecting the two volumes to see just how different or similar they are. So far, I’ve compared a little over 300 of the poems.

A major difference between the two books is how the two editors ordered and numbered Dickinson’s works. Although both arranged the poems by year, there are significant differences.

Here’s how Johnson organized his volume:

“The date at the left, following each poem, is that conjectured for the earliest known manuscript; that to the right is the date of first publication. The order of the poems is that of the Harvard (variorum) edition. There, where all copies of poems are reproduced, fair copies to recipients are chosen the principal representation.”

Here is some of what Franklin said about the arrangement of his collection:

“The overall organization is chronological, reflecting a new dating and employing a new numbering….The numbering here is that introduced in Poems (1998), from which the texts also derive….About three fourths of the poems exist in a single source. For the rest, with from two to seven sources, the policy has been to choose the latest version of the entire poem, thereby giving to the poet, rather than the editor, the ownership of change.”

As a result of these different approaches, many poems have similar numbers (for example, J 110 is F 111, and J 245 is F 231). However, since the two editors had different methods in selecting which version of a poem to use, not all poems have closely associated numbers (for example, J 984 is F 192; and J 663 is F 274).

In most cases, the numbering is the only difference between a poem in Johnson’s collection versus one in Franklin’s. However, that is not the case for every poem.

MINOR CHANGES

In some cases, poems differ very slightly. For example, there is a very minor alteration in “‘Hope’ is the thing with feathers,” J 254 and F 314: the final line in Johnson’s book includes a capital “M” with the word “Me” (“It asked a crumb – of Me”), and Franklin’s edition has a lower case “m” (“It asked a crumb – of me”). Is such a change significant? If this were an E. E. Cummings’ poem, the answer would be a resounding “Yes!” Is that also the case with a Dickinson poem?

Differences between other poems are not so negligible. For example, consider J 240 and F 262, “Ah, Moon – and Star!” Not only are there changes with how the lines of the poem are structured, the final lines from each vary quite noticeably. In Johnson’s book, the poem ends, “So I can never go!” In Franklin’s, the poem concludes, “And I cannot go!”

MAJOR CHANGES

Other poems differ quite noticeably from one another. Here is J 41:

I robbed the Woods –
The trusting Woods.
The unsuspecting Trees
Brought out their Burs and mosses
My fantasy to please.
I scanned their trinkets curious –
I grasped – I bore away –
What will the solemn Hemlock –
What will the Oak tree say?

Compare that to F 57, and note the altered pronouns – and the different type of tree:

Who robbed the Woods –
The trusting Woods?
The unsuspecting Trees
Brought out their Burs and Mosses –
His fantasy to please –
He scanned their trinkets – curious –
He grasped – he bore away –
What will the solemn Hemlock –
What will the Fir tree – say?

Other poems differ even more significantly. Take a look at J 217:

Savior! I’ve no one else to tell –
And so I trouble thee.
I am the one forgot thee so –
Dost thou remember me?
Nor, for myself, I came so far –
That were the little load –
I brought thee the imperial Heart
I had not strength to hold –
The Heart I carried in my own –
Till mine too heavy grew –
Yet – strangest – heavier since it went –
Is it too large for you?

Compare that to Franklin’s version of the same poem, F 295:

Father – I bring thee – not myself –
That were the little load –
I bring thee the imperial Heart
I had not strength to hold –

The Heart I cherished in my own
Till mine – too heavy grew –
Yet – strangest – heavier – since it went –
Is it too large for you?

In my next blog entry, I’ll continue this discussion and feature a few more of the poems in Johnson and Franklin that vary considerably in structure, in wording, and in both. Plus, I’ve uncovered a few other variations and differences that just might surprise you. Stay tuned!