Help me read this poem, nitpickers wanted

[Pup]

Detail-obsessed nitpickers are perfect for this question.

Here's the manuscript of Emily Dickinson's poem "I started early - Took my Dog"

http://www.edickinson.org/editions/1/image_sets/235928

You can blow it up quite far.

On the first page, in the left margin by the first verse, there's a penciled word or two, looks like it begins with B. What is it?

But my main question is...

On the second page at the end it says "+ Bosom + Buckle + Man". I took that to mean, where there's a plus sign in the poem, substitute this word. For example, just four lines above, it says No+One and the word Man is penciled in. Clearly No One should be No Man.

On the first page, there is a + beside Boddice, third line up from the bottom. She apparently meant that to be Bosom or Buckle. But where is the third plus mark? That's my question. I can't find it.

The only notice taken of this that I've seen is here, 520 line 12, where the editor can't find the third plus either and is unsure what Boddice should be. Everbody else seems to just ignore it.

 

[calebprime]

To bring myself up to speed, I'm posting a version of the poem -- as it's usually published?

from

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/resources/learning/core-poems/detail/50976

I started Early – Took my Dog –
And visited the Sea –
The Mermaids in the Basement
Came out to look at me –

And Frigates – in the Upper Floor
Extended Hempen Hands –
Presuming Me to be a Mouse –
Aground – opon the Sands –

But no Man moved Me – till the Tide
Went past my simple Shoe –
And past my Apron – and my Belt
And past my Boddice – too –

And made as He would eat me up –
As wholly as a Dew
Opon a Dandelion's Sleeve –
And then – I started – too –

And He – He followed – close behind –
I felt His Silver Heel
Opon my Ancle – Then My Shoes
Would overflow with Pearl –

Until We met the Solid Town –
No One He seemed to know –
And bowing – with a Mighty look –
At me – The Sea withdrew –

 

[erwinl]

To bring myself up to speed, I'm posting a version of the poem -- as it's usually published?

from

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/resources/learning/core-poems/detail/50976

I started Early – Took my Dog –
And visited the Sea –
The Mermaids in the Basement
Came out to look at me –

And Frigates – in the Upper Floor
Extended Hempen Hands –
Presuming Me to be a Mouse –
Aground – opon the Sands –

But no Man moved Me – till the Tide
Went past my simple Shoe –
And past my Apron – and my Belt
And past my Boddice – too –

And made as He would eat me up –
As wholly as a Dew
Opon a Dandelion's Sleeve –
And then – I started – too –

And He – He followed – close behind –
I felt His Silver Heel
Opon my Ancle – Then My Shoes
Would overflow with Pearl –

Until We met the Solid Town –
No One He seemed to know –
And bowing – with a Mighty look –
At me – The Sea withdrew –

Ok. I freely admit to having something of a blind spot concerning poems.

But what is this?
I mean. The words are English. The senteces as well.

But the total? Does it mean anything at all?

 

[Pup]

To bring myself up to speed, I'm posting a version of the poem -- as it's usually published?

from

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/resources/learning/core-poems/detail/50976

I started Early – Took my Dog –
And visited the Sea –
The Mermaids in the Basement
Came out to look at me –

And Frigates – in the Upper Floor
Extended Hempen Hands –
Presuming Me to be a Mouse –
Aground – opon the Sands –

But no Man moved Me – till the Tide
Went past my simple Shoe –
And past my Apron – and my Belt
And past my Boddice – too –

And made as He would eat me up –
As wholly as a Dew
Opon a Dandelion's Sleeve –
And then – I started – too –

And He – He followed – close behind –
I felt His Silver Heel
Opon my Ancle – Then My Shoes
Would overflow with Pearl –

Until We met the Solid Town –
No One He seemed to know –
And bowing – with a Mighty look –
At me – The Sea withdrew –

Bingo. Unless there's another manuscript version running around (somebody point me to it, please!) this transcriber ignored two clear indications by the author that she wanted man instead of one, and put one.

Without finding the third +, it's unclear what should replace boddice, so I can see some justification for leaving that. Which is why I really wish I knew where the third + was.

Logically, one thought is that bosom would replace boddice, meaning buckle would be earlier. Apron is the only true /' rhythm (half of one iamb, half of another), and putting buckle there would increase the consonance. But buckle and belt seem to refer to the same anatomical level, unless she was wearing the kind of garters that buckled, which would actually work well, first shoe, then just above or below the knee, then the waist, then the chest. This is 1862, by the way. But without a real + sign, I'm not going to make that leap.

Just trying to transcribe the poem the way the author wanted it, which ought to be simple, but I was surprised how difficult it was, even beyond the infamous Dickinson dashes.

I warned this thread was for nitpickers!

 

[Pup]

Ok. I freely admit to having something of a blind spot concerning poems.

But what is this?
I mean. The words are English. The senteces as well.

But the total? Does it mean anything at all?

Ahem. Rape, or attempted rape. She barely gets away, reaching town. Could get pretty graphic in the next to last stanza, depending how one wanted to read it.

But that's just me. There are lots of different ways to read it too, and I'm definitely oversimplifying. There are some further discussions in the very helpful link calebprime posted, under discussion questions, poem guide, etc.

 

[Hokulele]

As I understood it, the editor first substituted Bosom for Boddice, decided against it, and substituted Buckle instead, as Bosom doesn't fit the list (body part directly, not clothing). The other piece of evidence supporting that there were only meant to be two substitutions is the penciled in note at the top of page 1, with the +2, which could mean "2 edits". Not sure what "10 unused" would mean.

 

[calebprime]

I read it as experiencing being overcome by the sea, or imagining it. The description has -- I agree with Pup this far -- an ominously personal quality, and it's disturbing to name the almost silly personal articles of clothing the sea overcomes. Death knows no obstacles, no boundaries, no silly clothes. Neither does the sea.

But I don't read it as a flowery description of a real rape.

 

[Pup]

As I understood it, the editor first substituted Bosom for Boddice, decided against it, and substituted Buckle instead, as Bosom doesn't fit the list (body part directly, not clothing). The other piece of evidence supporting that there were only meant to be two substitutions is the penciled in note at the top of page 1, with the +2, which could mean "2 edits". Not sure what "10 unused" would mean.

Ah! I didn't connect the +2 with the meaning "2 edits". Very clever.

I also can't figure out what the "10 unused means."

 

[Pup]

I read it as experiencing being overcome by the sea, or imagining it. The description has -- I agree with Pup this far -- an ominously personal quality, and it's disturbing to name the almost silly personal articles of clothing the sea overcomes. Death knows no obstacles, no boundaries, no silly clothes. Neither does the sea.

But I don't read it as a flowery description of a real rape.

I see what you mean, and Dickinson is certainly known for writing about death. It works that way just fine for me too. That's what makes it a good poem, imho. When someone else describes how they interpret it, I can read it that way and it works that way too. There's depth and breadth to the meaning, rather than just coming out and saying: I almost drowned the other day. Let me tell you about it... Or, this creepy guy on the beach tried to grab me the other day. Let me tell you...

What I want to know is, what happened to the dog? Was it her dog Carlo? Is he okay?

 

[calebprime]

I see what you mean, and Dickinson is certainly known for writing about death. It works that way just fine for me too. That's what makes it a good poem, imho. When someone else describes how they interpret it, I can read it that way and it works that way too. There's depth and breadth to the meaning, rather than just coming out and saying: I almost drowned the other day. Let me tell you about it... Or, this creepy guy on the beach tried to grab me the other day. Let me tell you...

What I want to know is, what happened to the dog? Was it her dog Carlo? Is he okay?

Yeah, I was thinking of something more like "because I would not stop for Death, he kindly stopped for me."

On the other hand, I was trying to find my copy of Camille Paglia's _Sexual Personae_ because I wouldn't be surprised if she had written something about the way the drowning is like being raped by the sea -- or she might even go as far as Pup. Heh. Can't find it.

 

[erwinl]

Ahem. Rape, or attempted rape. She barely gets away, reaching town. Could get pretty graphic in the next to last stanza, depending how one wanted to read it.

But that's just me. There are lots of different ways to read it too, and I'm definitely oversimplifying. There are some further discussions in the very helpful link calebprime posted, under discussion questions, poem guide, etc.

You're putting me on, aren't you?
Where does it mention that?

 

[Lucian]

As I understood it, the editor first substituted Bosom for Boddice, decided against it, and substituted Buckle instead, as Bosom doesn't fit the list (body part directly, not clothing). The other piece of evidence supporting that there were only meant to be two substitutions is the penciled in note at the top of page 1, with the +2, which could mean "2 edits". Not sure what "10 unused" would mean.

Yeah, I thought +2 probably meant "two edits," although I didn't see any editions that replace "boddice" with "buckle"* (after a very quick bit of Googling). There are editions that have "no man" instead of "no one."

*At least one printed the emendations in the margin.

 

[Pup]

You're putting me on, aren't you?
Where does it mention that?

The woman in the poem talks about the tide which is personified into a "he" who

Went past my simple Shoe –
And past my Apron – and my Belt
And past my Boddice – too –

So he's working his way up her clothes from shoe to bodice. Then she says

made as He would eat me up –

Which could imply his mouth on various unspecified locations. She runs, obviously,

And He – He followed – close behind –

Not going into what pearly stuff might be in her shoe. She gets to the safety of town, and he leaves, giving her a knowing, threatening look.

And bowing – with a Mighty look –
At me – The Sea withdrew –

I expect any dirty minded teenager could explain it better than I have.

I also like calebprime's description:

"I read it as experiencing being overcome by the sea, or imagining it. The description has -- I agree with Pup this far -- an ominously personal quality, and it's disturbing to name the almost silly personal articles of clothing the sea overcomes. Death knows no obstacles, no boundaries, no silly clothes. Neither does the sea."

There's the same sense of ominousness and threat. The result, though, would be death by drowning rather than rape.

The link that calebprime posted has some good explication of the poem, under the tab "poem guide." One point the writer makes: "Though she’s obviously threatened by the possibility of consummation here, there’s beauty in it, too: the way pearls are beautiful, once they’ve been released from their shells."

The writer sees the narrator's emotions toward the sea as more positive and not all negative: "But her dream of being subsumed by the sea is interrupted by the inescapable reality of the town, a place so “solid” that her imagined Poseidon must concede (and recede) back to his ocean floor:"

She has a dream, not a nightmare, of the sea overcoming her. At the end, the sea's retreat "leaves her feeling a tangible sense of loss."

Well now. If she is feeling suicidal or just looking forward to the peace of death, that fits. If the sea is planning to rape her, instead she becomes a willing participant in an exciting affair beyond the prim and proper "solid town."

It's like an orange. You can just keep squeezing it and getting more juice out of it.

 

[Hokulele]

I viewed it as consensual, mostly because of the "No Man moved Me - Till the Tide" line. I read it as a woman fantasizing about the sea as a lover, due to the lack of romance in her daily life. The leaving "early" suggests anticipation. Bringing the dog makes it sound like she is covering up an illicit rendevous with a mundane cover ("I was just walking the dog...").

Wording it as "No Man he seemed to know -" to me suggested that she understood that this was pure escapism, and that even the sea knew "He" wasn't a man, and couldn't actually replace her reality. It would be a stronger way to phrase it than "No one he seemed to know", because it generates that lovely ambiguity over meaning.

To me, this is a wistful fantasy by a woman stuck in a mundane reality.

 

[Aardvark422]

My first impression of the writing on the left margin of the first page was that it was a number, 82, and not a word starting with B.

 

[asydhouse]

Thanx everyone! I enjoyed this.

 

[erwinl]

The woman in the poem talks about the tide which is personified into a "he" who

Went past my simple Shoe –
And past my Apron – and my Belt
And past my Boddice – too –

So he's working his way up her clothes from shoe to bodice. Then she says

made as He would eat me up –

Which could imply his mouth on various unspecified locations. She runs, obviously,

And He – He followed – close behind –

Not going into what pearly stuff might be in her shoe. She gets to the safety of town, and he leaves, giving her a knowing, threatening look.

And bowing – with a Mighty look –
At me – The Sea withdrew –

I expect any dirty minded teenager could explain it better than I have.

I also like calebprime's description:

"I read it as experiencing being overcome by the sea, or imagining it. The description has -- I agree with Pup this far -- an ominously personal quality, and it's disturbing to name the almost silly personal articles of clothing the sea overcomes. Death knows no obstacles, no boundaries, no silly clothes. Neither does the sea."

There's the same sense of ominousness and threat. The result, though, would be death by drowning rather than rape.

The link that calebprime posted has some good explication of the poem, under the tab "poem guide." One point the writer makes: "Though she’s obviously threatened by the possibility of consummation here, there’s beauty in it, too: the way pearls are beautiful, once they’ve been released from their shells."

The writer sees the narrator's emotions toward the sea as more positive and not all negative: "But her dream of being subsumed by the sea is interrupted by the inescapable reality of the town, a place so “solid” that her imagined Poseidon must concede (and recede) back to his ocean floor:"

She has a dream, not a nightmare, of the sea overcoming her. At the end, the sea's retreat "leaves her feeling a tangible sense of loss."

Well now. If she is feeling suicidal or just looking forward to the peace of death, that fits. If the sea is planning to rape her, instead she becomes a willing participant in an exciting affair beyond the prim and proper "solid town."

It's like an orange. You can just keep squeezing it and getting more juice out of it.

Not really seeing it.

What about, she goes to the sea to walk with her dog. She forgets the time, gets surpised by the tide and almost drowns, but just manages to reach solid ground in the town?

 

[The Sparrow]

Damn fine poem.
I tend to feel it as the sea and nature 'threatening?' or inviting her in, and she flirts with it but retreats back to 'society' and humans' formal institutions (the town).

But I am usually adept at missing stuff

 

[calebprime]

Maybe the "town" is the same town as Houseman's "Townsman of a stiller town,"
solid and dead like rocks and bones and coral and tombstones -- "of his bones are coral made".

 

[Pup]

Not really seeing it.

What about, she goes to the sea to walk with her dog. She forgets the time, gets surpised by the tide and almost drowns, but just manages to reach solid ground in the town?

I have no quibble that that's a basic description of what happens in the poem, and one can even throw in the time the narrator spent daydreaming about mermaids and such, to explain why she didn't notice the tide was rising.

But it's a poem, written in language that carries dual meaning, or more. The tide is personified throughout: called "he" rather than the normal "it," has an intentional action like making as if he would eat her up, and at the end seems most like a man, doing things that people do, bowing, looking.

I would ask: why? Why write about the sea as if it's a man?

If somebody asked me, what'd you do yesterday? I'd say, went to the beach, got to daydreaming and almost drowned. I could even write it in ballad meter:
So yesterday I took a trip
To see the beach nearby
And almost wound up drowned--
Must keep a closer eye.

There's still no personification of the sea, even in my little verse. So what does it imply if the sea is a certain kind of human and they interact? I'd say the answer to that question illustrates the difference between reading poetry and reading prose, and how there's a basic story, but also more depth, in poetry.