THE WILDLESS ONES by (me!) Sandra, tvgp
I think it's a personality type.. And not sure just yet how to identify it succinctly, but I know it when I see it, or hear about it, or read it: the most revealing characteristic is demonstrated by an utter inability to just let things be, as they are. There is coupled with this, an equally utter compulsion to fix and adjust things. I'm going to have to call them, the wildless ones. -because if I plucked them from society and took them all on a field trip which passed through a meadow, a forrest, and a patch of wild flowers... The very sight would make their hearts uneasy. Several of them would stop and physically prune plants along the way... Several would be disturbed that the flowers didn't match, that the height of each blade of grass was not the same.. That there were more trees on one side of the path than the other... And speaking of the path... Every one of them would agree it needed cement; to be a sidewalk and not dirt(y). And as I read again this morning about Emily Dickinson.. I realize it is mostly people (and dare I point out,primarily men) like this that criticized and edited her poetry. They just couldn't let it be. It seems it must have been impossible for them to just reprint something as she wrote it... Always.. Even if it was just a comma... Nothing she wrote seemed to escape at least one, but often several, wildless, unwelcome, completely imposed, totally unnecessary! editorial stamps. They just had to fix, adjust, alter, prune, even out, pour cement... It reads to me like they were incapable of recognizing, appreciating, valuing or celebrating the force of nature she was... It is my belief, but not knowledge, that instincts and aesthetics alone explain Emily dickinson's style of writing. But the editorial and egotistic and wildless instincts of the editors/publishers of her time, won out in print.. And also, by simply not printing or publishing at all. It is my humble, irritated and defensive opinion that no one should read anything in print by Emily Dickinson without access to her original work. And there is a write and wrong way to compare the two... Not, this one reads better than that one... Or this one is correct and this one is not... Rather, this is original from her heart and this one has been imposed upon. Organic vs. Altered. Intuitive vs. Dictated. Truth vs. Fiction. Wild vs. Contained. And I would like to close this post by dedicating The Beatles song, let it be, to each and every person who added a coma or removed a dash, or updated a word, or shifted a line in any of emily's poems or letters. I realize you just couldn't help yourself; so,...you helped yourself.
posted by SHE @ 9:56 AM
1 Comments:
I add on here, time allowing, -that not only could they not -not adjust her words and poetry... But also they seem incapable of offering her a compliment without following it with an insult or criticism of some sort... Like that too, must have been against the rules...
It just reads like it would have been physically painful for them to publish her work raw and unedited and equally painful to pay her a compliment and leave it at that.
And I use the word incapable in its sincerest form. Genuinely incapable.
It takes an entirely different personality type to a.). Let things be; un-intervene, and b) see beauty without also fault finding /better said, fault Inflicting..
Sadly, it does not appear anyone with this personality type edited or published her work...
Happily, time is on her side... And it now appears countless editors, critics, poets and readers of all ages and backgrounds see
The rare beauty, genious, talent, craft, authenticity and originality of her unedited poetry and literary work in general.
And I note here with gratitude and pleasure... Blogs are the first canvas ever for writers that allows and even encourages, -originality.
And I repeat, how much I know she would have loved them.
As is true for so many of the greats among us... She was ahead of her time.
Post a Comment
<< Home