The Concept of Gradual Truth in Dickinson's Poetry - Essay Example

The Concept of Gradual Truth in Dickinsons Poetry Introduction In his article “Devious Truths,” Benjamin Friedlanderpresents the possible contradicting approaches to Dickinsons texts. He aims to address the questions of whether the poet writes about how “indirection and honesty are compatible” (Friedlander 32) or whether “her ultimate aim is not veracity, but communication” (Friedlander 32). Friedlander states that Dickinsons work should be analyzed whether it aims to stress the importance of saying the truth accurately, or of blurring the truth by creative articulation to cushion its blow, or of the possibility of combining truth and telling. Articles Interpretive Approach Friedlanders approach to Dickinsons text is one of a mix of reader response approach and cultural studies approach. At the beginning of his article, he expresses clearly that in aiming to answer these questions, he wants to provide a deeper understanding on how these two contradicting concepts might affect a reader in understanding Dickinson (Friedlander 32). Toward the middle of his article, Friedlander demonstrates the potential historical and political interpretation of Dickinsons work. He states that Dickinson is not the “theological rebel who...rejected the comforts of theodicy in direct response to the Civil War” (Friedlander 37) but that “the poem could also be read as a political fable” (Friedlander 37). However, Friedlander uses these approaches merely to demonstrate his intention to interpret Dickinsons work in a more reader response approach rather than cultural response one. Doing so provides the readers a solid direction for the interpretation, particularly for readers who are more knowledgeable of the various critiques on Dickinsons poetry. He states several other contexts that other articles have used in interpreting Dickinsons oeuvre, and maintains that his article “would not make broad claims” (Friedlander 37) in either supporting or disputing those articles. However, those other critiques are useful in Friedlanders intention to advance the questions he aims to answer in his own article. Aside from referring to a few outside sources and existing commentaries on Dickinson, Friedlander largely uses the concept of “gentle stories we tell to a frightened child” (Friedlander 33) to serve as a model in understanding the poets work. Much of Friedlanders arguments are based on widely-accepted knowledge or those ideas that attained general consensus, making it an easy an enjoyable reading material in ones journey to read between Dickinsons lines. Article Summary Friendlander first discusses the initial presumption he has on the difference of truth and telling. He states that at the start, he believes that “storytelling,” which usually utilizes circuitous speech, cannot be, in any way, associated with truth because truth deals with direct information, that is, no beating around the bush. However, upon review of Dickinsons work, Friedlander states that the poet could be declaring that truth can be told “gradually” (Friedlander 33). This is an obvious oxymoron if one would base the line of thinking on the universally acknowledged fact that truth is direct or straightforward. This poses two questions on the readers: 1) is understanding the accurate meaning more important? or, 2) is the agreement of everyone more important? Understanding is associated with ones perception of meaning, while agreement could be associated with something that is within the general consensus, or more simply told, truth. However, Friedlander does not delve widely upon the actual and technical definition of truth. He bases his explanations on concepts that are widely accepted even by young children. Therefore, for the purpose of common understanding, truth in this paper would refer to “common knowledge.” To further his examination on telling and truth, Friedlander uses Dickinsons poem that has the first line: “Tell all the truth but tell it slant -” (33). Friendlander states that Dickinson expresses the need for a gentle declaration of truth. Truth should not be harsh, as the last two lines of the poem state: “The Truth must dazzle moderately / Or every man be blind -” (Friedlander 33). Friedlander likens this to that of explaining to frightened children what lightning is. He states that to ease the “truths blinding flash” (33), one should be careful in choosing the right words even with the intention of saying the absolute truth. With the purpose of relaying factual information while considering the receivers state of mind (or emotions for that matter), it is almost always sure to get the agreement of everyone involved while retaining the accuracy of the message. This is further explained in Friedlanders article, which is discussed in the next paragraph. Agreement, or general consensus, as mentioned earlier, is what is referred to as truth in this paper. This poses another question: “What consists of general agreement?” Friedlander explains this by using Dickinsons “William Tell Poem.” In the poem, Friedlander examines how Dickinson emphasizes the benefits of a good narrative while attempting to depict truth. In the first two lines of the poem, Dickinson writes: “Tell as a Marksman – were forgotten / Tell – this Day endures” (Friedlander 34). Friedlander explains that Dickinsons retelling of William Tells tale speaks of how the story endured over time due to the effective way the moral (truth) is presented. Had it been merely about William Tells excellent aim, retelling the same story over and over again would be tiring (Friedlander 35). Dickinson, through the poem, explains this by stating on paragraph 2, lines 2-4 that: “Though a statelier Tale / Grown in the Repetition hoary / Scarcely would prevail” (Friedlander 34). The tales “appeal to sentiment” (Friedlander 35) is the reason why this story is still being told to this day. This concept is also shown in the poems last 2 lines, where it states: “God it is said replies in person / When the Cry is meant” (Friedlander 35). There is a “disclaimer of personal knowledge” (Friedlander 36) on Dickinsons part. This therefore means that “it is said” [by many] that God listens to sincere prayers, which shows a general consensus. This also shows that instead of going through an “actual and truthful” explanation of how William Tell prayed to God so that his son would be saved, a grander word “Cry” is instead used, appealing to the readers sentiments (Friedlander 36-7). Brief Discourse Once readers successfully understand what Friedlander and Dickinson are trying to present in their work, they can answer the questions stated above that both understanding and agreement are important. It is easy to agree to each of Friedlanders ideas due to the wide use of general knowledge, both in interpreting Dickinsons work and in presenting his own opinions. The article is effective in giving the readers a deeper perspective in looking at not only Dickinsons work, but also of literature in general. First, the argument is so close to home, that is, trying to tell the truth in a nice way. Everyone, at some point in their lives, has done that one way or another. This makes the article an even enjoyable read, not to mention informative. Second, it modified the way one would look at Dickinsons work. By presenting a few other critiques on Dickinson, Friedlander is able to say that Dickinsons message in the poem is not necessarily coming from her personal convictions (Friedlander 38). Rather, there is this possibility that Dickinson is merely obscuring the truth in her message by the beauty of her words. There is indeed truth in telling. Work Cited Friedlander, Benjamin. "Devious Truths." The Emily Dickinson Journal. 18.1 (2009): 32-43. Print. (Friedlander 32-43) Read More