by Emily Dickinson
(Poem 480)
"Why do I love" You, Sir?
Because—
The Wind does not require the Grass
To answer—Wherefore when He pass
She cannot keep Her place.
Because He knows—and
Do not You—
And We know not—
Enough for Us
The Wisdom it be so—
The Lightning—never asked an Eye
Wherefore it shut—when He was by—
Because He knows it cannot speak—
And reasons not contained—
—Of Talk—
There be—preferred by Daintier Folk—
The Sunrise—Sire—compelleth Me—
Because He's Sunrise—and I see—
Therefore—Then—
I love Thee—
Analysis:
An objective evaluation of a literary text is always hinged on the sensitivity of the critic to analyze the extrinsic and intrinsic elements of a text. Since New Criticism deals with the poem as an object which has ontological status, the poem is analyzed as a self-contained, autonomous entity. With this, Emily Dickinson’s 480th poem, “Why Do I Love” You, Sir? can be an example of a poem that made use of these elements effectively to give the impact of the persona’s emotion towards the addressee. To avoid the intentional and affective fallacies, we will focus on the text alone and all ambiguities will be resolved and justified through citing evidence from the poem itself.
Let us start with the first line which is the main point of the poem.
“‘Why do I love’ You, Sir?”
The persona asked a question, yet when she tried answering it, she couldn’t finish the line. The line must end with a dash.
“Because—“
Instead of giving her reason, the persona resorted to the use of metaphor as she compared herself to Grass and the man to Wind. The persona would be the Grass that couldn’t keep its place when the Wind passes by, just as how she finds the presence of the man overwhelming that she couldn’t be still.
“The Wind does not require the Grass
To answer—Wherefore when He pass
She cannot keep Her place.”
Aside from the image that the lines created, they give the message that the persona is already presenting an excuse why she couldn’t give an answer to the first line. Same as the Wind doesn’t require the grass to answer, he should not ask the persona why she loves him.
In the second stanza, the persona used the paradox of knowing and not knowing at the same time to create the contrast and the complexity of the situation.
“Because He knows—and
Do not You—
And We know not—”
Despite the contradiction of the statements, it is sensible in the way that according to the persona, the man knows that she loves him, while there is something that the addressee doesn’t know—the reason why he loves the woman. The last line concludes that they both don’t know their reasons.
“Enough for Us
The Wisdom it be so—”
The third stanza is structured with the same concept compared to the first. Metaphor is used to compare the persona to an Eye and the addressee to Lightning. This comparison would give the readers an idea on how the persona reacts in the presence of the man—she fails to look at and speak with him.
The following lines support the image about the Lightning and the Eye. The very reason that the Lightning doesn’t ask the Eye is that it can’t speak, just as how the persona couldn’t speak to her loved one.
“The Lightning—never asked an Eye
Wherefore it shut—when He was by—
Because He knows it cannot speak—”
Aside from the persona’s reaction, these lines also give an excuse for the persona not to answer the question in the first line. According to her, just as how the Lightning would not ask the Eye for the reason that it would close when Lightning comes, the man should not ask why the persona loves the man.
“Because He knows it cannot speak—
And reasons not contained—”
To justify that an answer should not be forced out of her, she added that reasons of her love is not contained in words, which is preferred by people who are refined and prim.
“And reasons not contained—
—Of Talk—
There be—preferred by Daintier Folk—”
The poem concluded as the persona addresses the man as Sire, with much reverence, utilizing metaphor once again when she compared the man to Sunrise—how it compels her to wake for the very reason that it is Sunrise. With this justification, she then concluded that the first line would be answered in the same manner—she loves him with the very simple and undeniable reason that she loves him.
“The Sunrise—Sire—compelleth Me—
Because He's Sunrise—and I see—
Therefore—Then—
I love Thee—“
Since the lines have already been discussed, let us now go to the objective correlative which is defined as a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events or reactions that can effectively serve to awaken in the reader the emotional response, which the author desires without being a direct statement of that emotion.
The poem’s objective correlative is presented from the beginning of the poem down to the last line. This is found from the time the persona mentions her behavior in the presence of the addressee. Also, it is evident in the manner her words are written—the frequent use of dashes, which supports her behavior with the implication of her nervousness while addressing the man.
It is also noticeable that the dashes had been more frequent in the stanzas wherein she is directly addressing the man, unlike the other stanzas that she would only talk about him and her feelings for him. These things would paint the picture of a woman, stuttering in the presence of a man whom she loves and who loves her back. With their aim to justify the emotions that they feel, they ended up settling with the idea that they love each other because they just do.
Looking at the structure of the poem, it is noticeable that the use of dashes had been too frequent that it would really affect how the poem would be read. The frequent pauses and even the hanging statement in the second line would create the implication that the persona speaks with so much nervousness that it is reflected on the way her words are written. This extreme emotion is greatly supported by her lines pertaining to how she would behave in the presence of the man—just like the grass that couldn’t keep its place and like the eye that couldn’t help closing and couldn’t speak.
Another use of structure to convey the message of the persona is the unusual use of capitalization. Aside from all words that serve as beginnings of lines, words that are capitalized would usually pertain to the persona and the addressee. If this pattern would be followed, even the Grass, Wind, Lightning, Eye, Talk, Daintier Folk and Sunrise are pertaining either to the persona, addressee, or both. It is easy to understand why Grass, Eye, Wind, Lightning, and Sunrise would refer to the persona and the addressee respectively because of the use of metaphor or the direct comparison of two different things while pointing out their similarities.
The comparison with the use of metaphor clearly brought the meaning and the image that the author wants to convey, but the tension on the words Talk and Daintier Folk would need unlocking to solve the ambiguity in diction. If the use of capitalization is patterned as representations of the persona and the addressee, Talk may refer not the usual connotation of it which is words. Instead, these words, since capitalized, would refer to “their talk” or their words. The persona would like to express that whatever they say to justify why they love each other could not define the reasons why they do, which is justified by the central idea of the poem. With the same pattern, the Daintier Folk could also be identified as the two of them. It would not really pertain to other people who are refined in manners, but just them. The persona would like to emphasize that it is prim not to talk about the reasons why they love each other.
People might not easily notice but the use of quotation marks in the first line of the poem is already an effective use of structure. The first line is written as “Why do I love” You, Sir? Notice that the quotation marks are placed before the word Why and after the word love. This unusual placement of quotation marks would give us the idea that the words Why do I love were trying to convey two meanings: First, the persona is asking herself why she loves the man. Second, the persona is asking the man the same question, as if asking, “What about you, sir?” This is supported by the lines “Do not You— And We know not—” which means that the addressee also doesn’t know why he loves the woman.
With all things discussed in the use of diction and structure, it is safe to conclude that organic unity in the poem is achieved. This organic unity leads to the central idea of the poem, which is a paradox. Paradox naturally rise from the use of metaphors. And since the root of all figures of speech that deal with comparison is metaphor, paradox will be present in any literary work. In this poem of Dickinson, the paradox of reasons of love is highlighted. The central idea that the only reason for loving is the lack of reason to love seems to appear false at first, but if all things presented would be analyzed, this is very much justified by the persona. This poetic truth challenges the truth based on facts and reasons; creating the artistic epitome of an excellent literary piece judged objectively through New Criticism.
No comments:
Post a Comment