1. Aaryn Frazier
American Literature
Survey
Dr. Myles
4/14/2016
To Pose a Question that You Do Not Want an Answer For
“Unable are the loved to die, for love is immortality.”
-Emily Dickinson
Of all the questions that can be, and have been asked; the gender and love preference
of Ms. Emily Dickinson seems to withstand the test of time. Like the ‘famous’ people of today,
there is much contemplation and obsession about the sexual orientation of loved and prominent
figures of the past. The question of why sexual orientation is important is still unknown. But,
apparently, some people would rather chop off their foot than have it proved one way or
another. In the studies of this question, Paula Bennett and Martha Nell Smith have much to say
in their books.
While holding a similar opinion of Dickinson’s sexuality they both go about it in very
different ways. Bennett’s ideas are based on the sexual, womanly imagery while Smith’s
argument tries to negate the reasoning for the ‘master’ that causes all the fuss in the first place.
They each, have views on how and why it is essential to consider gender and sexuality, have
evidence for their views and opinions and a poem or idea that they deem important and is
interpreted.
Their books are incredibly diverse, but each has a chapter that can compliment yet
contrast each other’s views and ideals. The chapter chosen from Bennett’s book is titled, “Of
Genre, Gender and Sex”. While Smith’s chosen chapter is titled, “All Men Say “What” to Me:
Sexual Identity and Problems of Literary Creativity”. In her opening Bennett says, “This chapter
will discuss patterns of genital imagery in Dickinson’s work which suggest that she experienced
female sexuality (and female creativity) as a separate and autonomous power equal to, but
different from, men’s own: a ‘little’ but ‘explosive’ force.” (Pg. 154) Meanwhile, Smith quotes a
statement from Emily’s sister, “She declares that Emily was devoted to language, not a mystery
lover.” (Pg. 98) Within the very beginnings of each chapter it is obvious that, while they may
agree that Dickinson may have a queer sexuality, each woman will be spearheading her
argument with very different tactics.
There seems to be a problem in the world with people who are “other” aka not the
“norm”. And no matter what you believe of Dickinson’s sexuality, she was one of these “other”
people. Her interests lied in wonder and questioning of the world around her and not with the
next roast she would dutifully pull from the oven for her “man”. Emily was writing these poems
and letters with a mind before her time. She would, inevitably, miss out on all the opportunities
that women have in America today. As Smith says, “In patriarchy, the most important facts of a
woman’s life are her relations to men --father, husband, brother, son, lover. The spinster poet
Dickinson had a father and brother, but no husband or son and no male lover, as far as we
know.” (Pg. 103) While Bennett says, “As in so many things, Dickinson viewed her sexuality with
compound vision in a highly complex, paradoxical light (as small and great, impoverished and
sumptuous, vulnerable and powerful). . . female sexuality had the power to feed and nourish her

2. even when she thought herself deprived.” (Pgs. 170-180) Both of these show the importance
that is weighed not only on her choice of partner, but her sexuality at all. Smith’s obsession with
the “Master” letters is carried on throughout her chapter, but none so clearly as when she says,
“Richard Sewall devotes an entire chapter to the “Master” letters and does not think her most
voluminous correspondence with the housewife next door, thirty years worth of prose, poems,
and poems woven into prose, warrants more attention.” (Pg. 99) And again on with, “There
would not, perhaps, be a problem with obsessive speculation about the “Master” letters if these
texts could positively be classified as nonfiction letters addressed to a particular audience, or if
they were fair copies that had been folded, tucked into envelopes, and mailed. But they are not.
Though written on fine linen stationary, all three -- with words or passages crossed out -- are
drafts.” (Pg.103) Here, Smith is making a painfully obvious jab at the denial and refusal of same-
sex partnership as opposed to the “norm”. One small batch of “evidence” is sufficient when it
agrees with the preconceived notions of the masses (which are mostly men at this time).
While all of this is happening, both authors are giving evidence to their points and ideas.
Bennett says, “Dickinson’s female sexual imagery makes its first appearance, not surprisingly,
in her youthful letters to women friends.” (Pg. 155) To list all of the “sexual” imagery could last
forever, but a few are as follows: flowers, crumbs, pearls, nectar, lips and bees. While a bee’s
“sting” could be indicative of a phallic lover, the idea is the small stature of the bee and delicate
attributes of the flower. They are symbolic imagery of the clitorus. So, while Bennett is all for the
idea that Dickinson was of the queer nature, Smith says, “. . . critics have asked the least
interesting questions, queries designed to perpetuate and enhance legends of the white-clad,
“partially cracked” popular-culture “myth” (L 48in), and have therefore missed a spectacular
opportunity to study the artist’s composing process.” (Pg. 103)
This goes to make a great point. “Why?” Would knowing the sexual preference of a great
writer and person negate everything that they achieved? If so; why? While many, including
myself, may think that great historical people were queer, that doesn’t undo every great thing
that they ever achieved in their lifetime. Love is love. Passion is passion. Interest is interest.
What can be taken from reading about this question is that even those on the “same” side can
and will have exceedingly different views and ideas. And that is perfectly okay.
“Anyone who realises what Love is, the dedication of the heart, so profound, so absorbing, so
mysterious, so imperative, and always just in the noblest natures so strong, cannot fail to see
how difficult, how tragic even, must often be the fate of those whose deepest feelings are
destined from the earliest days to be a riddle and a stumbling-block, unexplained to themselves,
passed over in silence by others.”
― Edward Carpenter, The Intermediate Sex: A Study of Some Transitional Types of Men and
Women
Citation

3. Bennett, Paula. Emily Dickinson, Woman Poet. Iowa City: U of Iowa, 1990. Print.
Smith, Martha Nell. Rowing in Eden: Rereading Emily Dickinson. Austin: U of Texas, 1992.
Print.