Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:42:33.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emily Dickinson's Animal Pedagogies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Colleen Glenney Boggs
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

E. Dickinson

Would you instruct me now?

—Emily Dickinson, The Letters of Emily Dickinson (Johnson 449)

In 1866 Emily Dickinson Ended a lapse of eighteen months in her correspondence with Thomas Wentworth Higginson by sending him three lines that connect the major concerns of her work: death, subjectivity, and the conditions of knowledge. When Higginson later published these lines in “Emily Dickinson's Letters,” he explained that the poet would on occasion include “an announcement of some event, vast to her small sphere as this,” the death of her dog who had been her companion for sixteen years (450). In measuring Dickinson's loss biographically by the “small sphere” of her life, Higginson sets aside her ability to “wade grief” (Franklin 312) and situates her letter within the sentimental culture of pet keeping, which had transfigured a predominantly agricultural practice (pet initially referred to a lamb) into a staple of genteel domesticity and bourgeois subjectivity (Mason; Grier; Kete; Ritvo; Thomas). Far from participating uncritically in the roles and relations Higginson projects onto her, Dickinson interrogates the formation and gendering of sentimental subjectivity (Dillon; Blackwood) by placing “Carlo died” in relation to the other two lines—the signature and the call for instruction. “E. Dickinson” refers ambiguously to Emily or to her father, Edward Dickinson (Holland 146). The signature pluralizes the subject; it doubles and ultimately obscures “E.”'s gender. This ambiguous subject hinges on the animal's death as a scene of pedagogy: it stands in the liminal space between the announcement of Carlo's death and the request: “Would you instruct me now?”

Type
Theories and Methodologies
Information
PMLA , Volume 124 , Issue 2 , March 2009 , pp. 533 - 541
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Aesop. Aesop's Fables in French: With a Description of Fifty Animals Mentioned Therein and a French and English Dictionary of the Words Contained in the Work. Philadelphia: Lindsay and Blakiston, 1852. Print.Google Scholar
Midori, Asahina. “‘”Fascination“ Is Absolute of Clime’: Reading Emily Dickinson's Correspondence with Higginson as Naturalist.” Emily Dickinson Journal 14.2 (2005): 103–19. Print.Google Scholar
Arlo, Bates. “Books and Authors.” Boston Sunday Courier 23 Nov. 1890: 2. Rpt. in Emily Dickinson's Reception in the 1890s. By Willis Buckingham. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 1989. 29–33. Print.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Martha Dickinson. “Selections from the Unpublished Letters of Emily Dickinson to Her Brother's Family; Chosen and Arranged by Her Niece Martha Dickinson Bianchi.” Atlantic Monthly Jan. 1915: 35–42. Print.Google Scholar
Sarah, Blackwood. “‘The Inner Brand’: Emily Dickinson, Portraiture, and the Narrative of Liberal Interiority.” Emily Dickinson Journal 14.2 (2005): 48–59. Print.Google Scholar
Asa, Bullard. Dog Stories. Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1863. Print. Vol. 7 of Sunnybank Stories. 12 vols.Google Scholar
Capps, Jack L. Emily Dickinson's Reading, 1836–1886. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1966. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daisy, Cousin. The Picture Alphabet. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Co., 1879. Print.Google Scholar
Patricia, Crain. The Story of A: The Alphabetization of America from The New England Primer to The Scarlet Letter. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2000. Print.Google Scholar
Jacques, Derrida. “And Say the Animal Responded?” Trans. David Wills. Zoontologies: The Question of the Animal. Ed. Wolfe, Cary. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2003. 121–46. Print.Google Scholar
Dillon, Elizabeth Maddock. The Gender of Freedom: Fictions of Liberalism and the Literary Public Sphere. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2004. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donovan, Josephine, and Adams, Carol J., eds. Beyond Animal Rights: A Feminist Caring Ethic for the Treatment of Animals. New York: Continuum, 1996. Print.Google Scholar
Eberwein, Jane Donahue. An Emily Dickinson Encyclopedia. Westport: Greenwood, 1998. Print.Google Scholar
Franklin, R. W., ed. The Poems of Emily Dickinson: Reading Edition. Cambridge: Belknap–Harvard UP, 1998. Print.Google Scholar
Gates, Henry Louis Jr. The Signifying Monkey: A Theory of African-American Literary Criticism. New York: Oxford UP, 1988. Print.Google Scholar
Katherine, Grier. Pets in America: A History. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 2006. Print.Google Scholar
Alfred, Habegger. “Evangelicalism and Its Discontents: Hannah Porter versus Emily Dickinson.” New England Quarterly 70.3 (1997): 386–414. Print.Google Scholar
Donna, Haraway. The Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People, and Significant Otherness. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm, 2003. Print.Google Scholar
Vicki, Hearne. “Horses, Hounds and Jeffersonian Happiness: What's Wrong with Animal Rights?” Harper's Sept. 1991: 59–65. Print.Google Scholar
Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. “Emily Dickinson's Letters.” Atlantic Monthly Oct. 1891: 444–56. Print.Google Scholar
Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. “Women and Men: Children and Animals.” Harper's Bazaar 30 July 1887: 530. Print.Google Scholar
Jeanne, Holland. “Scraps, Stamps, and Cutouts: Emily Dickinson's Domestic Technologies of Publication.” Cultural Artifacts and the Production of Meaning: The Page, the Image, and the Body. Ed. Ezell, Margaret J. M. and O'Keeffe, Katherine O'Brien. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1994. 139–81. Print.Google Scholar
Johnson, Thomas H., ed. The Letters of Emily Dickinson. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Belknap–Harvard UP, 1958. Print. 3 vols.Google Scholar
Kathleen, Kete. The Beast in the Boudoir: Petkeeping in Nineteenth-Century Paris. Berkeley: U of California P, 1994. Print.Google Scholar
Lippit, Akira Mizuta. “Magnetic Animal: Derrida, Wildlife, Animetaphor.” MLN 113.5 (1998): 1111–25. Print.Google Scholar
John, Locke. Some Thoughts on Education by John Locke. Introd. R. H. Quick. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1902. Google Book Search. Web. 23 Feb. 2009.Google Scholar
Polly, Longsworth. The World of Emily Dickinson. New York: Norton, 1990. Print.Google Scholar
Jennifer, Mason. Civilized Creatures: Urban Animals, Sentimental Culture, and American Literature, 1850–1900. Ed. Ritvo, Harriet. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2005. Print. Animals, Hist., Culture.Google Scholar
Timothy, Morton. Shelley and the Revolution in Taste: The Body and the Natural World. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print. Cambridge Studies in Romanticism 10.Google Scholar
“Orthography.” The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989. Print.Google Scholar
Sherry, Ortner. “Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?” Woman, Culture, and Society. Ed. Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist and Lamphere, Louise. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1974. 67–87. Print.Google Scholar
David, Perkins. Romanticism and Animal Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2003. Print. Cambridge Studies in Romanticism 58.Google Scholar
Tom, Regan. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley: U of California P, 1983. Print.Google Scholar
Harriet, Ritvo. “Pride and Pedigree: The Evolution of the Victorian Dog Fancy.” Victorian Studies 29.2 (1986): 227–53. Print.Google Scholar
Matthew, Scully. Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy. New York: St. Martin's, 2002. Print.Google Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia UP, 1985. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, Singer. Animal Liberation. 1973. New York: Avon, 1977. Print.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., and Nussbaum, Martha C. Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Keith, Thomas. Man and the Natural World: A History of the Modern Sensibility. New York: Pantheon, 1983. Print.Google Scholar
Sarah, Trimmer. Fabulous Histories: Designed for the Instruction of Children respecting Their Treatment of Animals. London: Printed for T. Longman and G. G. J. and J. Robinson and J. Johnson, 1786. Microform.Google Scholar
Cary, Wolfe. Animal Rites: American Culture, the Discourse of Species, and Posthumanist Theory. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2003. Print.Google Scholar