Achtung_Bebe
New Yorker
I've been learning about Emily Dickinson in class for the past few weeks, and it got me considering something concerning the publishing of poetry. Emily Dickinson was very secluded from society--she practically shut herself within her home and its surrounding area, wearing only white, writing poetry.. basically keeping to herself. She did not like sharing her poetry--infact she only allowed close family members to read it, because it revealed so much that went on within her head, and I suppose she preferred if her poetry were kept to herself... giving her a way to live vicariously through the pen in a way. Though she didn't interact much with the world, it would be a fool who said that she didn't know what it meant to live, because I feel she successsfully expresses this through her work. My question is how do you feel about someone's poetry getting published after they have died? It is my understanding that none of her poetry was published during her lifetime, however they were found and now over 1,000 poems of hers are published. It's almost as if someone were to publish your personal diary after you have passed away. I suppose you could say that if it were not published her many works would have gone untouched--which would be quite an overlook--however is it right to do this when this person, while still living, would not likely have given consent? I'm sure there are other instances where poetry was not published until after death, but Dickinson is fresh on my mind. I'd love to hear your opinions on this concept. I think many factors can take part in this question--having to consider gain to the study of literature, as well as the consent of the poet. Thanks for allowing me to ramble
