The Extensive Use of Symbolism in Emily Dickinsons Poem #315 :: Emily Dickinson Poem 315 Essays

The Extensive Use of symbolic representation in Emily Dickinsons Poem 315 As I had no prior recognise with Emily Dickinsons become, I was unsure of what to expect from this assignment. I read the poem intimately fifteen or twenty cadences before I was rase able to ask myself legitimate top dogs about Dickinsons thoughts as she composed this work over two hundred years ago. I couldnt even guess to the title for guidance...ugh, this is going to be tough ran through my head over and over. I began by researching 315 on the Internet and in our library. I implant more opinions than I could possibly wade through in star summer semester and resigned myself to limiting my research to the basics and forming my own opinions. I puddle learned in literature classes since past-many, many years ago I might add-that sagaciousness symbolisms that exist in poetry is the key to get a lineing the poem itself. Emily Dickinsons 315 is absolutely FULL of symbolism, so much so that I had to break it down--almost word-by-word-- to begin to guess what Dickinson is trying to tell her readers. The first question that I had-and probably the one of most significance-- was who is HE??? Dickinson begins with He fumbles at your soul...-- I couldnt even understand who HE was. After researching this, I recognise that I was not alone and that various readers of 315 have debated my question over decades. Robert Weisbuch in Emily Dickinsons Poetry (1972) explained that he felt that the primary figure (He) is by design ambiguous because his identity doesnt really matter. Weisbuch further postulated that Dickinson wants the reader not to understand the cause, but to focus on experiencing the terrible moment (pp. 98). Mr. Weisbuch seems to feel that He is many things (e.g. pianist, smithy, Thor and wind) and yet his definition is of little importance. I was somewhat relieve when I read Weisbuchs theory on He because each time I read He fumbles... I come to believe that He is a different entity. I first felt that Dickinson was referring to a turgid male figure in her life-maybe her father or her lover-but during subsequent readings my thoughts glum to less obvious possibilities such(prenominal) as God or non-human objects such as a storm. Even after a weeks worth of research, I still am not certain that I fully understand which direction she is hoping to lead her reader.