The Child's faith is new—
Whole—like His Principle—
Wide—like the Sunrise
On fresh Eyes—
Never had a Doubt—
Laughs—at a Scruple—
Believes all sham
But Paradise—
Credits the World—
Deems His Dominion
Broadest of Sovereignties—
And Caesar—mean—
In the Comparison—
Baseless Emperor—
Ruler of Nought—
Yet swaying all—
Grown bye and bye
To hold mistaken
His pretty estimates
Of Prickly Things
He gains the skill
Sorrowful—as certain—
Men—to anticipate
Instead of Kings—
-Fr 701, J637, Fascicle 33, 1863
This poem calls into question the idea of a childlike faith.
The first stanza might be paraphrased like this: The child’s faith is new. The child has absolute belief, and, just as absolutely, bases his principles off of this faith. This faith is widely held and is blinding like sunlight on freshly opened eyes. (You might have to squint when facing it!) This child has no doubt at all. He laughs at any uncertainty or hesitation. He believes only in the promised paradise. Everything else is a sham.
Second stanza: The child credits the world for all that is false. He considers God's dominion the largest of all kingdoms. Caesar is small in comparison to this greater kingdom. Thus far into the poem a general reader might see this poem as a celebration of a child's faith, but after the first five lines the second stanza switches gears in a tricky way. The last lines of the stanza “Baseless Emperor—/ Ruler of Nought—/ Yet swaying all—” complicates the poem because it functions as a sliding modifier. (This sliding modifier thing that Dickinson does is very confusing to the unpracticed reader, but I believe it is essential to understanding certain poems.) If you read the above lines as modifying the lines before them, then the baseless emperor is what the child thinks of Caesar; powerful (“swaying all”), but ruling nothing real (baseless). But these lines may also syntactically modify the last stanza. Read this way, the baseless emperor is the child of faith. He rules nothing that is real, even if his faith might sway others. By conflating the two Emperors this way (Caesar and the child of faith) we see them as essentially the same. They are both baseless. Caesar might ultimately be an empty emperor, but so is the one who thinks his “faith” represents an even bigger kingdom.*
In the last stanza of this poem the child of faith “grows up”. He has grown, gradually over time, ("bye and bye"), to see that his absolute conviction about paradise was really just an estimate, and not an accurate one. It was pretty to believe so, but it doesn't resemble the hard truth, which is much more prickly than pretty. (I'm reminded of Hemingway's line here, "Isn't it pretty to think so?”)
Eventually the child "gains the skill/ Sorrowful—as certain— " to see more clearly. Learning to be skeptical and to doubt is presented to us as a skill. By going through sorrow the child “gains the skill” and a new kind of certainty; that man is flawed, and is not divinely right like a king is meant to be. We learn to accept reality for what it is.
There is a doubleness to the phrase "bye and bye" in this poem. The child learns by and by, but also learns "goodbye after goodbye". Loss is part of the deal.
Experience leads us to a more humble kind of faith. I think this is what is meant here by "sorrowful—as certain—". Love doesn't point us toward future glory, and isn't based on comparison, but is a belief in the embrace of another in the here and now. One can have a kind of faith which is accepting of the whole person, as they are, flaws and all, rather than a faith which has more to do with self-regard and trying to be "good" for some future judge.
Experience leads us to a more humble kind of faith. I think this is what is meant here by "sorrowful—as certain—". Love doesn't point us toward future glory, and isn't based on comparison, but is a belief in the embrace of another in the here and now. One can have a kind of faith which is accepting of the whole person, as they are, flaws and all, rather than a faith which has more to do with self-regard and trying to be "good" for some future judge.
- /)dam Wade l)eGraff
* To reiterate, the sliding modifier means it can be seen as two poems. The first one, seeming to praise the child of faith, ends after the second stanza. The second poem, criticizing the child of faith, begins in the second stanza with the line "Baseless emperor." It's worth taking a moment and reading it both ways, to get a feel for how Dickinson pulls this off. Compare the two below.
1.
The Child's faith is new—
Whole—like His Principle—
Wide—like the Sunrise
On fresh Eyes—
Never had a Doubt—
Laughs—at a Scruple—
Believes all sham
But Paradise—
Credits the World—
Deems His Dominion
Broadest of Sovereignties—
And Caesar—mean—
In the Comparison—
Baseless Emperor—
Ruler of Nought—
Yet swaying all—
Whole—like His Principle—
Wide—like the Sunrise
On fresh Eyes—
Never had a Doubt—
Laughs—at a Scruple—
Believes all sham
But Paradise—
Credits the World—
Deems His Dominion
Broadest of Sovereignties—
And Caesar—mean—
In the Comparison—
Baseless Emperor—
Ruler of Nought—
Yet swaying all—
2.
Baseless Emperor—
Ruler of Nought—
Yet swaying all—
Grown bye and bye
To hold mistaken
His pretty estimates
Of Prickly Things
He gains the skill
Sorrowful—as certain—
Men—to anticipate
Instead of Kings—
Ruler of Nought—
Yet swaying all—
Grown bye and bye
To hold mistaken
His pretty estimates
Of Prickly Things
He gains the skill
Sorrowful—as certain—
Men—to anticipate
Instead of Kings—
Adam,
ReplyDeleteA clear and compelling explication. Thank you for the two readings.
On first reading, ‘The Child's faith is new —’ is a description of a maturing child’s worldview.
ReplyDeleteOn second reading, the “Child” could be a conservative Presbyterian minister to whom ED gradually revealed, in their pre-1860 correspondence, her doubts about resurrection and Christian dogma. He, never exposed to such heresy, was all ears and anxious to show ED where she’s wrong.
The manuscript of this poem (F701) proposed “propitiate” instead of “anticipate” in Line 23, which puts a more utilitarian spin on ED’s last two lines and on the entire poem. ED and Wadsworth certainly did not see eye-to-eye about religion, which may have intrigued him and provided the lure for his 1860 visit to Amherst.
ED composed this poem at age 32. Franklin estimates she wrote her first Master letter spring 1858, when she was 27. She first met Bowles on June 30, 1858 (Habegger, 2002, p.427). Paragraphs 1-3 of Master Letter 1 indicates a continuing correspondence, so “Master” could not have been Bowles, but chronologically he could easily have been Wadsworth.
Master Letter 1, Paragraphs 1-3
(Johnson, “about 1858”; Franklin, “spring 1858)
“Dear Master
"I am ill, but grieving more that you are ill, I make my stronger hand work long eno' to tell you. I thought perhaps you were in Heaven, and when you spoke again, it seemed quite sweet, and wonderful, and surprised me so- I wish that you were well.”
“I would that all I love, should be weak no more. The Violets are by my side, the Robin very near, and "Spring" - they say, Who is she - going by the door – . . .
“You ask me what my flowers said - then they were disobedient - I gave them messages. . . .”
Franklin, R.W. 1986. The master letters of Emily Dickinson. Amherst College Press; First Edition (January 1, 1986)
"Propitiate" does put an interesting spin on this poem. Thanks for that gloss. I prefer "anticipate" for the general sense of the poem. I can see how propitiate fits better for the biographical take though. I believe ED was always, somehow, conscious of both her own personal meaning and the public perception simultaneously.
Delete‘The Child's faith is new’, [brackets mine], ED’s alternative “propitiate” in place of “anticipate”
ReplyDeleteThe Child's faith is new —
Whole — like His Principle —
Wide — like the Sunrise
On fresh Eyes —
Never had a Doubt —
Laughs — at a Scruple —
Believes all sham
[Is] But Paradise —
Credits the World — [Trusts, EDLex]
Deems His Dominion [Capitalized “His” can refer to either God or Wadsworth]
Broadest of Sovereignties —
And Caesar — mean [small] —
In the Comparison —
[Actually, Wadsworth is a] Baseless Emperor —
Ruler of nought [Nothing except His congregation]—
Yet swaying all [His congregation]—
Grown bye and bye
To hold mistaken
His pretty estimates
Of Prickly Things
He gains the skill
Sorrowful — as certain —
Men — to propitiate
Instead of Kings —
I should point out that the theory I proposed in the commentary to Fr699, that each fascicle was discrete and thought out, is now in question. I see that the themes of judgment and heaven vs earth are continued all the way through this fascicle too. I think it is just as likely that the coherence of the poems is due more to the chronological nature of the poems than any kind of conscious ordering.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that info. I was wondering how a Civil War poem, F704, 'My Portion is Defeat — today —', fit Pears' proposed focus of Fascicle 33:
ReplyDelete". . . for Fascicle 33, ED chose poems “that constitute [a] central drama . . . : those addressed to a distant lover and those poems that narrate, reflect on, and consider the terms of such a relationship.” (Pears, 2017, p. 30).
Pears, Sean. 2017. "I, grown shrewder-scan the skies": Reading Emily Dickinson's Fascicle 33 as a Planetary System. The Emily Dickinson Journal; 26(1): 27-50.
I haven't read the Pears yet, but my take on F704 is that Dickinson's focus shifts from her own misery to that of the soldiers through the act of comparison.
Delete