![emily-dickinson[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/5vGw90q.jpg "emily-dickinson[1].jpg")
I got a second hand Dickinson collection and just realized it's the edited and truncated poems from before all the originals were dug up, should I bother with this one or just get a complete one?
>>8250514
It's good enough I'm sure, how heavily is it edited? I've never even heard the story of how the "originals" were dug up. I love the "narrow fellow" poem. Also, Emily is proof that even shut-ins can be great poets. This is inspiring for people like myself.
>>8250525
>Emily is proof that even shut-ins can be great poets. This is inspiring for people like myself.
Every time I go to bed after a night of writing without an agent... I know that feel. I know it hard.
>>8250514
I'm not an expert, but the existing poems got scrubbed of her unorthodox punctuation, and some of her more intense stuff didn't get published.
>>8250514
What "original" means in Dickinson's oeuvre is a pretty contentious issue. Although a volume like pic related probably has more material than the book you have (and maybe fewer reductions) pretty much every edition of her work that is printed and publicly accessible will include arbitrarily added line breaks, conventionalized spelling and punctuation, not to mention a lack of contextual factors like her correspondence and even attached objects like leaves and flowers that obviously can't be printed. My advice would be to read what's in your collection, try to look up alternative versions of your favorites, and then finally try to get your hands on any version that includes the Master letters.
>>8250805
Thanks.
Also I guess I'll specify, it's the modern library "selected poems" from around 1948.
