I want to put my thoughts here because this has been stuck in my head all week.
I’ve noticed that we, as a class, (myself included), tend to refer to Walt Whitman exclusively as Whitman, and Emily Dickinson mostly as Emily. I’m wondering if this is an unconscious misogyny-based thing, or if I’m just reading too much into it.
I remember this being a major point of contention for me during the Harris/Trump race. The act of referring to a woman by her first name, instead of the traditional, often exclusive, use of last names when referring to men, serves to undermine a woman’s authority or respectability, making her seem less formal and more approachable.
I’m not sure if this is something that we could, or should, alter, I just think it’s interesting and maybe worth talking about. I hate the idea of Dickinson’s strength as a poet to be undermined by the tone of familiarity we often use with women.
Great observation, I hadn’t noticed that! I tend to refer to both of them by their last names because it feels awkward to call them Walt and Emily, haha. I do wonder if it may have something to do with personal connection – as the class is made up of mostly women, perhaps we feel more personally connected to and content to be on a first-name basis with another woman. You’re absolutely right in that it does inherently create an unconscious undermining of authority and skill, though.
That’s a really interesting question! Personally I usually just call her by her full name? I think some of it also has to do with syllable length-Whitman is two syllables, Dickinson is three, so some of it might be ease of getting a word out all at once.
I also think a lot of people feel closer to Dickinson than Whitman in this class–there’s been a lot of talk of the paranormal and using her first name indicates more affection and familiarity as opposed to undermining her worth as a woman poet.
That’s a really interesting observation! Personally, I tend to refer to both of them by their last names, Whitman and Dickinson, since that’s how I write about them. I think there is definitely some element of misogyny in the way women are often infantilized while male artists are granted more formality and authority.
That said, with Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman specifically, I also wonder if part of the naming difference comes from the different kinds of relationships their writing invites. We read Whitman through fully published, highly self-fashioned poems that establish “Whitman” as a public literary figure. Even when the voice is intimate, it still feels deliberate, performative, and authorial. Dickinson, on the other hand, often reaches us through poems and letters that feel private, compressed, and less formally mediated.
I also noticed that when we talk about Susan Dickinson as “Sue,” it reinforces this sense of familiarity around Dickinson’s personal world. That informality seems to extend to Emily as well, making her writing easier to imagine from within and encouraging a greater sense of closeness.
This was really interesting to read, I hadn’t really thought about that, especially in correlation to this past election! I personally call both of them by their last names because it feels more natural in my opinion. I’m trying to think of any influential/famous women figures that are only kind of referred to on a first name basis… I might have to think on it haha. Something I did want to bring up though is I feel like there are well known women who are known by their first name and it’s seen as more powerful. This is a bit of a different kind of example but think of Zendaya. Most people are familiar with her simply by this name (even though it’s just a stage name), and it’s seen as something unique and recognizable to people. It makes me wonder if this perception of names has shifted a bit over time.