Terence Davies’ film “A Quiet Passion” claims to be about Emily Dickinson.
However, after the recent private screening held at Amherst Cinema, Davies admitted his own manager had commented after seeing the film that it was more an autobiography of Davies than of Emily Dickinson.
Perhaps the only truth Davies has uttered in connection with this film is that it is a fictionalized narrative, full of fabrications serving only the story line Davies wanted to create.
Unfortunately, many viewers unfamiliar with Emily Dickinson will take his distortion for truth, which it is not. Davies has completely twisted who Dickinson was, her work, just about everything possible associated with this gifted poet.
By portraying her erroneously as a bitter recluse haunted by failed recognition, he has created a narrative devoid of the truth one reads — if one reads — in the poet’s own words. He has chosen to ignore the rich world from which she constantly drew, through her continued engagement via reading and correspondence, and her love of writing as a pure necessity of being.
When audience members questioned Davies’ decisions to ignore Dickinson’s lifelong, vibrant connections, he waved his hand dismissively while acknowledging the volumes of manuscripts, notes and letters he hadn’t even read. When asked why, since the natural world and her gardens were of utmost importance and inspiration to her, did he choose not to include anything about them in the film, Davies replied, “At best, a cul-de-sac. So she had a little garden. So what?”
Additionally, while Davies claimed to follow a family narrative, he completely falsifies interactions, and ignores Dickinson’s close relationship with her sister-in-law, Susan. Davies claimed he was taking poetic license with the film. However, there was nothing remotely poetic about it — a more accurate statement would have been to call it poetic licentiousness.
Heidi St. Jean
Simsbury, Connecticut