Commentary on "DICKINSON" (1.01) "Because I could not stop" (2019)

 

COMMENTARY ON "DICKINSON" (1.01) "BECAUSE I COULD NOT STOP" (2019)

Recently, I began watching the Apple TV series, "DICKINSON" for the first time, due to finally gaining access to the Apple TV streaming channel. And naturally, I began my viewing of the series with its premiere episode, (1.01) "Because I could not stop". Although the series is highly acclaimed, I discovered I had a lot to complain about.

One, I have a problem with the episode's portrayal of Susan "Sue" Gilbert, Emily Dickinson's love and future sister-in-law. This portrayal seemed really off the mark, thanks to showrunner and screenwriter, Alena Smith's screenplay. The character had spent the entire first episode wearing a black evening gown, despite the span of several days. Come to think of it, Emily wore the same white day dress during most of the episode, with the exception of one or two changes in outfits. According to the episode, Sue began the series as her family's sole survivor. However, Sue's entire family had not been wiped out in real life. Around the time of her engagement to Austin Dickinson, most of her siblings were still alive and she had more than one brother. Her brothers, by the way, had provided a substantial dowry that enabled her and Austin to build their new home, Evergreen. But the series had portrayed Sue as lacking in money or support, which left her in a state of destitute.

Two, what year did this series began? The late 1840s, when Emily was in her late teens? The early 1850s, when Sue and Austin first became engaged? Or the mid-1850s, when the couple finally got married? Honestly, I am at a loss. I am aware that Sue and Austin first became engaged in 1853. This would make Emily and Sue at least 22 to 23 years old when the series first began, Austin at least 24 years old and the youngest Dickinson sibling, Lavinia, at least 20 years old. But the three Dickinson siblings behaved as if they were at least 17 to 20 years old. Very disconcerting.

Three, I hated the anachronisms featured in this series. I really hated them. I hated the modern music. I hated the modern dialogue. And I found the costumes, although pretty, rather sketchy. I will give the series' hairstylists credit for recapturing 1850s hairstyles I blame Sofia Coppola for beginning this use of modern music in period dramas in her 2006 movie, "MARIE ANTOINETTE". The use of modern music has popped up in various period dramas over the years - including in recent productions like "BRIDGERTON" and "THE BUCCANEERS", the second adaptation of Edith Wharton's last novel. And if I must be honest, I have grown to hate it. But the use of modern dialogue in "DICKINSON" struck me as the biggest elephant in the room for me (a problem also featured in "THE BUCCANEERS"). I have seen too many period dramas that featured period appropriate dialogue without coming off as a verbal museum. Why did series creator, Alena Smith, felt this was necessary or innovative? As for the costumes, well I have already pointed out most of my complaints about them. But they did reinforce my confusion over the time period for this particular episode.

I know what you are thinking. I must have really disliked that pilot episode of "DICKINSON". Well . . . you would be. To my utter surprise, I ended up enjoying (1.01) "Because I could not stop", despite it being wracked with anachronisms. Thanks to the episode's writing and the first-rate performances, I enjoyed it in the end. But what really sold the episode and the series (so far) for me was that one scene between Emily and Death. I simply found it emotional, poignant and a bit mind-blowing, thanks to Alena Smith's writing and Hailee Steinfeld and Wiz Khalifa's performances. Oh well, I guess I am hooked. I might as well grit my teeth over the annoying anachronisms and historical inaccuracies . . . and continued with this series.