Emily Dickinson

I can’t exactly figure out why I dislike Emily Dickinson’s poetry so much. I found that as I was reading it that I was constantly bothered by it. It may have been the fact that the old image of her as a crazy recluse kept creeping into my mind as I read. At some point during every poem I read I would get distracted and moan to myself “Go outside, Emily!”
The introduction provides us with the information that although Emily greatly admired Emerson’s writing, she never journeyed next door to meet him when he was in town lecturing. The Norton Anthology explains that she had preferred to keep the Emerson of her imagination instead of meeting the real person. This is exactly how I understand the woman while I read her stuff.
The poems all seemed to me to be, as they are normally characterized, very observant. But nothing within them felt really intimate, in regard to her or the subject of poem. The introduction called her daring, but I struggled to find any audacity within her poetry. Mainly I felt that Dickinson is very impersonal in her poems, does not show any real connection with the concepts she writes about and that her writing, while it sounds lovely, isn’t meant to make a whole lot of sense to anyone but her.
Of the one’s we read, I probably disliked the following the most:
1. #124: line 1: “Safe in their Alabaster Chambers”
I understand that it is the convention of poetry to use a lot of the passive voice, mainly for rhyme, suspense and emphasis on a subject, but it really got to me in this poem. I didn’t have any idea what she was talking about. The main subject seems to be the members of the resurrection, at least in the first stanza. The second still leaves me wondering what Dickinson is getting at. I think what she is saying is that once the resurrection occurs, all of physical time as we know it will enter into this arc which will also draw in the earth and the skies. I take the final three lines to mean that while the aforementioned is happening, the hierarchy on earth will be shed and worthless. Nevertheless, I had to read this nonsense five times to make the connections between the two stanzas, since the subject shifts from the either the dwelling of the members of the resurrection or the members themselves, depending on how you read it, and the events that will happen during the resurrection.
2. #146. First line: “All over grown by cunning moss,”
I don’t get this one either. When Dickson refers to “This Bird” is she talking about Charlotte Bronte or herself? She may have intended to be ambiguous there, I give her that. But the final stanza is garb to me. Is Bronte the Nightingale? Well then I guess “This Bird” in the second stanza is Bronte as well. But then what does she mean by “Yet not in all the nests I meet”? Is Dickinson trying to express that she has gone looking for Bronte without being able to find her? Didn’t she just say that the bird was in Yorkshire? Or was the line about Yorkshire just an observation? Or is Dickinson the bird, and Bronte the more distinguished Nightingale? I have no idea.
I don’t want to think that my problem is that I just don’t get poetry. I just don’t care for hers. I think an issue that I have is that I felt that most of her poetry is about concepts, but not about anything specific. Also, I think that I decided that her musings were awfully trite, but I recognize after some consideration that her work probably wasn’t as trite during her time.