Ramble Ramble Ramble

(I Died for Beauty, but Beauty was scarce)

The poem seems to explore the consequences of standing by the personal values that mean the most to you. (Often, I would postulate that they would be privately held values) The persona "Died for Beauty" a line that can be metaphorically interpreted as meaning that the persona did not sacrifice their critical value(s). The persona awakens to find someone who has also staunchly supported their own critical value(s). Having both stuck to their values, they feel a connection, represented by strong (nouns?) "Kinsman" and "brethren". The fact that they have died or failed could be a metaphorical allusion to a sacrifice the characters have made due to their uncompromising abilities - which in this instance would presumably be the ability to belong in society.

HOWEVER, it may instead be seen as a penalty that has not yet been paid - that is, to cross the floor from not belonging to belonging, a sacrifice (represented by the "death") must be paid. Perhaps, this would take the form of a compromise, not in the core values held so tightly, but in other strong, yet not critical, values. After having "died" - ie paid their penalty and sacrificed some of the lesser values, they have the ability to belong. Having not sacrificed their critical values, they can feel positive about belonging, in that it does not compromise them in an unreasonable fashion. It is possible that it is the sacrifice itself which allows the characters to find common ground, which could be supported by the fact that they had to: Die before exchanging dialogue when "He questioned softly why I failed?" Or, perhaps, it allows the belonging to take place later, which could be suggested by the fact that they were buried separately. Perhaps still, it could suggest that the characters are more likely to converse and realise their commonality having made their sacrifice prior to meeting.

One could argue that Dickinson suggests that if you stick to your values, eventually, you will find someone who does the same, and you can truly belong. (Presumably Dickinson executed this technique with great skill from within her house... [Obvious Sarcasm])

But, that would be a rather naive and optimistic view to purport. It also ignores the significance of the death - which, has been suggested to represent a sacrifice of some sort. So, rather, Dickinson is more likely suggesting that there is no such thing as belonging without sacrifice. She warns however, that sacrifices should not be total and unconditional - and that to be completely comfortable, you must not sacrifice your most critical value(s) - even if the result of that is that belonging be denied of several occasions. In this sense, true belonging is not one when no sacrifices were necessary, but one where the sacrifices that were (inevitably and unavoidably) necessary could be made without violating the critical defining value(s) - and that the sacrifices could be made comfortably, without regret, sorrow or remorse.

TL;DR:

Either you make a compromise that does not forsake your critical values and you subsequently belong - OR - maintain all of your values and remain isolated, alienated, alone and NOT belonging.