Plath and Hughes Poetry

Literature exists within a continuous cycle, consistently drawing upon previous works and ideas within contemporary texts, imbuing antiquated pieces with new life, and it is through the evolution of this cycle that textual conversations between art, culture and peoples are formed. Through the exploration of shared experiences, the continuous journey of prominent personas and the integration of biographical context, a mythopoetic canon is forged across Sylvia Plath's Ariel (1963) and Ted Hughes’ The Birthday Letters. (1998), which is rife with disparities. It is within these dissonances that the nature of the supposed conversation becomes clear- it is not a conversation at all, rather, Hughes attempts to summon Plath’s persona and spirit to enact a sort of judicial séance. Thus, it is through the disparities in the mythopoetic canon and biographical poems forged across the ‘conversation’ of Plath and Hughes that the corruption of their relationship and work becomes clear.
 

Through reflection of ones lived experience, Plath explores the nature of cyclical narratives and the evolution of the self. The Arrival of the Bee Box and Daddy serve to initiate the inaugural suffering persona as seen through claustrophobic imagery of confinement, “the coffin of a midget” and historical allusion to disparate power hierarchies such as the suffering of Jewish individuals under Nazi control. Additionally, the ‘Plathian’ motif of the “veil” is introduced in The Arrival of the Bee Box, symbolising separation from the self and one's soul. Plath works to banish the pain and suffering of the persona through breaking from the rigid stanzaic form with the final line of The Arrival of the Bee Box, “the box is only temporary”. This realisation and freedom further presents itself within Daddy as despite having “tried to die” the persona is reborn in power, the penultimate image of “villagers…dancing” serving to banish the suffering persona and replace lamentation with joy. Plath crafts a mythic martyr through the trials and tribulations of rebirth, characterised by an inaugural suffering in order to gain power, a celebration of femininity and freedom.
 

A confessional introspection of memory and nostalgia, Hughes mediates his involvement in Plath’s life through intertextual dialogue with her work, creating disparities and disillusionment within Plath's work. The Bee God serves to corrode and banish Plath’s mythic hero through imagery of subservience and innocence, the integration of ‘Plathian’ colour symbolism inverted to represent purity and innocence, “white regalia”, alluding to a wedding. Further, the independence of the Plathian persona is compromised as “you bowed to your daddy”, fully negating the Plathian persona’s struggle against the disparate power structure as witnessed in Daddy. It is Hughes’ attempt at renewing the Plathian persona that rather serves to erode the power from the Ariel collection, further seen in Red as he subverts Plath’s use of colour symbolism. Hugh interprets “red” as danger and futility rather than the maternal and matriarchal power as established within Plath’s work Nick and the Candlestick. Thus, it is through Hughes attempts to appropriate Plathian imagery, personas and narratives that the disparities between collections become clear and begin to erode the integrity of the ‘conversation’ itself.
 

A highly crafted poetic insight into the corrosive effects of societal pressures on the self, the Plathian persona must undergo a state of decay before being reborn in power. The performative rhythm of Lady Lazarus gives a sense of riot and voyeurism, furthered by images of cinematic horror and the grotesque, “the nose, the eye pits, the full set of teeth”, “I may be skin and bones”, described as “the big strip tease”. The power found in accepting one's flaws in the face of contextual societal pressures further gives the Plathian persona power against the erasure of identity as seen through the continuous motif of the “veil”. This is furthered within Lady Lazarus as the persona exclaims “these are my hands, my knees”, wherein repetition highlights her attempts to reclaim some sense of self in the aftermath of the corrosion of identity. The Plathian mythic hero rises again through mythological allusion and phoenix imagery as, “from ash I rise with my red hair and I eat men like air”, a powerful promise, negated by Hughes as he makes the Plathian martyr into a danger or infantilises her, as seen in Fever. Therefore, despite Plath’s attempts to poetically disseminate patriarchal confides, oppressions and harms, Hughes invokes linguistic dissonances to rewrite the ‘conversation’, with no chance for a Plathian rebuttal.
 

A collision of perspectives, the incongruence between Plath and Hughes’ ‘textual conversation’ is elucidated as they explore the duality of shared experience whilst negating the corrosion of memory and contrast of perspectives. Fever 103 by Plath and Fever by Hughes each explore conflicting sides of a shared experience, highlighting the disparate perspectives, ethics and philosophies that ground each collection, communicating the futility of ‘conversation’. For Plath, there is a return to colour symbolism and a satirical tone, “I am too pure”…”I am a camellia”. In addition, through  the minor use of pronouns within the piece there is an understanding of the metamorphic decay of the persona, furthered by tactile imagery of heat, similar to the final stanza of Lady Lazarus with its phoenix imagery. Hughes undermines and subverts this power through imagery of the hysterical and heroic, “what I was really saying was: stop crying wolf” and “how sick was she?”. This ignorance of the Plathian personas power and rather the crafting of an infantile character, “with her helpless baby bird gape” serves to entirely negate the rebirth of the Plathian hero through a bastardised characterisation. Further, Hughes’ statuesque imagery of the “stone man” paints a heroic portrait of chivalry and honour rather than the defamation and decay that The Birthday Letters administers to Plath’s works, thus removing the possibility of a morally, ethically, or academically sound ‘conversation’. The duality of Fever and Fever 103 serves to highlight the utter dissonance between these poets works as the disparities brought forth by Hughes are used to summon and persecute a woman who had already suffered enough whilst living.
 

Thus, the disparities in the ‘conversation’ between Ariel and The Birthday Letters severely impact the way in which the texts interact, as it is not a conversation at all- rather it is a spiritual defamation of Plath's work, life, and ethics. Having not published the Ariel collection herself, Plath did not consent to any part of this supposed ‘conversation’, a digression only furthered by attempts to immortalise the Plathian persona as immoral, manipulative, and cunning via The Birthday Letters through integration of Plath’s motifs and themes, therefore decaying any hope of power or peace found at the end of Lady Lazarus. Hughes’ disparities were crafted to raze the morality and integrity of Plath’s work, but rather, they act as evidence to the contrary as they highlight a man’s attempts to demoralise the work and life of a dead poet who sought to speak out against patriarchal ignorance and the silencing of women and girls. The conversation is not real- it never was, and to treat it as a viable academic source is to ignore the ethical ambiguity of patriarchy, misogyny, and literary plagiarism.