On Feb. 11, 1963, Sylvia Plath was found dead in her London flat. With her young son and daughter locked in an upstairs bedroom, she gassed herself in the kitchen. She had long battled depression. This final, deadly bout began the previous summer when her marriage to the poet Ted Hughes disintegrated, a casualty of his infidelity. At her death, Plath had written more than 220 poems, a novel, short stories, a children’s book, essays, letters — most of the work unpublished. She was 30.
When her poetry collection “Ariel” appeared in 1966, it became a sensation. Using vivid, precise language, Plath documented subjects vital to her — motherhood, marriage, betrayal, suicide. In poems like “Daddy” and “The Applicant,” searing indictments of a disloyal husband, Plath accosted Hughes with a fury rarely seen in literature. Hers was a singular, powerful female voice.
Comments
There is really too much here to even competently respond too. First, the writing is excellent and the subject speaks for itself. However, the destruction of Ms. Plath represented far more than Hughes's, what the writer would call, unfaithfulness. Sylvia's demise was and is representative of the dysfunction of western morality regarding not only marriage but the very act of living itself. The expectations game of how life itself should look, should be lived and experienced leads some to believe that in so much as their lives do not match up with the culture's expectations that they have failed and that this failure is utter and total.
Neither Hughes nor Plath were able to see the other person. Both could only see the title husband or wife and the person who wore the title ceased to exist. The very person they became attached to disappeared in a title. Oddly in the west where personal freedom is so admired and so discussed our actual beliefs lead to the burying of the individual behind a massive structure of "expected" behaviors and beliefs.
Both Ms. Plath and Mr. Hughes sought a freedom that was a vision of what life should look like, but neither could turn it into a fact. Ms. Plath for her own part from my viewpoint was unable to deal with the thought of what life could be as opposed to what she thought it should be. She has always been a sad tale of the destructiveness of western culture to true individual freedom.
This comment has been removed.
Thanks Paul for the insightful and informative article about Sylvia Plath. Her story reminds us of the destructive nature of depression which, tragically, often goes undiagnosed until after a suicide.
You say "Today, women enjoy and unprecedented level of success." Status by what measure? Income, status and power?
If women must succumb to these traditional patriarchical standards, I fear for the future of the most vital element of society, the family, and the children and marriages who take a back seat to chasing the vacuous holy grail of income, status and power.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
Well gee "Kitch" I live in the west but if one desires I can comment on the East. The inability of mankind to respect the individual within any given culture can be an interesting topic. However, the discussion here was Plath and not Islamic societies. It would however be quite easy to point out the fallacies of the East. Yet there would seem to me to be no point to it. As I said I live in the West and I look here to make cultural changes not to the broader world in which I have no impact, given the little impact I can have here.
By the way I note in both your responses to comments by others Islam shows up once again. What's that about if not obsession? I doubt Islam had much if any impact upon Plath. Now we could probably both agree basic "religious" underpinnings of society had a great deal of impact.
By the way I note in both your responses to comments by others Islam shows up once again. What's that about if not obsession? I doubt Islam had much if any impact upon Plath. Now we could probably both agree basic "religious" underpinnings of society had a great deal of impact.
Actually where we part company "Kitch" is that I see both religions Islam and Christianity as one; both western, two; as the cause of the loss of individual freedom in the West. I do not view Islam as something seperate from the western view of monotheism. Nor do I see Islam the "religion" as an opponent of the West but merely as another outgrowh of the monotheistic views developed historically in the West. Now the depths of Islams slide into "fundamentalism" is a political issue whereas the impact of the "religion" itself just as with "Christianity" is a philosophical issue.
I remain respectful of your view of Islam and in many ways agree with you, however what I view as your "obsession" with it has more to do with a sense that you miss an important overarching philosophical question regarding "freedom", womens rights, and in fact the very point of living.
In terms of Plath then the relationship is one of possibilities verses the "expectations" of this monotheistic culture where "right" and "wrong" are predetermined by "big daddy in the sky". As to the huge struggle between Islam and the West I frankly don't see it. Political Islam if it has not already is reaching its zenith, it is not viable in the modern world and like communism will die of its own inertia except it will do so more rapidly. What won't die so rapidly is the "expectations" of the individual within culture that both religions will leave behind.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
Im partial to Sandra Fluke
Well "kitch" I don't even see it on level with those two relatively long term aberrations. We agree on the fundamentals so I don't consider our disagreement to its importance as that big a deal. We will just agree to disagree on its fundamental importance. As I said though it really doesn't have anything to do with Plath.