ROS - MOD A #HSC - Module A essay for advanced english which received a 18.5/20 in the HSC PDF

Preview

Summary

Module A essay for advanced english which received a 18.5/20 in the HSC...

Description

ROS – MOD A ESSAY Capacitating limitless interpretations, the poetry of Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes is both resonant and dissonant in discourse as they uniformly seek to overthrow narratives that oppress themselves. In her anthology ‘Ariel’ (1962), Plath contests the oppressive patriarchal narrative in order to reach a state of purity. Resonating with this, Hughes poetic collection, ‘Birthday Letters’ (1998), timelessly draws on the same contextual circumstances to undermine the Plath narrative born from her tragic death. Ostensibly, Hughes’ anthology appears to serve as a simplistic response to Plath’s poetry, however, the emergence of a dialogic relationship unveils a complexity far deeper as a reading of the texts in tandem sparks a powerful mosaic conversation that transcends the significance of the texts singularly. Hughes challenges the traditional view of Plath’s poetry through the lens of her death, subsequently empowering readers to comprehend how Plath’s poetry serves not merely as a key to unlock the mystery surrounding her death, nor autobiographical truth, but as a form of art and a vehicle for her catharsis. In doing so, Hughes enables audiences old and new to critically consider the unbridled role context plays in the construction of meaning, subsequently forcing readers to question the ANOT which facilitates a retelling of their roles and relationship

Using poetry as a performative mechanism to challenge and reframe her role in the patriarchal narrative, Plath lay the foundations for a textual conversation upon which Hughes constructs his challenge. Plath's ‘Daddy’ harnesses a self-reflexive voice in combination with jarring holocaust imagery, as she describes herself beginning to “talk like a Jew, I think I may well be a Jew”, to simultaneously appropriate her sense of powerlessness whilst confronting the reader. The free verse quintains, bereft of a uniform rhyme scheme evoke an oppressive tone of uncertainty, enabling Plath to further confront the reader before she employs imagery through the symbolic colour of death to characterise Hughes as, “a man in black with a Meinkampf look and a love of the rack and the screw” who “bit my pretty red heart in two”. This tortured metaphor of love served as the catalyst for the vilification of Hughes, creating a literary image of Plath, as ‘the victim’ and Hughes, as ‘the oppressor’, cemented by Alvarez’ ‘The Savage God’. Furthermore, Plath successfully exploits the malleability of 20th Century stereotypes of feminine vulnerability asserting “I have always been scared of you”, to cast Hughes as a source of torture, subsequently evoking an empathetic response from readers. Hence, Plath leverages the malleability of poetry to paint Hughes as the patriarchal oppressor, laying the foundations for a textual conversation.

Igniting a textual conversation, Hughes poetry invites the reader to revisit Ariel in light of the veracity of the Plath narrative that obfuscated Plath’s purpose. This is reflected in ‘The Shot’, as Hughes attempts to undermine Plath’s poetic works that misassociated his identity with that of the entirety of the patriarchy, particularly ‘Daddy’, as he states, “I did not even know, I had been hit”. Hughes employs the metaphor of a bullet, “you were undeflected. You were gold-jacketed, solid silver, Nickel-

tipped, Trajectory perfect”, to symbolise the power and transcendence of Plath’s poetry and the subsequent futility of his attempt to poetically converse with Plath’s audience. Nonetheless, Hughes attempts to regain autonomy over himself by exploring the epistemological problem of totalising narratives; ones that seek to stand irrefutable in the face of the impossibility of encompassing absolute truth. He achieves this in the last stanza as he applies the particular in his inability to fully know Plath as he only “managed a wisp of [her] hair”, to comment on the universal inability to fully understand the dynamic and complex relationship between Plath and himself. Hence, Hughes ignites a public conversation with Ariel, as well as, a private conversion with the reader, which combine to uniformly warn us of the dangers of complacency to totalising narratives, subsequently widening the lens through which we view Plath's poetry

Through the lens of postmodernism, Plath contests the authority of the patriarchy by using the dialogic platform poetry provides to explore domestic subjugation under the patriarchal stranglehold. This is evident in Plath’s poem ‘Lady Lazarus’ which, in contrast to the political rhetoric of her time, pivots on the power of subversion to over-throw stability and return power to the individual. The technique of destabilising imagery aligns the speakers suffering with historical atrocities, evident as she alludes to holocaust victims, “my face a featureless, fine Jew linen”, and objectifies her body by referring to it as an “opus” and a “valuable”. Plath then attributes her suffering to “brutes”, using male connotations to direct her message towards the patriarchy which which has resulted in what Janet Malcolm refers to as, “Hughes burial alive”, in each retelling of their relationship. The conclusion of the poem undermines the patriarchy by reimagining the speaker in a position where she “eats men like air”. This transformation is symbolic of Plath’s emancipation from the confines of gender imposed by her 20th century context, thus provoking a questioning of the legitimacy of gender constructs and ultimately, the axioms which underpin socially accepted truth itself.! Thus, Plath leverages the power of poetic language to challenge the restrictive 20th Century paradigms of a ruling patriarchy and subjugated feminine voice, establishing the question; what defines social truth at all?

Hughes’ responds by drawing our attention to the constructed nature of truth, and the unreliability of interpretation. From the subjective lens of memory explored in ‘Fulbright Scholars’, Hughes’ constructs a lexical chain of rhetorical questions, “where it was?”, “were you among them?”, to evoke a sense of uncertainty, symbolic of the instability of interpretation and truth. Hughes is not only responding to Plath’s poetry, but establishes dialogue with the Plath narrative that attempted to solidify his role as the patriarchal oppressor. He contests the parochial view of this narrative, through his clever repetition of the word “remember” as it highlights the perils of the link between memory and perception, as they define how we interpret react and construct meaning; an inextricable link that lies at the heart of our inability to ascertain a definitive interpretation . As such, Hughes invites readers to re-interpret Plath’s poetic collection through an epistemological lens to reveal that meaning is formed through our construction, a concept which underscores the futility of ever ascertaining definite truth.

2

Ultimately, in establishing a powerful mosaic conversation with Plath, Hughes ignites a broader conversation among the audience in order to reveal the plurality of truth. Thus, the poetic conversation provides a platform for Hughes to present a resounding message to audiences old and new; we must relinquish our attempts to define their poetry in absolutist terms and embrace a quietest acceptance of the limitations of human knowledge, thus facilitating a reframing the traditional roles of victim and oppressor as we accept Plath’s poetry for its artistic purpose.

3...