Reading prompts for October 18 - Dickinson and Plath
Choose one (or more, if you really feel like it :))
1. Provide a literary text analysis (slow reading / close reading) of Dickinson's poem "Before I got my eye put out".
2. Compare the relations of writing (forms), nature, and possibly womanhood, in Dickinson's "The Mushroom is the Elf of Plants" and Sylvia Plath's "Mushrooms".
3. Can you relate, either critically or creatively, any of the poems you read with Val Plumwood's discussion of "ecofeminsms"?
(image by former student Laura Strazzabosco for Sylvia Plath's poem, "Mushrooms")
1- In the beginning of "Before I got my eye put out", by Emily Dickinson, there is immediately a preconception of blindness in the verse that gives the poem its name. However, in the poem, there is seeing, even if by the "absent" eyes of a reader; in fact, her words, as palpable things, invoke sight of something that cannot now be seen. Is it memory, remembrance? I believe it to be something other, to which I will get to by the end of this analysis.
ReplyDeleteIn the first stanza, she talks of how she liked to see as the other creatures in nature see. That is, while she had sight she was a part of the unity that constitutes nature. When she calls animals for having eyes in the third verse, because they know no other way I believe it has to do with the observing nature of the "I" in the poem, but also with the irony of putting words, "things", into paper that, in this way, wilfully disappear for her negative sight. Going back in the argument, and in relation to the last three verses of the first stanza, she opposes, in the second stanza, that seeing "as the things that have eyes" would be split up by the idea of someone from outside (today, from the time of blindness) telling her what was in front of her as if she saw. It it in the "splitting" that all things are hers (not in unity), the "Mountains", the "Meadows", etc. So, in the third verse of the first stanza, when she says she would like to be all things that have eyes, there seems to be implied, since meadows and mountains do not have eyes, that what has eyes is herself as an observer (that makes sight and blindness par on par, in this case). This idea comes, firstly, from the fourth stanza when she says "to look at when I liked" regarding the things she sees (with her blindness); then from the last to verses, where she says "So safer – guess – with just my soul / Opon the window pane / Where other creatures put their eyes / Incautious – of the Sun –", which I interpret as such: when the other creatures look back to her (she is observing from her blindness, not just the one built by the poem but the one suggested by it as well, that of "with just my soul", her loneliness; that loneliness entangles the thing she sees outside as phantasms of her inability to partake with them, not only phisically, by the bounds of her self-enclosure, by also by the inerent characteristics of poetry as well - word are built and not the world the words are aiming to) they are not caucious with the sun, a divine (and Nature) figure which seems to be her own vision; and the sun blinds. The animals blind with her look and that is as if it is what causes her own blindness. Therefore, "all things that have eyes" in the first stanza is her observing returning to an empty shell that sees as she is blind; and the "know no other way" that the animals have of seeing (than having eyes), in the first stanza, is the sight of poetry to her, which sees by blindness, and participates in Nature by being separate from it. At the same time, in the poem, she is the sun, that element that gives life to the whole of Nature.
First and more evident difference when putting in comparison these two poems is the metric organizations. Dickinson organizes her language in stanzas of four verses, that alter in 8 and 6 syllables each. Each stanza also seems to work as paragraph, in the sense of capturing each their theme that takes part in the whole scheme of the poem. Specific stanzas but always in relation to the whole. Meanwhile, Plath’s metric works in another direction. She packs her shoer five syllables’ verses in trios. She builds short but strong and pointed verses in stanzas that, although separated, do not end in themselves, but are always connected as we can see when se finishes the sixth one by starting the sentence she will continue in the next one.
ReplyDeleteEmily Dickinson works in this poem as a scribe who records the scheme of the mushrooms in nature, and how she, nature, even likes having this never-on-time, fawning creature that roams in her, but it is not considered a part of her: the elves are magical creatures that have supernatural powers and are thought to be seductive. Also, elves are normally related to a gloomy white color, which could another reason to link them to the playful appearances of mushrooms around a forest with the usual white upper parts. We can see again this reference to white at the beginning of Sylvia Plath’s poem. In her poem, since there in no explicit elf, we could say that there is not so much fantasy playful element, whereas we get even. Feeling of the stomping, of the marching of these “earless, eyeless, and voiceless” army that survive through nature and will stop only at nothing. Nonetheless, one could say that both poems are related in the way they create an image of mushrooms as half intruders in nature, “apostate” with their “foot on the door”, as parasites of it that are in it but are working not with nature.
To understand their specificities more, I think it is interesting to look briefly at another share element both poems: time. Dickinson poem starts by stating that this elf of plants is not presenting at evening, but always appears back in the morning at the same shack. Meanwhile, for Plath the action takes place during the night, this silent and soft action that is also fiercely in achieving its goal: this goal will come in the morning, when mushrooms “shall inherit the earth”. So, for Dickinson the mushrooms play and deceit since the morning, whereas for Plath it is exactly in the darkness and careless of the night when the army of fungi has the opportunity to multiply and advance. Maybe this difference can be explained if we now, to finish, try to interpretate the possible different compromises each of the poets takes with mushrooms as political allies.
DeleteThe second evident difference that one can point out between these poems is the relation of voice of the poem with mushrooms. On one hand, Dickinson describes from and external point of view that takes the stance of the “I” the mushroom and how he is in and with nature; on the other hand, in Plath’s poem there is a resounding “we” that is expressing the poem, both in the literally construction and the action that are being talked about. So, in Dickinson’s poem, the mushroom is seen as an intruder in nature, in the poem even, although she tries to show us his ways and tricks. Meanwhile Plath embraces everything that the idea of the mushrooms brings to the table and uses to show an energetic stand against all that is built around her/it/us. Finally, in Dickinson’s poem, to make this distance with the mushroom clearer, she states the mushroom as a “he”, while nature is a “she”. I would like to point out that this distance she takes with the playful and deceiving mushroom in comparison with the other plants is kept vague, as she says that the grass is somehow pleased with him, or so she feels. But this political distance with what the mushroom can teach is completely broken in Plath. The whole poem is but a long marching song of the fungi army as an army of all those creatures that diet on water and crumbs, of this kind that even after that, after being voiceless and having to move quietly at night will demand little or nothing with bland manners. While Emily Dickinson sees a describes an unequal relationship in nature that she wants to stay away from, Sylvia Plath builds into the idea of the mushroom a possible direction in which direct the collective forces.
2- In analysing both poems, I have tried to incorporate Plumwood’s essay as much as I can into my analysis.
ReplyDeleteWhen I am comparing Emily Dickinson’s “The Mushroom is the Elf of Plants” and Sylvia Plath's “Mushrooms,” I can see how both poets engage with similar themes such as nature and womanhood (metaphorically) by using the image of mushroom but in totally different ways. To Dickinson, the mushroom is a wild and conceivably, an enchanted organism. It is there vivid and alive, against the impossibility of anyone including her, mastering or understanding the ways of nature. As stated in the poem, the mushroom is shown as a "Elf," implying a magical and fleeting aspect in nature. Also, the phrase "'Tis Vegetation's Juggler" conveys a feeling of playful mischief, reflecting Dickinson's admiration for nature's hidden and humorous elements. She also claims that the mushroom’s spring up beneath “Summer’s Circumspet” and applauses that this resistance is admirable. She talks about the rebellious feature of the female figure by associating nature with being an “Apostate” and actually being a kind of rebel. The woman here is "that Mushroom". This is where I began to think about the work of Val Plumwood; she has a problem with such dualisms that are present in their own western culture, especially with the one that divides culture and nature, where the latter one is thought of as subordinate and needs to be controlled. It would appear however of Dickinson that this would be the very opposite of that, for Dickinson appears to understand that women have been associated with nature, but that women, like nature, have their own strength and rebellion that is independent of any sovereign attempts to label or confine them.
In contrast, Plath’s poem “Mushrooms” concentrates on the mushrooms in a more realistic manner. The phrase that has been used in the poem, “so many of us”, is reminiscent of the societal stereotype of women as weaklings, that is an impression that most people have, however, it is far from the truth. Just like those unnoticed mushrooms who wait patiently, women will also take over the world, exclusively a question of time. Thus, this brings me back to Plumwood: in particular how she views women and nature as being in some way dominated and therefore retrievable, without however losing their space or the strength of assertion that they have in that space. The mushrooms of Plath are akin to that aspect of growing over time as they have always been there growing in little spat out areas but very slowly. Additionally, the line: "Had Nature any supple Face / Or could she one contemn" indicates that nature, like women, is considered as something to be loved or controlled by society. Plumwood's article displays notably the notion that reproducing women have a natural connection to nature. She underlines that both men and women have a responsibility for protecting and care for the environment. Also, with the statement: “Our foot’s in the door.” Plath suggests that the mushrooms as a figure of women are right at the verge of crashing the barriers and such close understanding of themselves.
To conclude, Val Plumwood’s ecofeminist analysis of the dualisms that are utilized to oppress women is compatible with the themes in the both poems by Dickinson and Plath in the sense that both poets critique the patriarchal domination of women and nature. In Dickinson’s poem, the focus is on the transcendental nature of beauty and all things beautiful from the natural world whereas in Plath’s poem, she emphasizes the importance of of dominion and freedom, illustrating how those marginalised can still speak.
2- Sylvia Plath’s Mushrooms is potentially an extended metaphor for the women’s movement since she draws connections between the characteristics of mushrooms and the experience of women as an oppressed group (or any marginalized mass excluded by patriarchal norms and expectations). The poem's gradual, rhythmic flow reflects the subtle but steady rise of the feminist revolution, with lines like "Shelves, tables" illustrating how women have been objectified and restricted within the domestic sphere. The repetition of "So many of us" emphasizes the magnitude of these marginalized masses. When Plath writes, "Our kind multiplies: We shall by morning / Inherit the earth. Our foot’s in the door," she reassures the movement. Just like the quiet multiplication of mushrooms, an overlooked but crucial part of nature, women, too, will spread subtly and steadily, according to this reading. When it comes to form, there are eleven stanzas with a syllable structure where each line contains five syllables. The use of enjambment creates fluidity, while alliteration, as seen in "Soft fists insist," and assonance, like in "very Whitely, discreetly, Very quietly," generate a musical, interconnected feel, reminiscent of the way mycelium connects mushrooms underground. It is possible to visualize each stanza as a mushroom cap popping here and there. The chant-like rhythm and repeated words evoke the idea of spells or witchy incantations. This can be connected to the concept of an underground power—mushrooms and women alike—growing quietly, feared for their (mysterious nature and) transformative power. In this sense, mushroom metaphor could be read as a commentary on non-appreciation and invisibility since mushrooms play an essential role in nature but are often forgotten or overlooked, much like those (women) who perform essential but undervalued roles in society.
ReplyDeleteEmily Dickinson’s mushroom imagery in Mushroom is the Elf of Plants, on the other hand, is whimsical and mystical, highlighting its magical and trickster-like qualities. By referring to the mushroom as the “Elf of Plants,” she invokes a sense of mischief and fantasy. The mushroom appears as an elusive and surprising entity, like a “Juggler” or an “Apostate,” and with its “surreptitious Scion,” she may be suggesting a slow yet steady rebellion, which could be linked to a feminist reading similar to Plath’s. This is also reflected via the language and literary devices. Dickinson uses quatrains with distinct rhyme schemes, giving the poem a lyrical and musical quality. The use of dashes creates pauses and interruptions that mirror the unpredictable and mystical qualities she ascribes to the mushroom. The alliterations and assonances, which create a tongue-twister effect, help mimic the small yet powerful presence of mushrooms as they emerge silently and unexpectedly. In this sense, the poem could hint at a feminist reading: like mushrooms that quietly defy the natural order and sprout where least expected, women can also resist conformity and challenge the established patriarchal system. Moreover, mushrooms are presented as both mysterious and yet unsettling to some extent, considering their swift and unpredictable (dis)appearance., through which Dickinson captures rebellious qualities once again. Especially through the imagery of the “Apostate,” she depicts mushrooms as critters that defy norms and play tricks (not necessarily from an ecofeminist perspective, given her time). Her tone is playful, reflecting the impish but mystical energy of the mushroom. In this light, the poem may also be highlighting a “nature-act,” where the mushroom plays an active role in the ecological process, emphasizing that nature’s actions are dynamic and complex.
In a nutshell, both Plath and Dickinson highlight the transformative power of mushrooms in their poems although the latter does so more subtly, if intended. They both use literary devices such as enjambment, alliteration, and assonance, through which a rhythmic and musical quality that mirrors the mushroom's quiet yet powerful presence is created. Plath’s work draws a connection between the subtle, persistent growth of mushrooms and the gradual rise of the feminist movement, using rhythmic and musical qualities to illustrate this quiet revolution whereas Dickinson’s portrayal is whimsical and mystical, emphasizing the mushroom's elusive and rebellious nature. It is possible to link their poems to feminist movement; in that, much like mushrooms, marginalized groups—particularly women—can defy expectations and resist oppression. Whether through Plath’s vision of collective strength or Dickinson’s playful depiction of rebellion, the poems could be considered as revealing how nature and women’s experiences intertwine, illustrating their resilience and potential for change.
Delete3 – When reading Sylvia Plath’s poem “Mushrooms” we can relate it to ideas found in Val Plumwood’s analysis of ecofeminism. In the second stanza, the voice of the poem speaks of “Our toes, our noses / Take hold on the loam, / Acquire the air.”, and we can relate this act of reaching out for air as the challenge that ecofeminism throws unto the traditional dualism of the concepts of the mind/body or spirit/matter. The counterpart of the male world has, for the longest period, been understood under the lower notion of the order of nature, with physicality. On the other hand, men have been understood through a higher lens of mind, reason, culture and consciousness. Thus, men were seen as higher beings, as perfect human beings, idealistic models of this being, and women, as well as slaves and other minority groups, were seen as non-human, or other-than-human, meaning that their existence was based on the resources they could provide for the higher beings, on their usefulness. With these ideas in mind, we can interpretate the act of acquiring the air, in Plath’s poem, as an act of stepping out from under the soil, as mushrooms do, of stepping out from this inferior order inhabited by women and other groups.
ReplyDeleteWe can argue then that in this specific poem Plath could be relating mushrooms’ world experience with that of women, thus presenting the reader with an ecofeminist perspective. Plath creates a place where all beings are understood as kin, and where we understand our existences as that, as all sharing a space in the biosphere, a project defended by ecofeminism. It is a poem that allows us to understand both men and women and every other being as ecological, beings that reside in nature, and not out of it. Still, Plath does not forget to include women in the culture sphere, because, just as mushrooms have been under the soil for too long (natural sphere) it is time to acquire the fresh air that has become reachable (cultural sphere). It is a poem that questions all the hyper-separations created, such as the separation between humanity and nature, and that aspires for a hopeful future of true connectivity, of true kinship and of a true ecofeminist project (“We shall by morning / Inherit the earth. Our foot’s in the door.”). Women will nudge and shove their way through this inferior existence (“Nudgers and shovers”).
3) Womanhood: Dickinson’s treatment of the mushroom aligns with her exploration of identity and otherness, but it remains detached from explicit gendered commentary. The mushroom’s description as “Nature’s Apostate” hints at rebellion or deviation from norms, a possible reflection of Dickinson’s own unconventional life and creative autonomy. Womanhood, if implied, is subtle and aligns with her broader theme of individuality and estrangement from societal expectations. Plath’s poem, however, places womanhood at the forefront. The mushrooms in her poem represent marginalized voices—especially women—who quietly endure and persist under patriarchal constraints. The imagery of mushrooms as “sleeps in the crannies” or as “diet on crumbs” evokes the historical subjugation of women, while their ultimate declaration—“We are shelves, we are tables”—asserts their indispensable role in the fabric of life. The closing lines, “Our kind multiplies,” celebrates collective empowerment, positioning the poem as both a feminist manifesto and an ecological meditation on resilience and interconnection. 4) Intersection of Writing, Nature, and Womanhood: Both poems use the mushroom as a site where writing, nature, and womanhood converge, though their emphases differ. Dickinson’s poem elevates the mushroom’s transient existence to a philosophical inquiry, drawing parallels between its mysterious growth and the ephemeral nature of poetic creation. For Dickinson, nature is a source of wonder and inspiration, reflecting the solitary, contemplative aspects of her poetic voice. In contrast, Plath’s mushrooms symbolize the power of collective resistance, linking their growth to the rise of suppressed voices, particularly women’s. Writing, for Plath, becomes an act of reclamation and empowerment, using natural metaphors to confront social inequities.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, Dickinson and Plath approach the relationship between writing, nature, and womanhood from different angles, yet their works collectively illuminate the mushroom as a potent metaphor for the interconnectedness of creativity, resilience, and identity. Where Dickinson’s mushrooms enchant and provoke contemplation, Plath’s grow as quiet agents of revolution, showcasing the diverse ways poetry can engage with the natural world and human experience.
2. Emily Dickinson’s “The Mushroom is the Elf of Plants” and Sylvia Plath’s “Mushrooms” both use the mushroom as a central image to explore themes of nature, writing, and possibly womanhood. However, while Dickinson portrays the mushroom as a symbol of nature’s whimsy and hidden magic, Plath uses it as a metaphor for quiet, collective strength, aligning her work with feminist and political commentary. Though both poets focus on the mushroom’s modest, unassuming qualities, their approaches diverge significantly in tone and purpose.
ReplyDeleteTo begin with, Dickinson’s poem exemplifies her characteristic brevity and wit, transforming the mushroom into the “Elf of Plants.” Her playful language reflects a fascination with overlooked details in nature, using the mushroom as a bridge between the ordinary and the extraordinary. This mirrors her poetic style—compressed, enigmatic, and imaginative. For Dickinson, writing becomes a means of uncovering hidden truths, just as the mushroom embodies nature’s quiet magic and mystery.
By contrast, Plath’s “Mushrooms” employs a deliberate, repetitive structure that mimics the steady, insistent growth of the mushrooms themselves. The subdued tone builds momentum stanza by stanza, paralleling the natural proliferation of mushrooms and the power of collective action. For Plath, writing becomes an act of resilience, with the mushroom symbolizing the silent strength and persistence of marginalized voices.
In their treatment of nature, Dickinson and Plath reveal differing emphases. For Dickinson, nature is a source of mysticism and transcendence. She imbues the mushroom with elfin qualities, presenting it as a symbol of hidden wonder. Its ability to emerge quietly and thrive in obscurity mirrors the transformative power she finds in nature and poetry. On the other hand, Plath’s mushrooms are grounded and political. They represent resilience, breaking barriers and reflecting human struggles, particularly those of marginalized groups. Plath’s nature is not mystical but empowering, embodying quiet, unstoppable progress.
Regarding womanhood, Dickinson’s exploration is subtle and implicit. The mushroom’s small, delicate qualities echo societal perceptions of women in her time—seen as insignificant yet carrying inherent strength. The mushroom becomes a parallel to Dickinson herself, a reclusive but profound voice in literature. Conversely, Plath’s depiction of mushrooms directly addresses themes of collective female empowerment. Through repeated imagery like “soft fists” and “shoulder through holes,” Plath’s mushrooms represent the restrained roles historically assigned to women, yet their growth signifies inevitable triumph. The closing lines—“We shall by morning / Inherit the earth”—reframe a biblical promise, highlighting feminist awakening and the assertion of power.
In summary, both poems celebrate the unassuming power of mushrooms but approach the image from distinct perspectives. Dickinson’s poem focuses on the mystical and whimsical qualities of nature, reflecting her transcendentalist ideals. Plath’s work, on the other hand, emphasizes subversive and transformative power, resonating with her feminist concerns. Together, these poems demonstrate how the humble mushroom can become a profound symbol, illuminating nature, writing, and womanhood in complementary ways.