Archived

This content is available here for research, reference, and/or recordkeeping.

Author ORCID Identifier

https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0600-1852

Date Available

5-7-2026

Year of Publication

2026

Document Type

Master's Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

College

Arts and Sciences

Department/School/Program

English

Faculty

Jonathan Allison

Faculty

Matthew Giancarlo

Abstract

This thesis aims to complicate common binaries that have defined critical responses to Sylvia Plath’s Ariel since its first publication in 1965, and which emerged as the result of her husband Ted Hughes’ alterations to her original selection and arrangement of poems. Hughes’ editing emphasizes a narrative which ends in bleak fatality, whereas Plath’s original narrative concludes on a note of bittersweet hope. I read Hughes’ choice of ending as highly influential on Plath’s reception and legacy. The tone of her immediate reception, largely shaped by Al Alvarez, characterized Plath as an “extremist” poet whose work should be read through the lens of her suicide. Hughes’ arrangement was criticized by scholar Marjorie Perloff in 1984, but her essay and the critical response to it present yet another problematic binary that frames Hughes as either a malevolent abuser or a collaborative savior in his editing of Ariel.  Ultimately, this thesis explores how The Restored Edition of Ariel and a view of editorial theory that emphasizes the notion of “versioning” can help us think beyond simple binaries when it comes to Plath and her work, particularly in terms of accepting both editions of Ariel as “true.”

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2026.144

Archival?

Archival

Download

Share

COinS