The Limitations of Language in Sylvia Path's the Bell

lilfiitafions i{ilEtfifffi

Wh e n The BelI Jar was published in January 1963, Sylvia Plath had less than a month to live. The struggle of those last few weeks has been immortalized and perpetuated in biographies, literary criticism, and the zoor film Syluia. The harsh winter that shut down lnndon, the stmggle of caring for two young children, concerns for money, estrangement from Ted Hughes, her suicide-all of these images color our perceptions of The BeII Jar. Some would even argue that this story has eclipsed the plot of The BeII Jar. The French literary theorist Gerard Genette contends narrators are frames for larger cultural contexts, and ia net sta lla rd isanassistantprofessorof it seems the ultimate narrator of The Bell Jar could be the legend of the last few weeks of plath, her research in- english .on.'poiaion in washington, dc. in addition to sylvia a desperate and depressed Plath. Therefore, it is naive to think we can discuss Sylvia Plath also writes poetry and without referencing her biography. Yet, it is unreasonable to imagine there is nothing else terlests include modern literature and cultural rhetoric. she to say without this context. The BeII Jar is rich with social commentary, particularly in its fiction. discussion of the roles of language and identity formation. This is obscured when we do not consider the larger implications of Plath's work. Biography is a piece ofthe puzzle, but it is by no means the ultimate piece or perhaps even the largest. The BeII Jar can be read as a cautionary tale for women. After all, if every little boy can grow up to be president, what can every little girl be? How does she reconcile this conversation in modern culture? How does this discourse relate to the choices available to her? One particular reason Plath's protagonist struggles with this d1'namic is her choice to see identity as being defined through language. A wife, a professional, an artist-all are exclusive tasks to Esther Greenwood. She sees these words as tightly contained nouns with strict denotations. There seems to be no conversation for reconciling multiple options. Language, therefore, becomes an instrument of constric- tion, translating the limitations of expressing and understanding our own experiences. the limitations of language

for her. Indeed, the first line of ?he BelI Jar, "I didn't knowwhat I was doing in NewYork"'is psychotherapist Mary Pipher explores these connections in Reviving ophelia' and author (r). to tell Esther what to say or how to act, she is adrift, tomm-for stable identities by first describing Ameri- not coincidental Without a narrator iiir,". not", tire clifficulty .ruuli"g'u Kate Baldwin contends that "f for nurturing their inner selves not able to "do." To further indicate Esther's misplaced compass, can culture as one that demani. gi.f. .i.k being isolated She Plath's decision to use a first-person narrator "is also present as a warning" (24). The vast- to a"itft"t strict intetpt"tution of what it means to be female' or limiting themr"lu", ,..o.iirrg and constructs. Plath 'f.*J"-iilp".ron"to..'*ho fit-th"it *hole selves into small' crowded ness ofthe city foreshadows the deconstruction offormerly clear signals contends "girls b""o-" with "fake, country-wet freshness that . (rr). a way of successfully expressing carefully notes how the city mirrors this eventuality .p"""J""[,fr"iiri, u "proft"rn *iih no nam"" Without victims of America's . . evaporated . . . [m]irage-gray. . . the hot streets waverling]" (r); it cannot be pinned down experience n. .ignifrrrg it with a name,_girls are left frustrated, this to a certainty, which is also supported by Esther's effusiveness. Choosing the right words is .,girl-poisoning. ".ro"n ."rutt is that '{mlost girls choose to_be socially.accepted culture trzj]ftl (26)' when to buckle under this tension, she notes "something was is authentic and one that is culturally scripted" In a struggle, and Esther begins and split into two."luu., o*ih"t wrong with me that summer . . . all the little successes I'd totted up so happily at college *rtoirt"v toppot"d to be (27)' It is compelling that Pipher chooses ;;blilthtbe;o-u-since the role that fizzled to nothing outside the slick marble and plate-glass fronts along Madison Avenue" (z). rstt er's"r" prediciment centers-on the inabifity to reconcile i;;i;;;;".tpf want to edit this script' Language, the mode that has defined every inch of her identity, has begun to fail her. been written for frer with ihe inner thoughts that desperately has builds To compound this void, New York City serves as a microcosm of America's confusing in ianguos" exprissions oflanguage, a troubling tension When identitv is tangl"d ""a and competing identities. In her zoo6 study of Plath's relationship to the Cold War, Sally between desire and exPectation. girl who has it Bayley sees America as "a culture that defamiliarizes and depersonalizes, a culture in which trr. .t*ggiu or Esther Greenwood. she appearsto-be the Herein lies the protective boundaries ofthe private realm are persistently opened up to a direct encoun- enviable, and successful-all neatly defined terms'-However' all*she is seen as intelligefi (rS8). supports, America's national rhetoric defines are exclusive, and this limitation of language ter with the rhetoric of nation" As Bayley ;t l. orrfy n.tfru.t p"r""pio' it at these terms practice. is,reinforced since "[w]e how language molds and changes our perceptions of reality, both in theory and in the scripts ,lr"'.p"of.. and ferforms. This slipperiness destabilizes who it is possible In the novel's 1953 setting, the impending execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg domi- problems socially sustained dft.o.t.tu" about face of recognition'b"cause nates the news; this exposure represents the danger inherent in unclear identity boundaries, or appropriate o. rratu"lt. io t" inet'itaUtv strape the wav we lo"Yl,ll9,t::-tltluteourselves' r95os culture, there and Plath reinforces how this is expressed in language. Plath consciously chooses to focus on of and tenslo"" icalhounz4). In Esther's with varying deg."", ogoil.- the many newspaper articles covering the event to emphasize the relationship between sto- isnocliscourseontto**o*"tcanbemultiplydefined'and'therefore'.nolanguagetode- "Eth- inadequacy rising out ofher, she rytelling and identity. Actual newspapers from that time painstakingly mythologized it. So when Esther a""r t.V io *tfralize the feelings of scribe outside el Rosenberg's status as a bad mother" (Baldwin z5). The reworking of a public, maternal is either silencea ny unottt". Jna"Jer or in her own seli-rapproch:T-ll l:t-t-Ltl]tingto guide their social identity is compelling because it indicates culture mandating the exposure and persecution of what she beli"u". to U" tt not*. Storytelling is a *ay foiittdit'iduals. guide action; that ofthose who fall out oftraditional storylines. Additionally, the Rosenbergs'execution rep- n. " and iloria i. Gibson contend: "stories performances. uurgrr"t so-"., the sense public theatre that drives identity performance. The couple appeared multiple and changing) by locating-themselves or being resents of people construct identities dr"owever be spies who were hemorrhaging (gz). Esther perpetually.faces individuals as a "normal" American family, but they were revealed to located within a r"pertoi.e'li stories" how Esther is co- security secrets. This haunts Esther as it represents how her identity's thin veneer is peeling i-*iror" tt n.r.iatives"*piott"a on her psyche, and this indicates ;;;;";r;n through nar- away and the horrible tmths that can be exposed through language. Just as she is working to "l. u n".."tirru.or.. Siince"experience is co-nstituted ;il;-* ;;;;;"of .o*pfuiinf perform the role of perfect daughter, perfect student, perfect worker, the Rosenbergs point g"iauJtJact in certain ways and not others, on the basis of projections, ;;rt*;-. . . ;".p1. public, to the danger of such connotations. The dread of their execution rests on Esther's conscience i"a "r"*.-o;". a"rived from a . . .limited repertoire of-available social' to conform to these as a reminder of this. ".p".i"ti.ir,cultural narratives" (so-utr and Gibson 98-39). Estier's inability and can- Likewise, work is a profound example of how public and private rhetoric shape iden- e"iomers and Gibson noie, stories prompt action, but if Esther scripts is seen as failure. is a scholarship winner, a successful writer, an excellent student and conform- ,t *hreat of altering, even failing, the story. Plath's deci- tity. Esther not keep up, l.rer in-actio, Gii". ing to the expectations of these terms is painfully rewarding. Esther and her fellow guest inai"rtes" how invest-ed she is in cultural story"telling' This sion to use a first-person nuilnlo. positions, and they are compensated not only socially, but pf"trrt having Esther tell her story instead of delivering it editors all won a contest for their diegesis indicates i-p"t"tive.in since working on an extra-diegetic level monetarily. Plath writes that the girls are rewarded for their manipulation oflanguage a third-person, i,"i-"ioaiug"tic narratiie system. through to make "writing essays and stories and poems and fashion blurbs" gave birth to jobs (g). The terms priuot. fo*ii like letters or diaries express€s Esther's desire that is not based in u 'gave" and 'Job" rweal how truly disparate Esther's language is. This rhetoric indicates that ianluage. Building on Gerard Genette's work in narratolory' Su- sense of the wor1l througtr herself an by impllng she was rewarded for her hard work with "c-an be equated with a publi-c readership" (6zr)' she expresses in oxymoron san S. Lanse,,uv, t riarration has not already heen written more work. It may be more accurate than she realizes because allowing others to determine p.lath indicates Esther,s"t".oai"g"ii. ai..?-rrrt at expressing a siory that the limitations of language

work. Esther must constantly negotiate defini- Here, Plath points out how dissimilar Esther and Jay Cee's languages are. Notably, Plath context oflanguage is equivalent to more the to tell the reader that chose for Jay Cee to demand Esther learn more languages, but Esther fails to interpret mul- perceived ana implied identities. Plath chooses this moment tions of as possibilities Plath further supports this assertion with ,,all luft to qo"rtion fully just what this means at the end tiple languages for communication. Esther is right tt oulir * u." "guin" Esther's admission that German seemed like "dense, black, barbed-wire letters [that] made ofthe novel (3). confiasting conversations be- my mind shut like a clam" (gg). Esther's dead father, her grandmother, and mother all speak plath continues the discussion of slippery language by the language of South- German. Her brother speaks German so well that he can be mistaken for a native; he is able friend, ooreJr, tnJtt". lott, iuy c... ooi""n speaks bveen Esther's toward to assimilate in a way Esther cannot. Plath's choice of "native" indicates her awareness of a TLis is in direct contrast to Esther'i puritanical attitudes ern aristocratic debauchery. Esther's brother's ability is to ou.r ,n arricle, Doreen lazily files.her nails as she multiplicity Esther ca nnot recognize. Being a native implies work and sexuality. whil" ;;;;;;ik he must also navigate Esther is "sweating" over her work. Esther be completely proficient. As he can be mistaken for a native speaker, lounges in a flimsy ,r"grig"Ju"Jqo".tlonr-*hy definilion of herself as a good the nuances ofthe language that may not be taught through the structure offormal German. between tfre urrfumiiir i"igo"g" of-pleasure and the is torn not do literally His ability to express himself in multiple ways is a foil to Esther's search for an impossibly oi"" orlriu"tiis;';';uly"o-"thing an aristocrat would worker. Doreen,s .t Bsther singular language. ai*pptouui. While Ooreen dismisses Jay Cee's authoritv, ;i6|,,i;,t*il;-lrrai"ut", in Esther's strict, even pessimistic, interpretation of assessment-is not completely accurate. A challenge Not recognizing nuance results ;;;", .li;;,,i;";;;.t" thi"d;;;";'s translates "You need to of- against her. Esther puts more value in Doreen's language. Esther considers Jay Cee's suggestion ruthless. She would risk Doreen,s person" judgment of her inadequacies ".i"g;ili1";i;nguagenoi cJntridict Doreen's dominant discourse for fear of fer more than the run of the mill as an authoritative language than her o* just as (33). While one can be open to whether this is Jay Cee's lack of sisterhood, it could equally "n"i-a".u,fails nsther because she cannot accept its nuances, nersecution. utimatelv, rariguage and a sinsre subject. Esther's interactions represent an honest nurturing. In fact, Esther's linguistic development, metaphorically !f|'#;i';il;;iil;;ili;i;li"ntiti"r.or"titutingstubborn resistance to interpret language literally, will allow her to better understand herself and others. Instead ofunderstanding Jay Cee upon ti,iJiJea by confirming her with Jay dr"* rattle Cee's suggestion as constructive, she takes it as a condemnation ofher own lacking. She can- *1r E-.irr"irrt" n""ar 6 think of the tuture, Esther is unable to ;i;;tbtlwh;;J"v6"" she not access the plurality of meanings available to her. pr"-r"rip-t"a joals. Powerlessto express her true thoughts accurately' off her usual list of ex- Perhaps Plath illustrates this best through the fig tree presented in Esther's copy arrua maybe she is even meaningless. Esther risks realizes the word. -"urli,ifl3rr of 'The Thirty Best Short Stories of the Year.' In this story, a Jewish man and a nun are un- "r" tuulv"na r.now what she wants to do, but she quicklv retreats rft" ao"t iot The fig tree is ;'o]iil;|j[i"G c"". she tries to take back her words and aban- able to reconcile a relationship because of their obvious cultural differences. since this language i- nearlv shoutingthat her work a prominent symbol of an inability to overcome differences and abandon strict interpreta- her language i" ""r;;;;i|ii;io';uy;;;;;;Jier fragile identity' dons Cee, but it tions ofbehavior. The tree image is central to Esther's struggle because it is a literal fusion of ,,lt "t . . . It interests me very *u"it," m"y convince Jay interests her: does, it does green possibilities, and gr,f*. again when ihe.notes. "it seemed to be diverse meanings in one vital form. The branches represent multiple do the sarrre for he'."("g"ri. rp""f.s..to this cannot :,r""-ing'i ,,being'' choice to perpetuate yet, they are simultaneously connected by a healthy trunk, a center that can bear the weight (3r). t".-"r, and indicate Esther's true,, As disparate been of these directions and their fruitfulness. Esther cannot accept such multiplicity; the story i, ui"pt..rion o1the self. This is the story that has .lav Cee,s discourse ,y";;;;;;lo reputation must represent a single idea. Though Janet Badia also sees the fig tree as representative of ;;;'h"d been willing to invest in. Her prizes, awards, and #J#i"ffi;;;; as she is possibility, she ultimately confirms that "Esther's own fear of inadequary constantly over- no* rrt" fee"ls parallzed, utt"bl" to access language should secure this identitv, but whelmsher,shecannotseethefigtree...inapositivelight...Esther'sdamagedself-image "balk like a dull cart horse' (32)' ubl" to ottly and balk branches into rotten, dreadful choices that fall, spoilt, to her feet" (r33). h"r to translaie her thoughts into metaphor, therebv dis- turns the once-green Esther,s backtr".d;l;il What Esther does not see is that the story's characters suffer a loss because they are unable g"t admissiJn of uncertainty through figurative experience: tun"lng h", oine to communicate their feelings, and, again, a narrative reaffirms separation from identity and .Idon,treallyknow,'Ihearclmyselfsay.Ifeltadeepshockhearingmyselfsaythat, its possibilities. true, and I recognized t""u"."T#'i"?"ii"'i;tdlii ffi* it;s true. Itiounded Throughout the novel, Plath focuses on the idea of the self as scripted theatre. It nonaut"tift person'that's been- hanging around it, tt u *iv ui''tl"og"it"a t"*" your seems that Esther has spent the majority of her years quietly accepting what words and ac- ar#doiig".1";.;-tr"Il iraaenly comls up and introduces himself as vr", he really is your father' and the tions are socially prescribed. Esther is created by other people, a literal production of their real father and looks exactly like Vou' to vou tt"o* v""i tit" ioui fathet is a sham (32)' figurative hopes. In fact, Esther's life can be seen as a metaphor for the wishes ofher mother. p"tt"" ;;;i;;;i'i "ii 'i* a desire to person- Mrs. Greenwood has sacrificed her interests to participate vicariously in her children's suc- a simultaneous distance from precision and plath indicates metaphor is cesses. From her labors, she has produced the "right" kind of children, children who can alizethelanguageofexperience.Esther,smomentofhonestyisdismissedbyJayCeewho compete and succeed in upper class worlds as noted through Esther's much-praised writing ,.y";i;;;;r get like that. what languages do you have?"(32). pounces to procl^i*, any*here I

I the limitations of language I

save their virginity for marriage, men included. It also reinforces the concept of containing andherbrother,smasteryofGerman.ThiscreatesaconstantconversationaroundEsther purchase respect, scholarship money' and social complex ideas in a definite format/language. It is of course inaccurate since it creates a glo- since she has become a *uy to "uri "o*1" of theatre when she writes, "The Bell Jar rified definition of morality that Esther knows she and Buddy cannot live up to. She knows status. Linda wagner-Marti" p"i"i a"irrir sense is the unquestionable product of her ambitious Buddy is not a virgin and is frustrated that men are not stigmatized by sex. Men are allowed shows the ways in *fri"fr nstfrJr Creenwood denv the influence of those elements be- to step out ofthese definitions while women risk being exposed as fallen either through repu- mother and family, tn"'*uvrJn *hi"h ,h" -u.t "na " (g4). Esther takes her molher's sacrifices tation or pregnancy. Again, Esther cannot see possibility because her culture does not make fore she can come lnto r,er o'#irirv i"nt"a li"t seif described in the stories told about her' room in its language for an even sexual playing field. Furthermore, Buddy has intimated seriously and feu., ,fr" i* un"iti"Joive.sion ofthe perceptions and reflections' Accord- that Esther is more experienced, and this falseness causes her to end the relationship since has enslaved Esthe.', ,"'"r" rai to her mother's This "i and maintenance "he didn't have the honest guts to admit it straight off to everybody and face up to it as part ;iln;t chodorow, "ti.,u d.r, difficulty in life will be the formation (43). compounding this connection is. chodorow's of his character" (72). Now that Buddy has acted outside of his projected identity, Esther is of an identity separute from he'r mother" .,feminine itself in rJation and connection to other unsettled again. Citing Virginia Woolfs discussion in "Women in Fiction," Cora Kaplan notes claim that p*r*"niy'""-"t 1ir'qi,g"g (44). Esther ever define herself when that since "[o]ur identities are . . . constructed through social hierarchy and cultural differ- more than the *"r";ii;;p"*"r"rrtv" How can people entiation, as well as through those processes of division and fragmentation, our identities access a language that allows such expre-qsion? It on lan- arrived at through these structures will always be precarious and unstable" (87S). Esther's " "un"otSimilarly, the c"rtirt ,i.rnalirtt, ana mottterhood is a significant-comment with quasi-boy{riend, Buddy experiences mirror this idea since she has invested in what her culture has told her to be. guage and is further d"""1;J;h;"rgh Esther's relationship a woman giving birth,.she is horrified' Consequently, these competing pressures and the ineffectuality of language make Esther's willard. when Esther vi.d;;;;;;;;spital and sees niady. i,sther's romantic view of lubot is shattered by this breakdown inevitable. though she will not ua-it iito presents gender own tabor witlte similar to a movie production with Plath Buddy's mother as another representation of strict definition. experience. She has fun,".irua'ti'ut-#. ..dead ,,.Irltriii hair down to her waist" (62). This fairy tale Diane Bonds contends that "Esther is haunted by images suggesting the self-mutilations of her whit",, ru"" ,J,"ar"", *t h tort-uo]ls experience and Esther's repulsion of marriage and motherhood" (ror). Esther recalls the way in which Buddy Willard's mother image of labor is fractureA by'tr,trs. Tomolillo s ofchildbirth changes from m1'th to horror' weaves a beautiful rug only to destroy its beauty in a matter of days by using it as a kitchen the mucous covered irrr""t]ir"t., ttte definition .1o,,'oUiiot"l*tiiiry her experience beyond an "inhuman mat. The message is clear to Esther who says, "I knew that in spite of all the roses and the Furthermore, M.r. to "o,n-unicatespeech and experience (66). Mrs. Tomolillo kisses . . . what [a man] secretly wanted when the wedding service ended was for [the wife] whooing noise,, signifies #:r""t"r"1"*een (roz). express it veibally. In fact, Buddy explains to flatten out underneath his feet like Mrs. Willard's kitchen mat" However, what this distanced from her labor decause she cannot is she has been given excludes is how work can tell a story. Mrs. Willard's rug is a representation of female material not p"i" orthe birth of her child since that she will ,u."rii"rirr" experience culture and intense labor to create something beautiful, yet useful. The ultimate fate of its "r,ur, tfr], u, ,.iolition of the sanctity between language and twilight gas. Esther ."", personal just " by the mostly male hospital staff. She predicts the withering beauty is a direct comment on interpretation and not the mutilations and is angry it h", uu"r, .o .i.ity dismissed ;'in will rest some secret part of her, that long' and sacrifices of marriage Mrs. Willard's kitchen mat is often mentioned in Plath criticism as new mother will be haunteffiifr" prir*tti.tt . waiting to open up and shut her in again"(66)' an example of neglecting the contributions of women's work. Esther mentions she would not blind, doorless, una *inooiuiJ..'.oi.iao. . . to describe and define her own ex- have made such a beautiful rug and then ruined it by using it. Her choice would have been to her, Mrs. Tomolillo Jiil" ai.a".u"d by an-inabiliw Like shape to,experience, and display it on the wall. Critics overlook an important point when they reduce the mg to such Additionally, tf,i, i"rt .""nr-s ho* languugl provides periences. a literal example. In actuality, the mg says more about Esther than it does Mrs. Willard. To thereby,supportsho*onu*p'""edexperiencesequatemonstrous'amorphousunknowns' s'h" t"llt Bucldy that witnessing childbirth Esther, the rug tells a story of denigration, but her desire to see the rug displayed is coun- Esther only expresses thisii"iJi t""a".l rtt*"".,. day" (62)' Again' Esther re- terproductive. In a literal sense, hanging a rug on a wall is absurd. From a figurative point una rn"?*o*ti t"" tt-"tfti"glike that every was "lw]onderfut" of view, Plath takes this syrnbol a step further. Since Esther wants to see the rug displayed, u of faithtullv communicating experience' -i;t;;;;h -"",,. content to reject. However, the polit- the reader is again confronted by Esther's desire for external praise with its positive rein- Motherrrooa". t onuioi" n.irt". r""-r otheri,,ise i' uioti;t *"""i' f"* her New York summer' Mrs' Greenwood forcement through language. Esther's desires for these outlvard confirmations hinder her ical language oi tirginitv 1o as a young reducing meaning is about a of Chastity." The article reinforces gendered sexual development woman. Here, Plath clearly signals that sent Esther an article titl"d "i;;;f"*e .,.urri *o.tJi, air"."nt from a woman's world and a man's emotions denial of oneself. norms stating th"t she recognize of " ,rra only marriage can bring the two w.orlds and the Esther feels isolated from society because she feels must the sum are different fro- u *o*ri, "-otiorr. p..p"tfi'" (8r). The vague linguage mirrors the dis- herselfwithin it to feel whole. She wishes she could be one thing or another since this is how rwo different ."a. of u*o,ioi. ;;;;,h"r r"en. The article explains that the best people she interprets others*Jay Cee is the career woman, Doreen is the sexually assured modern tance betlveen .rt". ro, *oil"r,;;;r;i": f; the limitations of language

woman, Mrs. Willard and Mrs. Greenwood both represent sacrificial motherhood. Esther not recognizing her own voice just as she does not recognize herselfby finally claiming she sees these categorizations as separate and exclusive. Note that Esther never relates an event feels "all right" (r44)' Dr' Gordon accepts this empty language and fujher vaiidates the that contradicts how a character has first been described. These static characters support parity dis- of language and experience when he re"ounis a siory-he told previously ir it *ur" how her point ofview does not allow for multiplicity. Reflexively, this demonstrates how she for the first time. Subsequent treatments make her feel blind and heiplerr, riath", describes cannot tolerate multiplicity for herself either. Esther sees herself as a blank slate that has it as "being transported at enormous speed down a tunnel into the earth. until "the voices been written on, but she has not thought about what is beneath that surface. She has not al- stopped" (r7o). Esther cries for her mother as the darkness turns to nack, bui thu." i, no lowed herself to create a self-concept, nor does she see that identity is a project and unstable response' She says that she cannot see and she hears a voice explain, "[t]here are lots ofblind in nature. It seems Plath is correct about this unsteadiness since Esther cannot stabilize lan- people in the world. you'll marry a nice blintl man some day"-(r7r1.A[eit for a short whire, guage in a healthful way. Esther is an equivocal sight'less mute. Her senses abandon he.'until nr.ir-v she All of Esther's work is entrenched in language, and mental rehabilitation is no dif- feels the same as before- "rr" "."Arms ferent. Her recovery centers on verbalizing personal experience and how that experience is As Esther is institutionalized, Plath continues discussing the trouble of language Es- translated by others. Her first psychiatrist, Dr. Gordon, unsettles her by asking what is wrong. ther feels a certain sense peace of in the sanitarium, even more so when she is transferred to Asking Esther to negotiate her experience verbally and her inability to do so accurately is the an up-scale mental hospital. Some critics contend tiris isolation ir p".iiit.-rt"p since it al- center ofthe problem. Esther's reaction is to "control the picture he had ofme by hiding this lows Esther to concentrate on her problems without the anxiety of "e*t"*l prl.'.u.us. How- and revealing that" (13o). She also tries to remove herself by being noncommittal. However, ever, Esther finds many directions for her attention. Esther takls ln Ir{ir. Esther's treatment is predicated upon the expert interpretation of her feelings and ideas, Norris, an aphasic patient, since she does not need to depend on language to"ornfort n"gotiri, whether negotiated verbally or nonverbally. Susan Boyer contends that when Esther begins iir"1r relationship' uncompelled to explain her experience oilisten to Miis r.ior.l. treatment she "is already emptied of words or reactions that can be interpreted or under- tr"io*n, r.g,". is free from the burden of narrative; they are left to sit in a ".ror","*ituln si.t"rjiy ,ir"n."- stood" (zr4). However, this is inaccurate since no matter how verbal or evasive Esther is, she scholars interpret rrgrl. Esther's..relationship with her new psychiatrist, D.. Nol;n, ;:;; positive is still at the mercy of outside judgment. Esther consistently responds that she feels only the sisterhood' Yet, it is actually another example of performance distorting Esther,s identity. same, and by not elaborating, she makes an attempt to retreat from the burdens oflanguage, After all, Dr. Nolan's identity as a- hearer depends on her ability to pro"&. tr," uxlperiences However, Esther also indicates she wants Dr. Gordon to intuit her needs. After being asked of others and decode the secrets that will unlock Esther's inner self throujh;;; therapy once again if she is the same, Esther notes, "So, I told him again, in the same dull, flat voice, sessio-ns. In actu_ality, Dr. Noran does not help facilitate a stabre identityro.'bJt w1,"t rt only it was angrier this time, because he seemed so slow to understand, how I hadn't slept for do is.provide ways for F'sther {oe.s to act out, which feign the symptoni, oi"-r""'o*ry."i. wrr"n" fourteen nights and how I couldn't read or write or swallow very well" (r35). While repeating Esther tells Dr. Nolan that she hates her mother, she tests Dr. Nolan,s reaction, hoping to the same words, Esther wants Dr. Gordon to decode her secrets; she wants to be understood peer at her reflection in her psychiatrist's eyes. It has been said that nr. lloi"" gi"", E tlr". but cannot find suitable language for this purpose. the ability to make her own decisions, and, as a result, Esther',feels independentlin controt" In the same session, Esther shows him a letter she wrote and then destroyed. Playing (wagner-Martin 43). However,this is illusory and best evidenced throuih Notan's Dr. see this as for or aeci- upon the idea of intuition, Esther hopes Gordon will a metaphor the unreli- sion to use shock therapy in Esther's treatment. ability oflanguage, since her message is forever obscured. However, Esther is not successful Her first treatments with Dr. Gordon made Esther forget herself. Though onry tem- in this respect as she notes, "Doctor Gordon seemed unirnpressed" (3S). Compounding Es- porary, erasing experience is a disturbing means ofrecovery.s it tak". u*"y E.Trrer', uuitity ther's failure to have this slnnbol of abandoned language read according to her specifications to define her experiences. Dr. Nolan's tieatments are better administered, bJitr"l1. ,..,rtt is the reality of Dr. Gordon's authority. In this context, it is clear Esther's understanding of is to make Esther feel erased 'like chark on a blackboard'ttrough she ieei" ;rir.pJringty the Ietter is dominated by her psychiatrist's judgment. Though literally reading the letter is peace" (zr4-zr5). rt since Esther's memory and relationship to her world t uu" b"Jn--o*"n- impossible, Esther cannot keep Dr. Gordon from interpreting what it may signifo. None of tarily altered, Esther is free from its burdens, but she is also further distancJ fr# herself Esther's attempts to withdraw from language provide relief; in fact, they lead to an unexpect- and vulnerable once again to the inscriptions of others. susan coyle recognizes this dispar- ed consequence. Dr. Gordon prescribes shock treatments, so once again Esther is punished ity by examining plath's description of a "recovered" Esther ,. ;"il; f;;. coj" .uy, tr,. for not finding the right words to convey her innermost thoughts. analogr "seems to b€ accurate, since " the reader does not have a sens" a brand_ Waiting for her first shock treatment, Esther sees several silent patients, and she is new, unblemished tire but of one that has been painstakingly ,"*on"irnr*".i'", (qta. rn unable to share her fear and questions with Dr. Gordon. After treatment, Plath returns to Bonds Being molded 54). according to expectations of others is the ."rl "a,-i"-#dJ";;;i"g;f Esther,s metaphor to express Esther's tenuous hold on language. Asked how she feels, Esther recalls rehabilitation. Like Mrs- willard's tit.h"" rug, Esther is flattening the horror of being shocked by a lamp in her father's study. She remembers screaming and .Inst as a tire carries the weight ofan entire cai, Esther carries th.""*p".tuuon."rt;;;;ts;moment. oiihu p"rror_ the limitations of language

cording to the neatly ascribed values ofher culture, and in the end, this does not change. This mancesheiSsupposedtodeliver.And,astheretreadtireimageasserts,itcannotlastforever.articles is the real question ofthe novel. Does Plath's story support a sense ofwholeness for Esther, a plath continues to approach narration bv including so long. unification many iiffii;ffi;i;ti;. attempt' Her experience has been encapsulated of the designations that comprise individuals? Esther invests in the mutual detailing Esthe.', ai'upp""o"le ancl suicide tiremselves offer a short but complete nar- exclusivity of language, and her inability to appreciunification of the many designations that and distributed to a mass comprise individuals? Esther invests in ctJd;tre"Ji;;;;h;headlines Mgift.r i.y9-i99" provides the exposition; "Sleeping the mutual exclusivity oflanguage, and her inabil- rative arc_,,scholarship the con- ity to appreciate language's vast nuances causes her to compartmentalize meaning at hor- With Girl;;i"ai.ut.t tft. "Giri Found Alive!" announces pills Feared Missing control rible costs. For instance, shouldn't Esther take comfort that her benefactress, Mrs. la""trn"Ji" r"rge capital"onflict; letters, it is a reliefto relinquish Guinea, clusion (rg8_9g). Neatly succeeded despite her mental illness? Instead, the focus is story can ne-verbelong to her' just as her sense of on the money she made writing oftelling her own story' Esther's recovery i.fi;;;;" t;tioff reads The BeIlJar "as the attempt to heal cheap, trashy novels. Therefore, Mrs. Guinea's story/stories are illegitimate. Esther cannot self cannot be s"tf-d"fin"a. identity can grasp the grey areas in life and does not recognize the: irrr". ,"ii and false-self systems so that a real and viable the fracture between of this p;fi';;;"i".ir"tio" of Joan Gilling is a prime_example [t]ension between identity-putatively singular, unitary and integral-and come into existence,, turns ""d to. a straightforward, privileged ilyJeaguer' lt identities-plural, cross-cutting and dMded-is inescapable at both indi- fusion (rz). she is someone E.trt". loor. i, rin"J.h" too is a patient at the asylum. when vidual and collective levels. As lived, identity is always project, not settled out that Joan,s identity accornplishment; though various external ascriptions or recognitions may ,,rrow "".i.i""ti"".ith"rJoan's response.is "I read about you, and I ran away" Esther asks, did you gei rr"r"r" be fixed and timeless (Calhoun zz). of Esther will never provide a sense of self' (rqs). Plath indicates ht* ;;;V;;onstruction Esther's own story for her own actions and experi- We neversee if Esthercanlivewithpiecingthese ideastogether. When Plath earliercomments This is evidenced by how ir"n J"-rp" air,t"ssed when she discovers Joan is a lesbian. This that Esther was "all right" again, the inadequateness oflanguage rears its head. Containing ences. Esther,s or r"iii, i"i,[". "on""pt tultural expectations and her reaction is to reject and Esther's experience in two brief words sounds as ridiculous as it actually is. Additionally, it is word connotes extreme d;;;;;;"; the .rr*eel" is the "tension within us which can be both crucial that Plath ends the novel without an afterword from Esther. Plath leaves Esther "on chastise Joan. Highlighting;,riiJ, identity politics that aims not simplv at the the threshold" of entering her release hearing (z++). The reader never knows what was said locus of personal struggle ffi;; ;;;;;ffii r. identities bui at living up to deeper social and at the hearing; Plath closes the scene before the meeting begins. It seems both scripts have leeitimation of falsely ".;;"f;;"g-ical alreadybeen written, and the performers will act as expected. The refusal to use language al- m"oral values" (Calhoun z9)' see multiplicity in another and ultimately lows Esther, like the silent Miss Norris, to free herself from determining who she is. Resigned The irony is that aither has again failedto j;;;o two things*her own self-concept and social rep- to the judgments of others, Esther walks onstage as an actress would. She remembers how in herself. Esther cannot be "iil tot h"ttu-lt Joan's eventual suicide is a re'iection "[t]he eyes and faces all turned themselves toward me, and guiding myself by them, as by a resentarion-just as she ;;;;i"-1i;,ht. acting outside cultural expectations' Esther magical thread, I stepped into the room" (24$.The novel does not end neatly with a climac- of this idea entirely ;';;il;;nt'again.t proper "rd f,.r *oris haue reinforced the definition of a voung tic assertion of self; rather, Esther allows cultural perceptions to have the final word. ;;il;r;;ili;Uoui tr,i, t"""ur? "didn't know e1 tuneral' Esther admits she woman who i. uppun"a uvli'iiid""i""ty' 'rqn's (zqz-43)' Esthe-r asserting "I am, I am, I am" hr she was buryi.,g,, uut iilJ ,"""" *ith what "r,i. no such term exists for Esther' plath to omit p;;;il;;;n o, aaj".tl"e te"uos" chooses honest attempt at ver- ;;i""#; ;;, ,t .""r" irr"" Esther's disgust. Instead, it is Joan's " i".ir,*l"i irirt.. ir able to deflne herself, as Joan has at least bal expression tr,ut rro*in". ""a recourse is 1o castigate Joan' ,"a her only from "i.tii-J,""'"'t':;;;;;;'ifr" Jih" no.r"l srfgests Esther may or may not be released "naing not"irulv in question' The reader knows that Esther sanitarium, this part th; ;;;i;;; the "f This signifies Esther's inevitable fate-to leaves the sanitarium ""d';;;;i;'h"*3 for"lttd. the comfort and conformity of an expectation qive up her quest for *"*'iffi id.ntity defined as oppression if it is an independent bv others. Moth#ffi;il not be created as horrible and limit- yet, i. ift"inr,fter defines motherhood choice_ the ,"ua". "i."""ii "*"." ing. forour desires to change, there is no textual Though a healthy self_concept a-llows Esther has spent her whole life succeeding ac- evidence that Esther has hJia .r,"rgJ"itr""rt. 76 the limitations of language

Works Cited

Badia,' Janet. "The Bell Jar and Other Prose." The Cambridge Companion to SVIuia Plath. Ed. Jo Gill. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge LJP,2006. 124-38.

Baldwin, Kate A. 'Ibe Radical Imaginary of lhe Bell Jar." Novel: A Forum on Fiction 38.r (zoo4): 2l-4O. Bavlev,-'' Sally. ''I have your head on my wall': Sylvia Plath and the Rhetoric of Cold War America." Eiropean Journal ofAmericanClrlture.25.3(2006): 155-n.

Bonds, Dane. "The Separative Self in Sylvia Plath's The Bell Jar." Women's Studies r8.r (rggo): 49- 64.

Bover, Marilyn. 'Ihe Disabled Female Body as a Metaphor for l,anguage in Sylvia Plath's Ttre Bell Jar." Women's Studies 33.2 (zoof)i tgg-223:

Calhoun, Crais. "Social theory and the Politics ofldentity." Social Theory and the Politics ofldentity. Ed. Ciaig Calhoun. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1994.916.

Chodorow, Nancy J. Feminism and Psychoanalytic theory. New Haven, CT: Yale lJP, r99r.

Kanlan. Cora.'Pandora's Box: Subjectivity, Class, and Sexuality in Socialist Feminist Criticism." ' Feminisns: An Anthology of Liierary Theor! and Criticism. Eds. Robyn R. Warhol and Diane Price Herndl. New Brunsviick, NJi Rutgers UP, 1996.857-n.

Lanser. Susan S. -Toward a Feminist Narratolog." Feminisms: An Anthologg of Literary Theory lrl andCriticism. Eds. Robyn R. Warhol Cid Diane Price Herndl. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP,1996.6ro-29.

Perloff, Marjorie. "A Ritual for Being Born TWice': Sylvia Plath's the Bell Jar." Contemporary Litera E$el3(1972)t 507'22.

Pipher, Mary. Rwiving Ophelia: Saving the Lives of Adolescent Girls' NewYork: Ballantine, 1994.

Plath, Sylvia. The BellJar.1963. NewYork: Harper, 1996. somers.' Manar€t R. and Gloria D, Gibson. "Reclaiming the Epistemological 'Other': Narrative and the Social Constitution of ldentity ." Social Theory and the Politics of ldentitA. Ed. Craig Calhoun. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, tgg4.37-99,

Wagner-Martin, Li nda. SglviaPlath: A Literary Lfe. NewYork: St. Martin's, 1999.