In Adrienne Rich’s “Diving
into the Wreck”, the poet depicts how a person dives into the deep ocean alone
to explore the wreck from the past. There are many metaphors in this poem, and
the wreck is one of the conceits among those metaphors. Throughout the poem,
the wreck appears several times, and it is the driving force for the narrator
to go down there. I want to argue that the wreck stands for the mistreatment of
women and deprivation of human rights in general in the past.
When Rich wrote “Diving
into the Wreck” by the year of 1973, American society was going through
unprecedented civil movements and the liberation of women from domestic labors
and limitation. During the time, many female poets expressed their support for
feminism and basic human rights. As for Rich, she and her husband divorced
about three years ago in 1970, leaving her unrestricted from domestic women’s
dilemma between the burden of family and the expression of their own thoughts
and rights in other social settings.
The language of “Diving
into the Wreck” is very different from Rich’s previous works. The poem is in
free verse, which has more freedom and various expressions than traditional
metric poems. Many would argue that such change indicates her transformation
from a wife to a feminist and free spirit. However, there are still some repetitions
between lines as well. For example, “I go down” appears two times as individual
lines, which can be interpreted as the narrator’s persistent determination of
going deeper into the sea. It indicates that either the wreck is something very
attractive to the narrator, or it forces the narrator to go and explore it.
The narrator goes alone
because “I am having to do this not like Cousteau with his assiduous team”,
which suggests that Rich doesn’t want to depend on someone else. Jacques
Cousteau was a French naval officer who built his reputation as a
conservationist and marine scientist in the early twentieth century. However,
the narrator decides to go alone because there is no one to trust. “I have to
learn alone/ to turn my body without force/ in the deep element”, one has to
face the past alone because it is exclusive to him or her, and it is not open
to others.
The narrator’s purpose of
coming to the wreck is to explore it and “I came to see the damage that was
done/ and the treasures that prevail”. Women have been suffering from the patriarchy,
and not all of them survive the pressure and expectations from society and the
opposite sex. As a result, the poet wants to see what has been done to women in
the past in the form of the wreck. Since at the time women were just beginning
to awaken from the darkness, the narrator is also aware of the evil from the
past so that he/she carries a knife.
Despite depicting the
narrator as the only person going down to the wreck, Rich later in the poem
uses first plural perspective “we”, and it is hard to tell whether the narrator
is a woman or man. This could be the poet’s intention to see the past of both
women and men. Although women are the primary victims, men also suffer because
they are all “drowned”, and “we are the half-destroyed instruments”, which
explains why people regardless of gender all have the same destiny --- death.
The wreck is thus a symbol of the struggle and a resting place for women and
men.
Rich is eager to find out
what misfortunes happen to women, but all humans are bound by the rules of
society and thus human rights are devalued no matter who is more authoritative.
Your paper is very well organized including specifically what you're arguing about in the thesis and concise topic sentences. I like how you included historical evidence, not just briefly, but connected it to your analysis of the wreck. Even though this was about women's rights, I liked how you added the historical part on Cousteau, giving background to the reader. This allows readers to continue reading without having to stop and google what the quote is about then come back and continue reading and I think you did a great job with this and your overall analysis. You also concluded with a sentence that tied everything together and overall I don't think your post needs any changes. Great Job!
ReplyDeleteI loved how most of your analysis was original and not seen in many of the other posts that talked about this topic. Your analysis of the free verse was specifically intriguing to me and your analysis only became better as it progressed. You had plenty of evidence to help your argument and you executed the topic perfectly by combining different elements of the text to help prove the same point. Overall this post was amazing. Great Job!
ReplyDelete