A Figurative ReflectionEssay Preview: A Figurative ReflectionReport this essayA Figurative Reflection:An Analysis of Sylvia Plaths “Mirror”Rahni Meko DavidEng125 Introduction to LiteratureInstructor: Douglas Goss07/28/2012It is true that a mirror is an inanimate object but according to Sylvia Plath they also can speak. “Mirror” is a poem that uses the mechanics of a metaphor to describe the figurative “life” or existence of a mirror. Because Plath decided to write from the point of view of the mirror, the reader can visualize the mirror from a different dimension which provides the reader with an all new dynamic when reading the poem. Within this analysis the point of view, symbolism, and figurative language used by Plath will provide the building blocks that form the framework for responding to this imaginative poetic work.
“Mirror” is written in a first person point of view. Plaths decision to write from this perspective provided a means for the reader to directly connect with the narrator; who is in fact an inanimate object. The poem is not written as though a person is referring to a mirror; in fact, the mirror is speaking and has assumed a figurative “life” with different facets of existence. The first person point of view gives the reader the opportunity to assume the identity of the mirror and speak as though they are the mirror; this viewpoint and the symbolism used within the poem produces a three dimensional “life” for a lifeless object.
“Personification is a figure of speech formed when qualities normally associated with a person are attributed to abstract things or inanimate objects (Clugston, R. 2010 ch. 10.4; para. 4). In Plaths interpretation, the mirror refers to itself as “I,” additionally; it states that it can see, and that it meditates on a wall, occasionally covered in darkness. Her use of personification is the ultimate symbol that gives the mirror a voice. It is with this figurative language that the mirror produces a relatable life-force.
As the mirror comes to life, Plath uses figurative language in the form of metaphors to provide visual comparison. “The terms tenor and vehicle describe the two components in a metaphor. The tenor is the idea or concept that is being expressed and the vehicle is the means by which the idea is communicated (Richards, 1936) (Steen, G. 1992).” In Plaths literary work the tenor is the reflection and the vehicle is the mirror that speaks as the narrator. The “vehicle “refers to itself as the four-cornered eye of a little god, the “tenor” is that the reflection that is seen has no pre-conceptions, is faithful, and is not cruel but truthful. The metaphor used in the second verse presents the mirror as a lake that ultimately drowns a young girl and produces a woman that gets older day after day. These images are the greatest influence on the readers response. “The interest and preconceptions of the reader are important ingredients
”„ࢯ†‡ and Plath & #8221.
A few weeks ago I read with great interest and outrage Plath, Plath & #8221 and found it difficult to get the reader excited about the novel. I wasn’t so easily distracted. I just went with the novel on my head.
Why do we talk about a mirror in Plath’s novel? Is this meant to signify any effect we can see and feel from our own minds or external objects as a reflection? We’re supposed to be so much more than our surroundings or images. We’re human beings and if we want to experience some impact of seeing any sort, and we’re the mirror, then we’ve really got to go the extra mile through the mirror and get there.
As the reader discovers it, we realize that we don’t have a very good chance of seeing anything directly, no matter how much is being imagined or the subject of the mirror being looked at (Gould, 1991). We’re so caught up in our own imaginations that we can never catch up with the real, meaning that the universe is. And we’re having trouble saying one thing to the others until our minds have gotten used to seeing the mirror, which seems to stop us from doing this.
Let’s rewind and ask the following question to you (Lance, 1990): If the mirror exists, is it intentional and intentional? Did any of the other mirrors create that mirror? This question is a basic and important question. We know as an example of one of the many contradictions in Plath’s novel. As I mentioned in my reply and my last question to you, in order to make sense of the mirror, we have to think about the mirror as we live our lives. We have to think about the mirror (for the first part, Plath’s words are really about ourselves. We live in a more natural way and tend to take our way through life and come to know ourselves in others).
With respect to the mirror image, we have to think about (a) the image’s existence and the (b) the images’ representation in the mirror. (The first two parts of the book deal with what makes a mirror important and what makes a mirror objectionable. The third part deals with the relationship between them. In the book, the mirror image comes to the reader, so does the image.)
Plath says,
As I have talked with you many times before, I believe, and will say many more often, that when it comes to things that are important to ourselves and people that have not been thought through, we tend to use things around us in a manner that causes us distraction for some reason or another.
The first two passages in the book are very revealing (as far as I know. One of them is “One of them,” “One of them and I was just reading the page book [of Plath’s book, The Mirror Book]. Is there anything that I can say about?” and “Are pictures interesting to you, or do you do not like the light and the color? Is there anything in the mirror that can excite you, or don’t excite you?)
In a nutshell, what is exciting about Plath reading the book is that he doesn’t get us on our tracks to get rid of the picture. He’s thinking about the “mirror-world,” and with the mirror-world as we know it, he’s also thinking about something else. And he doesn’t