Miss O’ Connell

ADRIENNE RICH: Revision notes.

(b. 1929)

Aunt Jennifer's Tigers The Uncle Speaks in the Drawing Room Trying to talk with a Man Power From a Survivor

1) Aunt Jennifer's Tigers

Analysis

Stanza One

The poet describes the imaginary world created by Aunt Jennifer as she embroiders

tigers on a fire screen. The tigers ''prance'' across the screen, implying that they are

full of energy, strong, proud, carefree and unafraid. They are bright and golden –

standing out against the green background. They are not full afraid and their

brightness is not hidden. This is in contrast to the men ''beneath the tree''. This is the

tigers' world and they ''pace'' through it in a confident, powerful manner. They are

linked to the old system of knighthood by the word ''chivalric'', thus reminding us

again of their power and strength. Yet there is a gallantry and dignity associated with

the word ''chivalric'' which makes us wonder if the tigers are symbols of a positive

sort of male power, compared to the men who are lurking in the shadows ''beneath the

tree''.

Stanza Two

The poem now shifts away from the tigers and towards Aunt Jennifer. The power and

energy of the first stanza vanishes as Aunt Jennifer is described. She is nothing like

the strong, bright, confident creatures she has created. She does not move with

strength and confidence. As she embroiders, her fingers are ''fluttering through her

wool''. This suggests that she is weak and nervous. Even the act of creating this

tapestry is difficult for her. She finds the ''ivory needle hard to pull.'' The whiteness

of the needle is in contrast to the bright golds and greens in the world she is creating

Miss O’ Connell

on the screen. The colours associated with Aunt Jennifer are pale, almost lifeless.

We imagine bloodless, white fingers and a white, ivory needle. It is worth noting that

ivory is taken from the tusks of elephants – linking this stanza back to the jungle

where the tigers live. Men hunted elephants for their ivory – dominating the natural

world and taking what they wanted. They also rode elephants when hunting tigers,

again conjuring up the image of men as destructive and dominant. This idea of male

dominance is picked up in the next lines when we read that Aunt Jennifer is weighed

down by the her wedding ring. The hyperbole in the description of the ring as being a

''massive weight'' emphasises how powerless and weak Aunt Jennifer is and how

oppressed and controlled she is in her marriage. The wedding ring is more like a

shackle than a piece of jewellery.

Stanza Three

In the final stanza, Rich imagines how Aunt Jennifer will be after death. She will,

even in death, be ''terrified'' and the painful ''ordeals'' of her life will have marked her

forever. She was ''mastered'' or conquered by these trials and will never be truly free.

She is a victim, whether dead or alive. This is a negative view of marriage and there

is no hint of love or equality in it. Instead, it has utterly crushed and defeated Aunt

Jennifer. Life, for her, was something to be endured. The tigers, on the other hand,

will carry on ''prancing, proud and unafraid'' in the screen that she created. The

tragedy is that Aunt Jennifer never got to live life to the full and could only hint at her

unhappiness by depicting the strength and freedom of the tigers in her tapestry. But

of course they are not alive and are only symbols of her longing.

Note

This poem was written when Rich was still a young student. The formal structure of

the poem and the distance she keeps from its subject are marks of her early work.

She deals with the issue of female subjugation, but at a remove. Instead of

commenting directly on marriage and the male/female divide, Rich uses symbolism

to get her message across. The tigers represent all that Aunt Jennifer is not. They are

Miss O’ Connell

strong, free and in control of their own destiny, while she is a victim of an unhappy

marriage – her only small act of rebellion being the creation of this image of power.

2) The Uncle Speaks in the Drawing Room

Analysis

Stanza One

Rich adopts the persona of a man watching a mob which has gathered in the square.

The words ''of late'' suggest that this disorderly crowd has been assembling more than

once in recent times. A gathering mob may seem threatening, especially since they

are ''sullen'' and carrying stones, but the uncle does not seem unduly disturbed. He

does not shout or rant: he simply speaks. By calling the crowd a mob, he seems to

imply that he feels contemptuous towards them. There is no mention of the reason

for the crowd's discontent, and the uncle does not seem to care why they are

gathering in the square. He stands in the drawing room, which indicates that he is

wealthy and removed from these ''sullen'' people. Their concerns do not concern him,

except insofar as they affect his possessions. The mob stare resentfully at the

''window, balcony, and gate'' of the uncle's house. The distance between the gathering

crowd and the uncle is not just a physical one, of course. They are also separated by

class. The uncle represents a bygone era and a genteel, epper-class lifestyle. We get

the impression that his house is a large one, and that this may be fuelling the mob's

discontent and anger. They play with the stones they carry, but they do not go so far

as to throw them. They talk in ''bitter tones'' but again, they do nothing.

Stanza Two

The uncle talks about the mob's behaviour as ''follies that subside''. It appears that he

has seen this sort of thing before and he dismisses it as the type of foolish behaviour

which will soon die down. He is not worried. However, he is concerned for his

valuables. Glass is delicate, so he fears that his ''crystal vase and chandelier'' –

obvious symbols of wealth - will be damaged if the mob should act.

Miss O’ Connell

Stanza Three

In the opening line of this stanza, the uncle repeats his assurances that nothing will

damaged and that the mob will not throw stones. None of them dare to lift an arm, he

says. The words ''as yet'' lend a slightly more threatening note to this stanza,

however. There is a suggestion that, while the mob has not acted to date, they may

do so at some point in the future. They are like a storm brewing. This idea of the

storm is picked up again in the third line, when the speaker recalls how his

grandfather's ruby bowl was shaken in a storm, much to its owner's horror. The word

''But'' at the beginning of this line adds to the slight sense of doubt in this stanza.

What if the mob should throw their stones, after all? What if they should translate

their ''bitter'' words into action? There is a rather ominous tone, here.

The language in this stanza reinforces the notion that the uncle is from a different

class to the mob in the square below. His choice of words sets him apart as much as

his wealth. He talks of his ''grandsire'': a formal and rather archaic way of saying

''grandfather''.

Stanza Four

In the last stanza, the speaker tells us how he and his type of people have a

responsibility to protect the valuables that they have inherited. Those items were

made in a ''calmer age'' – presumably when people knew their place and would not

dare to rise up against the ruling classes – but now they are threatened. The uncle

states firmly that he and his kind will stand their ground and will guard these

treasures agains the mob. Note the use of the words ''we'' and ''us'' in this stanza and

''our'' in the last. The uncle sees himself as a representative of the upper class, and he

is determined to preserve the class divisions. This poem is a metaphor for a political

idea: that class distinctions exist and that there are those who want to maintain the

status quo. They view their way of life as more important and valuable than that of

the lower orders. Like the crystal vase, the chandelier and the ruby bowl, their social

is both frail and precious in their eyes. If their class is threatened, they will defend it.

Miss O’ Connell

This is a political poem, written in the 1950s. The story itself is a metaphor for the

deeper political ideas. We are reminded of ''Aunt Jennifer's Tigers'' and the fictional

uncle in that poem. Both men are domineering, confident and in control. They are

the rulers; they are in charge. But their attitude fosters resentment and disquiet

among those who do not share their privileged lifestyle. There is a deep undercurrent

of unhappiness and discontent in both poems.

3) Trying to talk with a Man

1971

Note

Rich and her husband have travelled out into the desert to observe the army's testing

of nuclear weapons. Their marriage is falling apart, and in this poem, Rich uses

many unusual comparisons to link her husband and their failing relationship to the

nuclear bombs and the desert.

As this is quite a complex poem, I have divided the poem into sections and followed

each of the sections with a brief analysis.

Analysis

Out in this desert we are testing bombs,

that's why we came here.

The desert is a harsh, baren landscape at the best of times, but now it is even more

dangerous because of the nuclear bombs that are being tested. The lifeless desert is

a metaphor for Rich's marriage. The marriage is also linked to the bombs, and there

is a feeling that they have reached a stage where their relationship is a negative

force. If they stay together, they are likely to cause one another great suffering. The

idea of ''testing'' is also important. Perhaps, by travelling together to this place, they

are also testing their relationship.

Sometimes I feel an underground river

forcing its way between deformed cliffs

an acute angle of understanding

Miss O’ Connell

moving itself like a locus of the sun * locus – centre or source. Used in maths.

into this condemned scenery,

Rich senses that in this dry and lifeless desert, there may be an underground river.

The desert is weird and ugly with its ''deformed cliffs'', and it may represent their

relationship, which has become an ugly, barren, lifeless thing. The landscape is

''condemned scenery'' because the bombs will soon explode. Is their marriage also

condemned?

There are a number of different ways of looking at the underground river. Is it a

symbol of hope, that at some level there is life in their relationship, even if it is buried

deeply? Or is the river a knowledge buried within her? Does she know the

relationship is doomed, and does she realise now that this knowledge can no longer

be hidden but must be brought to the surface? The knowledge that this metaphorical

river runs beneath the surface of their marriage and is ''forcing'' its way through

their relationship is a painful one for Rich. She calls it an ''acute angle of

understanding''. The word ''acute'' has two meanings: it can be used in mathematics

(linked to the word ''locus'', here) and it can also mean a pain that is sharp and

severe.

What we've had to give up to get here -

whole LP collections, films we starred in

playing in the neighborhoods, bakery windows

full of dry, chocolate-filled Jewish cookies,

the language of love-letters, of suicide notes,

afternoons on the riverbank

pretending to be children

Rich lists out the things she and her husband did when they were happy. These are

things they will have to ''give up'' if this is to be the end of their marriage. The list is

a poignant one and contains details such as the description of the ''dry, chocolatefilled

Jewish cookies'' which suggest that there is a part of Rich which remembers

Miss O’ Connell

these times fondly. However, there is also the rather jarring note in line twelve, when

Rich mentions ''suicide notes''. Towards the end of their marriage, both Rich and her

husband did harbour suicidal thoughts. However, the inclusion of such a negative

note in this list of typically sweet and loving elements of a relationship may also

serve to prove that Rich and her husband stayed together through the good times and

the bad. They suffered together and this cannot be ignored. Now, though, the

marriage is ending and none of these things matter any more. Their marriage is

empty and lifeless, like the desert.

Coming out to this desert

we meant to change the face of

driving among dull green succulents * cactuses and other plants that hold water

walking at noon in the ghost town

surrounded by a silence

Here Rich describes the journey she and her husband made to get to this observation

point in the desert. The face of the desert will be changed by the bombs. Note that

Rich says 'we' when she talks of the people who will test the nuclear weapons. She

shares the army's responsibility for what will happen. Is this like her marriage?

Does she acknowledge that it was destroyed by both her husband and herself?

They stopped off in a ghost town, which again reflects the silence and emptiness of

their marriage.

that sounds like the silence of the place

except that it came with us

and is familiar

and everything we were saying until now

was an effort to blot it out -

coming out here we are up against it

There are two silences here: one is the silence of the empty town and the other is the

silence between Rich and her husband. They have tried, until now, not to face up to

Miss O’ Connell

the collapse of their marriage and have made an effort to ignore the signs, but they

can't, any more. By coming out to the desert together, they have forced themselves to

face up to the reality. The silence has been growing and it is ''familiar''. It has

become a feature of their marriage and they are acutely aware of it in this quiet

place. Small talk and chit chat is not enough, any more, and it does not hide the fact

that they have nothing left to say to one another.

Out here I feel more helpless

with you than without you

You mention the danger

and list the equipment

we talk of people caring for each other

in emergencies – laceration, thirst -

but you look at me like an emergency

The couple are in the observation post together, and are meant to be safe there. But,

of course, there is always the danger that the test could go wrong. Her husband

mentions this and they talk of how they and others would cope if something did go

wrong. Ironically, they talk of how they would deal with people's injuries, but of

course they have hurt one another and cannot heal those wounds. Rich is not

comforted by her husband's presence. In fact, she feels in more danger with him

there. There is no sense that he is going to physically harm her in any way, but she

feels that she would be better off alone. He does not comfort her and she feels that

their relationship has reached the point where it is actually damaging her.

Your dry heat feels like power

your eyes are stars of a different magnitude

they reflect lights that spell out: EXIT

when you get up and pace the floor

Rich compares her husband to the nuclear weapons and says that he may be as

harmful to her as a nuclear explosion. She compares his eyes to stars, but not in a

Miss O’ Connell

romantic way. Stars have, after all, a nuclear reaction deep within their cores. Rich

has reached the point where she feels that their marriage is at an end and can bring

nothing but hurt at this stage.

Her husband's eyes reflect the EXIT sign on the door. To Rich, this is probably yet

another sign that their marriage is over and that she needs to get out.

talking of the danger

as if it were not ourselves

as if we were testing anything else.

The final lines of the poem suggest that this trip into the desert was a last ditch

attempt to spend time together and to test if their marriage could be saved. Her

husband talks of the danger of the bombs and the nuclear test, but to Rich it is

obvious that what was really being tested was their marriage. They cannot ignore

the failure of their relationship, and there is no point in pretending that it is not over.

Theme

The end of a marriage

The poem deals with the pain associated with the end of a relationship. Rich and her

husband have been trying to ignore the fact that their relationship is failing, but now

that they are alone together in the desert, they realise that they have nothing important

left to say to one another. They must face the fact that the marriage is over.

Male power

Like ''Aunt Jennifer's Tigers'', this poem looks at the danger inherent in a relationship

with a man. The husband is likened to a dangerous weapon; he has the power to

destroy Rich. Marriage is not portrayed here as a meeting of equals, but rather as the

mastery of the woman by the man. If she is to survive emotionally, she must escape.

4. Power

Power

Miss O’ Connell

The first line, isolated from the rest of the poem, contains no object which would allow us to make easy sense of it. We might presume that the word ‘Living’ refers to such objects as the ‘bottle’ mentioned in the third line. But whose ‘history’ is the poet talking about? Joanne Feit Diehl says that ‘Rich… combs through the ‘earth-deposits’ of ‘our’ (female) experience of history’. According to this interpretation, then, Rich is doing something similar to what she did in ‘Diving into the Wreck’. She is going back through history in order to discover objects that will shed light upon the nature of power within the world, specifically with regard to the female. If we sift through, or mine, the ‘earth-deposits’ of history we might be able to better understand ourselves and our world. As one critic has said, ‘Rich’s poetry demands a scrupulous “re-vision” of history with a woman’s eye to what can be salvaged’.

‘Power’ concerns itself with two events that occurred ‘Today’: the first being the discovery of an ‘amber’ bottle by a digger on a construction site, and the second being the poet’s reading and thinking about the life of the famous physicist Marie Curie. The relation between these two events is not clearly stated.

Lines 2 to 5 – The ‘bottle’

The poet tells us that ‘Today’ a mechanical digger (‘a blackhoe’) unearthed some ‘hundred-year-old’ ‘amber’ bottle in perfect condition. The word ‘divulged’ is interesting. It is usually used with regard to the revelation of information. Used here it suggests that the discovery of the bottle discloses some secret of the past. The bottle used to contain an old ‘cure for fever or melancholy a tonic/ for living on this earth in the winters of this climate’.

This sounds like a hoax remedy, some alchemical potion that could cure anything and everything. Such medicines would probably have been sold by quack doctors, people of dubious learning who convinced the gullible and the infirm to part with their money for what they promised was a miracle cure. Of course the whole thing was a sham, someone using their learning and reputation to prey upon the weak. Its intended purpose was to be ‘a tonic/ for living on this earth’. It was used to help people deal with the hardships of life, a ‘cure for fever or melancholy’. However, we might imagine that it had little or no real medicinal power.

Lines 6 to 17 – Marie Curie

Through her discovery of radium, Marie Curie paved the way for nuclear physics and cancer therapy. Born of Polish parents, she was a woman of

Miss O’ Connell

science and courage, compassionate yet stubbornly determined. Her research work was to cost her her life.

The fact that the sixth line of the poem begins with the same word as the second suggests that the description of Marie Curie that Rich gives ought to be compared in some manner with the ‘bottle’. On this very day that the bottle was discovered the poet was ‘reading about Marie Curie’. Having read about this woman the poet divulges a few thoughts on the matter. Curie ‘must have known’, the poet states, that the radiation she was working with was making her sick. Rich exposes the irony of the fact that the element Curie was purifying was simultaneously destroying her. Whilst she worked to perfect this material it ‘bombarded’ her body ‘for years’. Yet she ‘denied to the end’ that it was her beloved radium that was slowly destroying her. She could not bring herself to admit that the ‘cataracts on her eyes’ or the ‘cracked’ and pus-discharging skin of her ‘finger-ends’ was a result of her work.

Her fingers eventually became so bad that she ‘could no longer hold a test-tube or a pencil’. Marie Curie was ‘a famous woman’ who came to live in denial. And she died this way, she died ‘denying/ her wounds/ denying/ her wounds came from the same source as her power’.

{A Closer Reading

According to Christopher T. Hamilton ‘Adrienne Rich's poem "Power," which provides a moving and sympathetic account of Marie Curie, is significant not only for its overt portrait of a famous female scientist, but also for its implicit criticism of male power misused. The poem contrasts two lives - one, a dedicated scientist who sacrifices self for the world; the other, an implicit, nondescript male "doctor" who exploits others for personal gain’. On the one hand then you have the purveyor of the cure-all who uses chemistry for dishonourable purposes. He uses his power to make financial gain for himself and has no honour. On the other hand you have Marie Curie who sacrificed her life for pure science and never thought a whit about profiting from her work.

Hamilton goes on to say that the opening lines ‘are significant in that they help Rich contrast the nature of male and female power, something that she had been (re)considering in several works from the 1970s. The portrait of Marie Curie, as idealized or as incomplete as it might be, is offered as a point of comparison. Males, who see the world as a place to gain power through capitalistic aggressiveness, competition, and financial exploitation, are ultimately self-destructive. Ironically, what is left of their

Miss O’ Connell

life is the artifact, the bottle - a curiosity and potential museum piece; and what is buried and forgotten is the man who peddled his product for immediate and selfish financial gain’.

In order for ‘Power’ to be so understood much has to be presumed. After all the only person mentioned in the poem is Marie Curie. Rich does not mention or describe anybody in lines 2 to 5, let alone a man. There is no ‘purveyor of [a] cure-all’ spoken of in this section of the poem, as Hamilton suggests, only a ‘bottle’. The poem does not ‘contrast two lives’. The only life spoken of is that of Marie Curie. And as Claire Keyes remarks, "no explicit connection is made between the artefact and Marie Curie, except to suggest that neither the tonic in the bottle nor Curie's radium has especially cured humanity's ills." She goes on to say that the "poem's abstractions make it less effective than it could be".

Hamilton states that the poem is ‘significant…for its implicit criticism of male power misused’. But where might we ask does this criticism arise in the poem, implicitly or otherwise? And where is there any mention of ‘male power’? Does the poem have anything at all to say about ‘power’? Certainly there is nothing explicit said in the first five lines of the poem. And what ‘power’ did Marie Curie possess? The description of her in the poem exposes a devotion to her work, an obvious love of science and research that ultimately blinded her to its negative possibilities. But how are we to characterize her ‘power’? Rich says that Curie’s ‘power’ came from ‘the element’ she was working with. Curie was powerful to the extent that her research ultimately influenced other people’s lives and the course of events in a very significant way. A New York Times reporter wrote of Curie, "Few persons have contributed more to the general welfare of mankind and to the advancement of Science than that modest, self-effacing woman whom the world has come to know as Marie Curie."

But her research into these elements also gave her the personal power to advance in life, to move in circles that were formally the exclusive locales of men. For example, after her husband’s death she took up his professorial position at the university, becoming the first woman to hold such a position. So Curie serves as an example of someone rising above the prejudices and restrictions of her time, involving herself in an activity that was then seen as the proper work of men and not women. (The spacing between the words in the poem calls to mind the style used by the American poet Emily Dickinson, another example of a woman who disrupted the established patriarchal order through her work.) Does the

Miss O’ Connell

final line of the poem, the only line that explicitly deals with ‘power’ suggest that Curie, who made extraordinary advancements and progress in science, was blind to the inherent dangers of working in an almost exclusively male field? The will to succeed, the desire to control elements at all cost, these are underlying features of science and industry. Is the poem ultimately a critique of the negative implications of such values? Rich can have enormous respect for what Curie achieved against the odds but she may lament the fact that this woman ultimately became a victim of something much greater and sinister. Perhaps the life of Curie can be held up as a cautionary tale.}

5. From A Survivor

Background

In 1953 Rich married Alfred Conrad, an economist and social campaigner. Seventeen years later Conrad tragically took his own life.Their marriage was in many respects a difficult one. Much of this difficulty stemmed from Rich’s dissatisfaction with the whole notion of marriage as it was understand in 1950’s America. She was not content simply to play the role of obedient wife and adoring mother. To make matters worse as the relationship wore on Rich gradually realised she was in fact a lesbian. In this poem, which was written three years after her husband’s death, Rich mourns his passing and reflects on the difficulties of their life together.

Section One: (Lines 1-9)

In these lines Rich thinks back to the early days of her marriage. She focuses especially on the marriage vows between her husband and herself, the ‘pact’ or promise they made to be faithful to one another: ‘The pact we made’. According to the poet, she and her husband believed they were ‘special’: ‘we thought of ourselves as special’. They felt they had the ability to avoid or overcome the difficulties that effect every long-term relationship, which Rich refers to as ‘the failures of the race’: ‘I don’t know who we thought we were / that our personalities / could resist the failures of the race’.

In reality Rich and her husband weren’t special at all.The pact or pledge between them was ‘an ordinary pact’.Their marriage was no different to all the ‘men and women in those days’, to the thousands of marriages that took place in America each year throughout the 1950’s. Like every other couple they thought they were special enough to be immune to the difficulties of marriage, and like every other couple they were wrong.They were extremely mistaken, it turns out, to believe they could avoid or

Miss O’ Connell

overcome these ‘failures of the race’: ‘We didn’t know / the race had failures…and that we were going to share them’. Like any other married couple they would have to deal with tensions and difficulties. Ultimately, therefore, Rich and her husband were ‘Like everybody else’. It was arrogant or stupid of them to think that they were special and that they alone could avoid the tensions and difficulties that effect every marriage: ‘I don’t know who we though we were’.

Section Two: (Lines 10-17)

These lines highlight some of the difficulties that affected the seventeen years of Rich’s marriage. Rich found marriage troublesome because in the fifties and sixties a woman was expected to respect and obey her husband and be guided by him in all things.To Rich, as a feminist, this was extremely difficult to take. Society, she felt, regarded her husband as a kind of ‘god…with power over my life’.

In the years since her husband’s death, however, Rich’s confidence and independence have developed to such an extent that she is no longer worried about being dominated by her husband or any other man. Society, too, has changed over that period which was a time of great political upheaval in America.Women are no longer expected to worship and obey the men they marry.These changes allow Rich to think more clearly about her husband and their marriage: ‘my feeling for it is clearer’. She no longer thinks of him as a tyrant with the ‘power’ to control her life. His body ‘is no longer / the body of a god’. She can now set aside the resentment she felt toward the unequal institution of marriage and focus on the love she had for this gifted man. Her affection for him is suggested by the fact that she can still remember his body perfectly, despite the fact that he is three years dead: ‘Your body is as vivid to me / as it ever was’

Section Three: (Lines 18-24)

In this section Rich mourns her husband’s tragic passing. Towards the end of their marriage, it seems, the couple discussed the possibility of divorcing and going on to lead separate lives. Rich claims they would discuss the possibility bility of making this ‘leap’ into the unknown:‘the leap / we talked, too late, of making’. Yet talk of this leap came ‘too late’ for Rich’s husband. Before they could fully explore this possibility he tragically took his own life.

In the years since her husband’s death Rich has gone on to lead an extremely happy existence: ‘I live now…as a succession of brief, amazing moments’. In her new life, according to Rich, each moment is filled with joy and wonder. If her husband had lived, she believes; they could have

Miss O’ Connell

left their troubled marriage behind and he would have been free to pursue a rich and independent life, as filled with amazing moments as her own. This, then, is the true tragedy of her husband’s death. His passing was an enormous waste because it denied him the opportunity of making ‘the leap’ from a life dominated by an unhappy marriage into a joyous and independent existence: ‘you are wastefully dead / who might have made the leap’.

Themes

Survival and Suicide

Like many of Rich’s poems ‘From a Survivor’ deals with notions of depression and despair. Like the speakers in ‘The Roofwalker’, ‘Living In Sin’ and ‘Our Whole Life’ the speaker in this poem has suffered incredible mental torment. The poem, however, is ultimately optimistic, emphasising how important it is to struggle against depression and declaring that a depressed person can recover to live a life filled with ‘amazing moments’. It is a powerful statement against suicide, which is presented as a terrible waste. Rich rejoices that she survived and overcame her own suicidal tendencies while her husband’s death is presented as a tragic and pointless loss.

Marriage and Male Dominance

‘From a Survivor’, like many of Rich’s poems presents men has having the ability to dominate and constrain women, especially within the context of a marriage or a long-term relationship. (This is especially evident when she refers to her husband’s body as the body of god that has power over her).This notion of women being harassed and dominated by marriage and relationships is one that occurs again and again in Rich’s poetry and we also see it in ‘Aunt Jennifer's Tigers’, ‘Living In Sin’ and 'Trying To Talk With A Man’. It is only by breaking free of marriage, Rich seems to suggest, that a woman truly can be free and realise her own potential. (This is evident also in ‘The Roofwalker’).Marriage, she maintains, has the potential to entrap and enslave a woman submerging her beneath her husband’s shadow.

Yet the poem, it is important to note, is not entirely negative toward men. It provides a moving lament for the passing of Rich’s husband and regrets that he, too, could not be a survivor. Like ‘Trying To Talk With A Man’ it mourns the end of their relationship while acknowledging that the relationship had many positive features. The poem leaves us with little doubt, then, that Rich truly loved her husband. ‘From a Survivor’,

Miss O’ Connell

therefore, not only is a powerful political poem attacking the institute of marriage, but is also a haunting memorial to a relationship that was doomed to failure