Talk:Ted Hughes

One of the best poets ...

I reverted the wording 'He is considered by most to be one of the best poets of his generation' to 'He is considered by some ... ' as this seems less POV-based. Certainly his repute has generally been high, but it seems to me the 'poets of his generation' are such a numerous and varied bunch, comprising practitioners of a number of different styles, that most might not be quite accurate in this context. Perhaps 'Considered by many ' is a good compromise. Any thoughts? — Stumps 12:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Totally agree. I had made this very change a while back and it keeps getting reverted. The use of "most" is too POV. While Hughes is a major literary figure, I personally don't consider him that good a poet (I prefer his children's literature, such as the Iron Giant). As such, the use of "some" is warranted. --Alabamaboy 14:15, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, wiki being a product of that most pandering of democracies, there doesn't really seem to be much of a point in arguing this further. --Quadalpha 18:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I lied - maybe "many"? --Quadalpha 18:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm happy with "many" — I've made the change — Stumps 19:11, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Cheers :) --Quadalpha 00:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Goodness! I should read better. I didn't notice until just then that you made the suggestion in your first comment. --Quadalpha 00:20, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Hate to be the breaker of consensus but...the opening sounds awfully weaselly. Hughes is regularly ranked as one of the best poets of his generation. We might as well say so. I've changed it. (I think he's kind of mediocre, myself, but that's neither here nor there.)69.209.223.71 20:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

How interesting all this is. Or not. I'm not very bothered about what people say on here, although I would like to add that I am sure that in a few decades' time it will be widely, indeed almost universally, appreciated that Ted Hughes was not a very good poet - sorry, I don't mean not very good, so much as not somebody whose work is very enjoyable to read. I think that the only great poets of the latter part of the twentieth century were Philip Larkin and John Betjeman. Indeed, I think Philip Larkin will in time (if he is not already) be regarded as one of the greatest few poets in the English language of all time, and in the twentieth century he will be overshadowed only by T. S. Eliot. Ted Hughes will never stand up to comparison with Larkin, Eliot, Betjeman, and Thomas Hardy, or even A. E. Housman and Robert Bridges, oh, and I almost forgot Dylan Thomas. Anybody who wants to read about the superiority of Larkin and Betjeman over Ted Hughes (and Seamus Heaney for that matter) needs look no further than what Larkin and Betjeman wrote about each other and about those other poets (Betj. once declared Larkin to be the "Greatest English Poet" - perhaps in somewhat jesting mood, of course). In one of his letters Larkin described Betjeman, D. J. Enright, and somebody called "Lizzie" (any suggestions? - I can only think of Elizabeth Jennings) as "giants beside these two Cantabs" (meaning Ted Hughes and Thom Gunn). (Letter to Robert Conquest, 11 July 1961). So I don't particularly mind what the article says, but maybe it should reflect the fact that opinion is very much divided and that although many critics may think that he was one of the most important poets of the twentieth century there are plenty of people who think that he was mediocre, if indeed they think about him that much. Having something so laudatory about him in the opening part seems rather to suggest setting the tone for the rest of the article, but I suppose if it were an article about Larkin, I'd be all for it saying, "Philip Larkin was perhaps the greatest writer who ever put ink to paper" or some such hyperbole, so I'll leave it for others to do as they please.--AlexanderLondon 23:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, AlexanderLondon, you just hopped on the bandwagon of pseudo-critics who bash Hughes because his work doesn't appeal to their normalist preferences. Frankly, if you can't read Lupercal (try "Witches", "A Woman Unconscious", "Cat and Mouse") and understand why it's lightyears beyond Betjeman or Heaney in terms of innovation than you need to spend some more time with poetry. Come to think of it, wasn't that the book that inspired Heaney to write in the first place? I guess Ezra Pound sucked too.

Well argued AlexanderLondon, but I think there are many who would not share your view of Hughes' eventual demise as a "great" poet - if anything, my take on it following the success of Birthday Letters is that his reputation is expanding. However, I am inclined to think he will not in future be seen as being in the same rank as Larkin and Heaney, if only because his interests as a poet are much "narrower", focused as they were on natural themes and religious/existential debates. Personally though I find Crow, Wodwo and Lupercal to be much stronger, more stimulating and powerful than anything in the work of any other 20th century poet other than Dylan Thomas and RS Thomas but perhaps all this just reflects my tastes. In the context of this article though I don't think we should be downgrading Hughes or showing him to be lesser than the other poets mentioned, as the critical jury is still I think "out". MarkThomas 11:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

well as everyone else seems to want to chip in their tuppence worth i think Ted Hughes created the most original and powerful poetry of the last 30 years. His quest to return language to a rough, mythic state and the way his work foreshadows and informs the great debate about man's relationship to ecology and his ability to see the connection between the natural world and dreams creates a new kind of poetry. i think that time will cement his reputation as having been on the right track whilst larkin was thinking about mowing the lawn and betjeman was comtemplating having another gin and tonic. by the end of his life his translations of Ovid show a mesmerising hypnotically powerful control of language. The movement and development his poetry through his life is one of the fascinating stories of contempory poetry. but of course this is an encylopaedia and "considered by most" is a useless phrase and means nothing.

Comparison with Sylvia Plath

dsghfdhgvcbvcbc wow, this guy sure did suck compared to sylvia.

Anyone that has taken the time to actually read some of Hughes' poetry will find that it is quite 'superior' to Plath's work; she should have realized and accepted that spouses cheat and marriages routinely break-up instead of prematurely offing herself. That being said, if she had lived to old age like Hughes, she may have had the chance to write some poetry that even remotely stands up to Hughes' -- otherwise it is clear that Hughes' poetry is far better (obviously he had MUCH more time to MATURE as a poet; thus his work is naturally better). Plath has ALWAYS been overrated (especially by angsty teenage girls and angry female academics) and has joined that peculiar band of artists that are (over)loved and VASTLY overrated because they eventually committed suicide and lived so-called 'tragic' lives. "Boo-hoo I will kill myself and that will prove that I am a creative and tortured artist-type with much inner-pain." What bunk. Actually, suicide seems to be a twisted and bizarre prerequisite whereby said artist is then unfairly catapulted into a sort-of 'mythic superstatus' that is sometimes undeserved, i.e. Kurt Cobain, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, Sylvia Plath, TONS of other writers/poets/various artists, etc. etc. The literary community is mighty morbid; sometimes it seems that they'll only take your work seriously if you eventually take your own life. How pathetic is that? Doesn't it "suck" to be an emotionally unstable and immature poet that killed herself at the height of her creativity? --205.188.116.200 03:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. -- she routinely used a thesaurus to write her poems. This was to try and find odd, infrequently used words that would make her appear more cryptic and intelligent. Enough said.

I must say that is very uncharitable and it's hardly going to be seen as at all sensitive by anybody who's been unfortunate enough to lose somebody through suicide or indeed by anybody who has tried to kill him/herself. Very poor taste, I'd say. Sylvia Plath is not one of my favourite poets (indeed, I could happily live without ever setting eyes on a single volume of her poetry again) but I've derived much greater stimulation and enjoyment from Ariel than I ever have from anything by Ted Hughes. Many artists (in the broad sense) have had tragic existences and it does influence the way we see them, no matter what Kant has to say on the matter. Larkin, Housman, Hardy, even Eric Gill if you're feeling charitable, and Betjeman, too. I'm struggling to think of a writer who's had a conventionally pleasant life. The best I'm doing is Alan Bennett. Stanley Spencer, Stephen Fry, Melvyn Bragg, Robert Bridges, Dylan Thomas, William Styron... none of them particularly happy lives. Anyway, I think the above statement is spiteful and tasteless in the extreme and something had to be said.--AlexanderLondon 23:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, AlexanderLondon, for saying that. It may be that "angsty teenage girls and angry female academics" use Plath to bolster themselves up, but why target such angry backlash at Plath herself or, even worse, at Plath's poetry? Plath killed herself for any number of reasons, the principal reason almost certainly being that she suffered from clinical depression and was on the "wrong" antidepressants at the time of her death. To allege that Plath killed herself because she was too stupid to get over the break-up of her marriage, or to claim that she did it because she wanted to "prove she was a creative and tortured artist-type," shows a phenomenal lack of understanding and research. Even if she hadn't committed suicide, even if various agenda-driven groups of people hadn't taken her reputation under their rather smothering wing, Plath would still be notable for her poetic ear, her attention to sound, and the strength and freedom of her poetic voice in later years. P.S. Do some research -- Plath's dependence of the thesaurus ended at around the time she composed the poem "Tulips," and most of the poems in "Ariel" were not written in a thesaurus-dependent way. Besides, the use of unfamiliar words is arguably helpful in nudging readers to look at familiar subjects in unfamilar ways -- has nothing to do with "wanting to appear more intelligent" at all. (As an inexperienced wikipedia user, I don't really know how to sign this comment, or else I would... Sorry...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.111.160.188 (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Suicide of Sylvia Plath [somewhat incoherent]

I was wondering if sylvia's children were placed in the room of her house when she committed suicide,or moved to the ted hughes' lover's house ,prior to her suicide I was wondering if Sylvia Plath has any living grandchildren. dinopup

Hughes's Left Testicle

I removed this:

In 1987, Hughes had his left testicle removed, about which he metaphorically wrote about in his poem "Fishgig", the rights of which he donated to the British Foundation for Testicular Cancer Survivors. He was an advocate of this group until his death in 1998.

Various Google searches turn up nothing for Fishgig or British Foundation for Testicular Cancer Survivors. Is this bunk or can someone verify this? --Minesweeper 02:50, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This was obviously the work of some feminist wackoid! --205.188.116.14 09:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Question about Birthday Letters

Why does it say 'Birthday letters' [published] with Plath?

negative influence or?

so was he the reason plath and wife two, killed themselves? whty isn't this addressed, alnog with his quote womanizing behaviour unquote? he was such a great husband his two wives felt hope for living so much as well as hope for their child's life that not only did they kill themselves the second woman killed herself and her child. was this related to how ted made the women feel or did he just go for fucked up women? from what i know of this interesting and relevant public history i truly doubt it was the latter. ~ haruki

hello

i have changed the page. you wrote false things,lies- if to be direct. which are not welcomed in encyclopidia's. or more apropriate for dark ages publishinges of the church than to knowledge in the name of freedome. no litreture critic ever claimed that ted hughes was involved in the death of sylvia plath. that is gust gossip-horrible one- spread by so-called faminist's-who took plath as a modek of a women destroyed by men. they were wrong. sylvia always blamed her mother for her life's dipression- read the diaries and see it for your self. you cannot blame a man for his wife's death becouse he was not faothfull. many men cheat. not all betraid women commit suicide.

you can argue that my e mail is jumping_maya@yahoo.com

maya benbenishty israel

free encyclopedia is for freedom of knowledge- not for writing lies as they were facts of truth.

"feminist wackoid!"

"This was obviously the work of some feminist wackoid! --205.188.116.14 09:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)"

--This comment is clearly in violation of a neutral point of view.

I have removed the consistent use of the word feminist thorugh out the entry because it inconspiciously violates a neutral point of view by indicating that only feminists have raised critques on Hughes. There have been more people than just feminists who have raised valid points about the negative influence Hughes may or may not have had on Plath's life. I believe the term feminist has been repeatedly used in this article to devalue the critques and to make them seem only attributable to one group of people. This is not so. Journalists, historians, academics and others have all discussed these issues and raised questions and leveled critiques on the subject.

If someone would like to go back into the article and raise the point that many, but certaintly not all, feminists have questioned the actions of Hughes towards Plath regarding her life, work, or death, then that makes sense. But it is unreasonable to preface every critique mentioned about Hughes as simply the work of feminists.

And you are?KRC58

responce:

look, i would'nt call the person who did it a feminist but as we all know there were some women who did disgusting things in the name of feminizem. the victimization of plath and the character-assaination of hgues as the source of all evel are cinicell deeds in the name of faminizem and the mithization of women as victimes for psaudo feminist agende. but a big amphesis on psuodo there.

---is that a joke?

'The Iron Man' poetry entry

This isn't a poem. Skinnyweed 18:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

for the person who edited my editing- thank you!

(that's a non-cinicel thank you), i needed editting. as you can see i re-editted my own writing myself as well- you were very kind with me and some of the things that could have been dropped out remained. so i was harsh on myself and took them out.

thank you that was very nice

maya (jumping_maya@yahoo.com)

Sylvia Plath

Hughes' relationship with Plath is so celebrated and controversial that I think we should say more in this page. I am writing a small section on it and would appreciate comments and reviews of it when done - I don't intend to take a rigid position or "fall into the Plath or Hughes camp" as so many do, but to reflect recent more measured opinion on the subject. MarkThomas 09:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Academic site links

I am seeking to expand this article both quantitatively and qualitatively and I think this will include adding more external site links to academic and critical reaction sites studying Hughes' work. One such link was auto-reverted by an administrator earlier - can passing editors please read this and make comments when doing so if that is what you do, it is very frustrating trying to improve page content for an important author when it just gets reverted without comment or discussion. Thanks. MarkThomas 16:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Educational gap

There seems to be a fairly huge gap between being raised in a newsagents shop in Yorkshire to Pembroke College,Cambridge. Shouldn't we have just a little in-fill? Am I being picky? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.207.240.101 (talk) 14:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)