Characteristically, he wrote Olwyn to tell her about his good fortune, even as he regretted the poems were not better. As Sylvia told her mother, Ted was modest about his work. Sylvia, as his agent, loved to talk him up. Her sense of destiny overwhelmed her as she noted 23 February was the first anniversary of the “fatal party” when she first met him. She took a proprietary pride in his work, declaring that she had typed and retyped those poems, and felt no sense of rivalry—only certainty that their award-winning output would increase. She believed that, in fact, she had made Ted as keen on competition as she was. In Letters Home, Aurelia commented that all her life Sylvia had sought such a man, and that from the age of four she had boosted male egos, always choosing boys who deserved her cheers. While Ted Hughes certainly did not lack confidence, Sylvia’s “unshakable” (to use Aurelia’s word) faith in him may well have accelerated his ambition. Intellect, vigor, grace, moral commitment, and a lyrical style, “O, he has everything,” Sylvia concluded. In a letter to his brother, Gerald, and Gerald’s wife, Joan, Ted simply said, “Sylvia is my luck completely.”
Hughes’s sudden success in America coincided with a tirade against his native land. In an aside that does not appear in the published collection of his letters, he gave Gerald and Joan his contemptuous opinion of a declining England, declaring the Anglo-Saxon “less worthy to live than any evil thing on earth.” Hughes decried the British Imperial Army, in which he had served, and the public schools that produced a uniformity typified in the blazers worn at weekends, and in “cut glass accents” resulting in a “complete atrophy of sensitivity and introspection. You can never correct them, because you can never wound them into seeing how foolish they are.”
Sylvia was beginning to torment herself about her unwritten novel, tentatively titled “Falcon Yard.” Where was her plot? Why had she not made more of her travels to Cambridge, London, Yorkshire, Nice, Benidorm, Madrid, and Munich? Basing the protagonist on herself, a sort of femme fatale who “runs through several men,” and featuring characters derived from Gary Haupt, Richard Sassoon, Gordon Lameyer, Mallory Wober, and others, she wanted to explore a character torn between playing it safe and a “big, blasting, dangerous love.” Other female characters, based on Nancy Hunter and Jane Kopp, would serve as foils or alter egos, apparently providing the kinds of alternatives the protagonist confronted. But then her journal breaks off to consider life with Ted, and her concern that she may “escape into domesticity.”
Sylvia turned to Virginia Woolf, whose diary comforted Sylvia because Woolf, too, got depressed. Indeed, Sylvia thought that in the dark summer of 1953 she had been channeling Woolf and emulating her suicide by drowning. But Sylvia had been resilient and had bobbed to the surface. Although she had dreamed of a traditional, grand wedding in Wellesley, she now reveled in the memory of the simple and spare ceremony in the “church of the chimney sweeps with nothing but love & hope & our own selves.” Ted had worn his old black corduroy jacket and Sylvia a pink knit dress Aurelia had bought for her. In Sylvia’s ecstatic prose, she and Ted were now the first couple, and like a new Adam and Eve they were destined to people the world with brilliant offspring. The marriage to Hughes transformed all that had gone before, so that earlier suitors would appear in her projected novel only to be dismissed as weak, flabby, and lacking in purpose.
For all her professions of pride in Ted, his success did take its toll on Sylvia, as she recounts in her journal, saying his criticism of her work came at a bad time. She seemed blocked, unable to write the novel. She did grind out three pages a day, but what she wrote was “blither.” Part of the problem derived from studying for her June exams. She tried to relieve the pressure by biking, but she still beguiled herself with her novel about a self-destructive young woman who is redeemed by the power of love. Sometimes it sounded to her like she was producing a potboiler, a true-confession story, and not the “noble, gut-wrenching” account she had dreamed of writing. Part of Sylvia’s problem, she realized, was her earnest heavy-handedness. The antidote, she confided to her journal, might be a style resembling Joyce Cary’s in The Horse’s Mouth, a delightful, informal, foray into an artist’s mind that was vivid, funny, and yet an entirely serious aesthetic effort. She envied his popularity and wanted to emulate his other supple novels, such as Herself Surprised.
On 12 March, an elated Sylvia Plath learned that she had been offered a teaching position at Smith with a salary of $4,200, then a respectable yearly income for a college instructor. Although Sylvia had all along had reservations about teaching at Smith, now she could not imagine anything she would rather do, she told Aurelia. Teaching three courses a semester might prove daunting, but Plath supposed she would do well with good students and have lively discussions.
On 29 March, Olive Higgins Prouty replied to Plath’s good news, sending along what Aurelia deemed in Letters Home “intuitive remarks”: “There is no end to the thrilling things happening. It frightens me a little. I am very proud of you, Sylvia. I love to tell your story. Someone remarked to me after reading your poem in The Atlantic, ‘How intense.’ Sometime write me a little poem that isn’t intense. A lamp turned too high might shatter its chimney. Please just glow sometimes.”
A week later Plath completed a poem, “All the Dead Dears,” an extraordinary meditation on the skeleton of a woman in a stone coffin the poet had seen in Cambridge’s archeological museum. The poem’s speaker notes that “this lady” is no “kin” of hers, and yet “she’ll suck / Blood and whistle my marrow clean” to prove otherwise. What would Henry James have given to imagine a character like Sylvia Plath, so steeped in the past that she could sometimes feel it was eating her alive? The speaker imagines this figure of the ancient past hauling her in and making her feel the presence of other old souls who usurp the armchair—that is, make themselves at home in a kind of death-in-life scene that drives the speaker to think of humanity as “each skulled-and-crossbones Gulliver / Riddled with ghosts.” The living will lie with relics like the woman in the stone coffin, “deadlocked with them, taking root as cradles rock.” This extraordinary Gothic evocation of recurrence and continuity has the kind of brooding, brilliant, and haunting acuity that disturbed Prouty.
Sylvia now had written eighty single-spaced pages of “Falcon Yard” and hoped to complete a first draft of the novel before departing in June for America. Only fragments of the work survive, including a page titled “Character Notebook.” She was trying to work out a trajectory for her heroine, Peregrine, a “Voyager, no Penelope.” Another character, Lisa, is called a “male-woman” and is associated with Nancy Hunter and Olwyn Hughes. Kate, described as an older passionate woman and a priestess, seems derived from Dorothea Krook. A Mrs. Guinea would be introduced as a sort of Wife of Bath figure. Jess, an “honest dowd,” would be comforting in a sort of stodgy Victorian way. This would be a novel about a woman of the world, an “Isis fable,” Plath noted.
The women would be set against the Dionysian Leonard, a hero, a “God-man,” who is “spermy” and creative. Adam Winthrop, a version of Gordon Lameyer, a mama’s boy (Sylvia said as much in her journal), is dominated by women. She had it in mind to create a Cambridge fop based on Christopher Levenson, an acquaintance, and another frail suitor, Maurice, was a ringer for Sassoon, “a dark, sickly, lover-type.” Warm and intuitive like Mallory Wober, Maurice is too cerebral, and like Sassoon, too worried about money (he had, in fact, rejected marrying Sylvia before he had earned a fortune). Why the title “Falcon Yard”? This was the place on the Cambridge campus where Sylvia and Ted first met. Apparently love would be portrayed as a “bird of prey,” with “victors and victims.” The novel would be characterized by “depravity and suffering” that would give rise to “a fable of faithfulness.” The auras of the Brontës seem to preside over this work.