Anne Stevensons The Marriage: An Analysis

Anne Stevensons The Marriage An AnalysisAnne Stevensons poem, The Marriage, is a playful, subtle and profound description of the differences between work force and women, and the difficulties inborn in such, specific ally in regards to the unification of the sexes, some(prenominal) bodilyly, spiritually and in terms of societal conventions (thus the title). By portraying these difficulties in pure physical terms as a straddle trying to come unitedly to rest comfortably in bed Stevenson is able to build a vivid and surprisingly comprehensive and universal depiction of nuptials.The poem is from the transfer of view of the wife, perhaps the author herself, who is trying to figure out a way to position her body against her conserves so the two will be able to rest snugly at night. With both of them face the kindred direction, she in front, he in back, they be well successful, just butif her spurCuts ex venturely into his rib cageAnd only if his kneesDock exactly under her kneesAnd all fourAgree on a common angleThus positioned provided their bodies willingly correspond the husband and wife induct achieved unification, or, at the very least, a modicum of comfort. exclusively this is a small victory, or even a false one, for as the fibber continuesAll would be wellIf onlyThey could face apiece oppositeIn three lines, Stevenson has perfectly summed up what plagues marriages, old and new kindred that men and women atomic number 18 inherently different. Not that one is superior and the an opposite(prenominal) inferior she seems to prescribe to the separate but equal doctrine that is the norm in her homeland of American and her adopted country of England but that they ar uniquely separate entities. Men and women think differently, act differently, and ar proportioned differently. And both kind of union between the two, any form of coming-together, is marked my problems. The poet is besides asserting that in order for this to occur, a compromise must be enacted. And in any kind of compromise, some things are win (the touch fit) and some are lost (they are non facing separately other). While the partners take over achieved a level of comfort and intimacy, with her backbone nicely fitting into his rib cage, and his knees docking perfectly under hers, they have lost a major component of such, as they cannot look at one another.Stevensons vision of compromise is universal, and does not apply to alone physical propertys. The implications correspond to any aspect of a relationship, including, for example, where a couple chooses to settle (one likes the city, one likes the country, so they move to the suburbs), to how they raise their kids (one is a cull out of television, one isnt, so the child watches a minimum amount), to how they spend their money (one likes extravagant things, one prefers simple things, so they buy items that are passably priced). In all of these situations, both parties are content in tha t they have achieved satisfaction. While neither got everything they were asking for, each partner got enough (presumably, at least) to remain content. This partial victory is the crux of a successful relationship.But Stevenson is not finished. She goes on with her physical description of the pair, who meetNose to fuckChest to scapulaGroin to rumpAnd yet, even though the situation is still not ideal they are unable to face each other, after all in even this there is a silver gray liningThey look, at leastAs if they were goingIn the same directionWhile this is merely a small caveat line up her use of the phrase they look, at least, as if this is merely the come outance of contract even so, it is something. And this small something, again, this tiny victory is often enough to control all the difference. Stevenson is celebrating the small moments of daily life and the small victories that are won through compromise. Are the couple, or, in fact, are any earth and cleaning wo gentlemans gentleman perfectly matched? No. Are there differences between the two that will never be breached? Certainly. But does this mean that one cannot work with this other to achieve some form of balance, even if it is not perfect? Of racecourse not. And, at least in the poets mind, this transcendence of differences makes it even more(prenominal) special.In Stevensons world, a husband and wife half-consciously groping for each other in the middle of the night is as important as any other compromise made between the sexes. A man moves halfway across the world to be with the woman he loves. A woman changes her religion to be with the man she loves. Both are courtly and tremendous acts, but are just as heroic as the couple fumbling in bed. Love, marriage, etc., is both gigantic and intimate, and every act of coming together is important.But let us quickly go back to these wordsThey look, at leastAs if they were goingIn the same directionThis passage holds another meaning, tha t of the fact that the couple is genuinely not going in the same direction, but only appear to be. Stevenson is saying that looks are deceiving, and while the pair seems to be in agreement, they are in reality far from it. This is a reinforcement of her belief that the sexes are different, and even when they dont seem to be (a husband and wife both like the same television program, for example, but he enjoys it for the action, she for the aphrodisiacal leading man), in truth their agendas and perceptions are widely divergent, more than ever.To try her view of marriage, Stevenson adopts a casual, roaring, free verse style, one that is relaxed and light. The words are simple and straightforward, and the situation is commonplace and routine. Underneath, of course, it is a different story, as the athletic field matter the differences between the sexes, and how these differences can be overcome is neither easy nor commonplace. And while she uses the couples awkward brushing of body split to personify this subtext, even this is muted. However, her choice of illustration is highly effective, and she doesnt lease to cloud the issue with excessive metaphor or lofty language. In fact, her technique actually apes her point of view. The mundane act of a man and woman trying to sleep comfortably together is profound, as it not only acts as a representation for the larger compromises that couples must make, but is on its own special and meaningful. By keeping it simple, Stevenson demonstrates the complex and universal.Anne Stevenson, remote the never-married Emily Dickinson and Elizabeth Bishop (who she is often compared to), has been wed four times. Since 1987 she has been with the Darwin scholar Peter Lucas, and no disbelieve in those seventeen years she has learned a thing or two about compromise. Her poem Marriage perfectly captures the disparities between men and women, and the contortions that must be performed to unify the two. Marriage, relationships, love , etc., are wondrous, unique things, as are men and women themselves, but they are also universal. Couples must compromise to survive, sometimes in big ways, sometimes in small ones. But all of these compromises are significant, and all of them make us human. Stevensons poem, like marriage itself, is both incredibly simple and tremendously complicated. Her basic, straightforward words could not be more profound.BibliographyHickling, Alfred. Border Crossings. The Guardian Unlimited. 2 Oct. 2004.Stevenson, Anne. Poems 1955-2005. Northumberland Bloodaxe Books, 2005.