This essay compares Lawrence Ferlinghetti's beat poem "Dog" and Sylvia Plath's confessional poem "Family Reunion" to explore contrasting treatments of freedom and conformity. Ferlinghetti uses the dog's perspective to celebrate liberty, political independence, and authentic identity, while Plath depicts conformity as a loss of self through family obligation and social pressure. The analysis examines how each poem's speaker relates to the world, their approach to identity, and the consequences of their choices, concluding that both poets present distinct ideological perspectives through their signature forms.
Lawrence Ferlinghetti's "Dog" represents the world through a dog's point of view about the societal and political state, while Sylvia Plath's "Family Reunion" portrays the difficulties of attending a family reunion from her perspective. Ferlinghetti uses his beat poem to approach the theme of freedom, whereas Plath's confessional poem reflects on conformity based on her lived experience. Conformity, as depicted in "Family Reunion," focuses on fake feelings, changes in state of mind, and suppressed individuality, while freedom, as expressed in "Dog," unleashes creative expression and invites wonder in the streets. Freedom and conformity can be differentiated on the basis of their approach and their relationship to individual identity.
In "Dog," Ferlinghetti accomplishes the expression of his societal and political beliefs by using the dog's freedom as a method to communicate with readers. At the very beginning of the poem, Ferlinghetti's speaker states that "the dog trots freely in the street and sees reality." This quote refers to the freedom the dog possesses and how it examines and views the world from a perspective different from that of humans. The dog's perspective is not constrained by social convention or political fear.
Rather than losing identity through conformity, Ferlinghetti expresses and dominates his own identity through the dog as a vehicle. A dog has a totally different perspective on the world than humans do, and perhaps it observes more acutely. Ferlinghetti's speaker justifies his position through the dog's declaration that "He will not be muzzled" and that "Congressman Doyle is just another fire hydrant to him." In this quote, Ferlinghetti conveys that freedom means not being afraid to act authentically, even if those actions challenge authority or social norms—even if one metaphorically "pees on" a congressman. Freedom, therefore, enables the revelation and assertion of one's true identity.
In stark contrast, Plath's speaker in "Family Reunion" is unable and reluctant to connect with her family members. The poem opens with the speaker's fear when she hears the "doorbell rending" and feels "the dull drums of my pulses beat/against a silence of wearing thin." This description shows the effects of conformity: her fear transforms her into a conformist who must prepare for the arrival of unwanted guests. Confessional poetry, Plath's chosen form, allows her to expose the internal psychological toll of social obligation.
As the poem progresses, Plath's speaker recognizes that she must, "cast off my identity" and take "the fatal plunge" into the role expected of her. Casting off her identity means changing her character, wearing a happy face, and saying what her family wants to hear. The speaker imagines deliberately falling from the top of the stairs, a violent image that captures her internal conflict: she knows she cannot truly abandon her identity and simultaneously satisfy her family's expectations of conformity. The act of conformity, in Plath's vision, represents a fatal loss of self.
The two poems present opposite approaches to freedom and conformity and their consequences for the individual. In "Dog," the approach celebrates the freedom to do anything and to eliminate compliance as a path to liberation. In "Family Reunion," the speaker loses her freedom by becoming a conformist to unnecessary social pressure. Beat poetry and confessional poetry thus embody different ideological responses to mid-twentieth-century social constraint.
"Freedom and conformity produce opposing life outcomes"
You’re 72% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.