To ask you to ‘Destroy without reading’? (Bereavement related)

[Izzy24]

Would you?

So if you were coping with clearing personal belongings and you came across a package marked as above, would you respect that person’s privacy and dispose of it without reading? Even if it was unsealed?

Hughes destroyed the diaries that he didn't want their children ever to read. He kept and published about a third of them. Obviously I don't know what was destroyed, but I think the surviving ones really give enough insight to Plath and her work. Apparently most of the unpublished but surviving ones were just her slagging off more or less everyone she knew; she did that even to people she was close to.

I can see why you'd disapprove, but I truly don't see how you can be surprised.

Absolutely.

"I don't interfere; If I'm scared of the things I might hear" 🎵🎶🎵

I'm in the "awful" club, too!

If I just destroyed it, I'd be unbearably curious for ever more.

I'd look tbh probably less interesting than your imagination anyway. When I cleared out my dad's stuff found a stash of porn mags If he'd had chance he'd probably have marked like your dad. I just opened the box and closed it again before it went in the bin pile.

I’m not scared of anything much.

And I’d always rather know the truth.

I agree.

Since this thread has been quite dramatic anyway perhaps it's a confession? Something the deceased couldn't or wouldn't admit in their lifetime but writing it down was a cathartic, conscience cleansing exercise - a secular version of going to confession. Whatever it is might affect someone else.

It's not going to be difficult to distinguish between soppy (or salacious) love letters and soppy (or salacious photos) , your parents' sex toys etc, at one end to well, who knows, a confession to murder.

Apologies to the previous posters who made this point.

A confession to a crime , or if not a crime, some other reprehensible act would be my suspicion If I saw that. If that were the case I think anyone who had been adversely affected by it being a secret has a right to know.

That’s what he claimed, but I think he just didn’t want what she said about him aired. What we don’t have is insight into her life in the period before her death. No-one but Ted Hughes knows what was in them and he wouldn’t have shared if she “slagged” people off so that is speculation and unlikely.

No, from the date on it, he filmed it over a decade ago, long before dementia set in. He’s always been obsessed that he was about to die. he was an older father, I’ve been expecting him to pop his clogs any second from the way he went on since I was about 5, I’m 43 now! He’s 90. I was always told, “this will be my last year” for as long as I can remember.

There would be no apology and I’d bet that it’s all about his money (which is all gone).

His vascular dementia was so fast. In the space of 12 months he went from doing accounts for his neighbours business and still tutoring A level maths at the age of 85 to hallucinating, not being able to tell you the day and having to go into a home because he wasn’t safe to live alone. it was terrifying how rapid it was. There wasn’t time to see any real behaviour changes. He was there one week and gone the next. it was like he was body snatched in the night.

I don't like Hughes or his poetry. I always assumed he destroyed the bad bits about him.

I found a box of DM's papers marked 'private' (she has severe dementia and I was looking for some important papers). They were letters from DM to DF. I started reading a couple and they showed all her worst character traits.
We always had a difficult relationship which I'm trying to forgive as she gets closer to death and those letters didn't help.
Quite aside from whether it was wrong to look at them, I wish I hadn't as it made her even harder to like. So I guess that was my punishment?!

I like his poetry but he was a very self-centred man. And if it had been the other way round I think Plath would have kept his stuff, however painful it was for her personally.

In the introduction to her diaries (at least, the one I read), it was stated that Plath "had a sharp tongue and tended to use it on nearly everyone", including people who were very close to her until the end. Names were given although I don't remember them. I can well believe it; she was pretty spiky even in the ones that survive. I don't remember if Hughes wrote that part of the introduction or not, though. I don’t think he did but I can't be certain. I do remember being surprised at what did make the final cut in relation to Hughes; there was more criticism of him in there than I had expected to see. I'm not much of a fan of the man or his work, personally.

Do we need to read the diaries that she wrote right as her breakdown reached the worst possible conclusion? I think what we've got gives enough insight into who she was and why. I'm one of those who absolutely would read something even if it said not to, so I'm not coming at this from any position of moral superiority, but there are things I'd read and not publish, especially if they related to the suicide of my children's other parent. I'm just not sure there could be anything to add to what's already out there that would tell us anything we don't already know and would benefit from knowing. But I guess since they were destroyed, we can never know.

My Nan had a sealed envelope with something similar written on it, which my aunt found after my Nan died. She discussed it with my mum and they decided to destroy it without opening it. There are a lot of unanswered questions about some pretty big stuff in our family and, honestly, I would have opened it.

Of course I would look

If it was my husbands I would definitely read it because with that written on it I'd assume he'd been hiding something from me and I'd want to know! If it was another relative then I would flick through it. If it was just personal diaries I wouldn't read it but if it was official letters I'd check what it was.

My grandpa recently passed away, my granny died ten years ago and she left instructions for my mum to burn a box of their love letters when both of them had gone, which my mum did. They'd written weekly for 2 years! I quite liked the idea that no one had ever read them but my grandparents and now they're gone along with them.

I would not read.

There are 2 different editions one in 1982 edited by Hughes and Frances McCullough (iirc) and a later unabridged one edited by Karen Kukil published around 2000. You’re referring to the first.

Afair the comment about her sharp tongue wasn’t specifically wrt journals but more of a general observation, it is also manifest in her letters and her life.

Whether you “need” to read the diaries is not the point; I and many others would like to have done regardless of how you feel. I would also have liked to have read the other journal that went missing and the early draft of a novel called “Double Exposure” that “disappeared”.

Whether you “need” to read the diaries is not the point; I and many others would like to have done regardless of how you feel.

Well, you will be glad to learn that the decision to destroy them was not made with any consideration at all to how I feel, so you can stop feeling offended on that count. Perhaps her children would have felt similarly, I don't know; you'd have to ask them.

And yes, I'd definitely be referring to the first as I read them before 2000.

At the end of the day, they were not written with the intent of publication, so we can be grateful for what we have. As a small note, I think the line about her sharp tongue and using it on almost everyone wasn't written by Hughes because it referred to her as "Plath" and I don't think he would have done that.

While I agree this is a good idea i think it is a lot of pressure to put on someone you know . they may feel that you really need to know something that's in the documents its a tough call for them to have to make ( affair / second family / child / convictions / huge debts etc ) or they could gossip about the above .
Ideally if you go down that route a solicitor might be the best option rather that a family member / friend .

Would I read them ? its hard to say , legal documents yes probably , personal letters no , diaries that's a hard call , it depends on how they died if its suicide i really wouldn't want to know that they were desperately trying to cry out for help but i didn't notice. on the whole i dont think I would .

I'm a historian so no way would I destroy anything that might be interesting. Might put it on a shelf to look at a few years after their death

Not sure where the idea I’m offended comes from?

I disagree Plath didn’t intend them to be published, they are performative and carefully crafted from the start. Her ambitions as a writer and her knowledge of past writers’ work means she knew they would likely be published if she were successful. As with many great writers the journals form part of her oeuvre. Except, sadly the last 2 years of her life are missing.

O would look. If he really wanted it gone ; why keep it at all? It must have some emotional value to him. I mean how bad could it be?

That made me laugh. I have a family member who would do this, but as a joke. Same one who swears his headstone will read either "Miss me now?" or "I told you I was sick".