Marlo Bloom

Spring 2015
EDU 619
Professor Hodges
Part One: Analysis
Girl, Interrupted by Susana Kaysen, is a young adult, partial autobiography about
Kaysens time in a psychiatric ward at the famous McLean hospital. She writes in first
person, past tense, which creates an especially personal sense of the book. Additionally,
it makes the book a good one for opening discussion about diversity and equity, as it
provides its readers with an opportunity to hear from individuals who are or have been
traditionally silenced or marginalized (Vasquez, 2010). My general opinion of the
book is that it is a well written, compelling, emotional read that draws the its readers into
the life of the author. It is honest and introspective, punctured with dry humor, and offers
a unique insight into to life inside a psychiatric ward in the sixties.
The book contains multiple aspects of Tunnell and Jacobs definitions of a good
book. The language evokes emotion, creates a character, sets the tone, and identifies
both setting and point of view (Tunnell, Jacobs, Young & Bryan, 2012). Kaysens word
choice is exceptional; it is strong yet uncomplicated. She uses words such as claimants
instead of nurses, which conveys a strong sense of entrapment and negativity, yet does
not complicate the sentence. She also uses a great deal of figurative language to add
power and meaning. She utilizes personification and similes, such as Scar tissue has no
character Its like a slipcover. It shields and disguises whats beneath. Thats why we
grow it, we have something to hide, (Kaysen, 1993). This sentence offers a unique
sense of specificity and clarity.

The tone of the book is the epitome of Vasquezs tenet that texts are created by
someone, somewhere, for some reason, and that they are created from a particular
perspective (Vasquez, 2010). Kaysen discusses her experience as both positive and
negative, yet whatever emotion she is feeling at that point in the book, is how the reader
is feeling as well (which in many ways, leaves the reader confused and wondering). She
is able to manipulate the reader; make him think and believe certain things in specific
ways. Had I not had prior knowledge of McLean hospital, I would have easily fallen into
Kaysens portrayal of it as a jail. Most of the time, she makes McLean out to be a prison,
the nurses to be incompetent, and the medication to be punishment. I have no doubt, that
this was how she felt. However, McLean hospital was known for its progressive
treatment for mentally ill patients at the time. McLean was one of the first to hospitals in
the U.S. to eliminate physical treatments such as starving and beating patients, and
employ humane treatments inspired by reforms in England and France. In fact, only the
wealthiest families could afford McLean hospital, as it was the best of the best. It was
one of the first hospitals in the U.S. whose doctors looked as patients sick, not inferior or
possessed by demons. Still, Kaysen writes that the patients scared or disgusted the
nurses, and that [The nurses] didnt like that, touching us (Kaysen, 1993). Once again,
evidence that everyone writes and reads from a perspective.
My perspective of Kaysens portrayal of the hospital, their methods, and nurses
illustrates the idea that we read from particular perspectives, and that we bring our past
experiences and understandings with us (Vasquez, 2010). I have experience in the mental
health field, and knowledge of McLean and the history of psychiatric treatment and
development. This put me in a position to disagree, or at least question, Kaysens claims.

Likely, neither of us is correct. There is no one truth, and her truth of living in McLean
will inherently be different from my experience of reading about it. Nonetheless, my past
significantly influenced me throughout my reading of the book.
Girl, Interrupted also centers on systems, power, and dominance. Kaysen makes
it very clear that the nurses and doctors had control, and that the patients had no freedom.
Kaysen describes the ward at one point with Lunatics to the left, staff to the right. The
toilets and showers were also to the right, as thought the staff claimed oversight of our
most private acts (Kaysen, 1993). In many ways, that is the purpose of an inpatient
psychiatric facility. The idea of inpatient care is that it is for individuals who are not
healthy enough for outpatient care, in which the patient comes in for treatment but lives
at home. People in inpatient need constant supervision. Most cannot take care of
themselves, are a danger to themselves, or a danger to society. Kaysen for example, had
suicidal thoughts and eventually made an attempt. Therefore, I believe her
hospitalization to be much more rational that she does. Yet this loss of freedom and
independence takes and extreme toll on Kaysen and the other patients, and is a recurring
theme throughout the book. The patients are very resentful, and often act out in an
attempt to reclaim their freedom. Often times, Kaysen describes the patients turning the
tables on the nurses, and manipulating them, especially new nurses or residents. Kaysen
describes one instance where a few of the patients wanted to return to their ward, and
requested the nurse come escort them. When the nurse didnt come immediately, one of
the patients became impatient and lit a lighter. The nurse came right away, at which point
the patient said, No lighters supervised smoking. I knew that would rouse them.

Societys view on the mentally ill population is also significant to the book.
Kaysen speaks about the outside world and their reaction to the patients when they went
outside the ward. She writes that generally, people made a conscious effort not to stare.
She says at one point however, In the worlds terms, though, all of us were tainted
(Kaysen, 1993). Kaysen explains that no matter how functional or dysfunctional the
patients were after their discharge from the hospital, they would always have a label; they
will always be viewed as damaged. For this reason, it was difficult for her to get a job
when people knew she was in McLean. Eventually she stopped telling people that she
was there, as nothing good ever came from it.
Kaysen also illustrates her sense of guilt for her illness, as society often blames
individuals for their mental illness. People with psychiatric illness often feel that it is
their fault, and that they are responsible for their illness and should pay some sort of
price. When she reads the diagnostic criteria of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD),
she finishes with so these were the charges against me (Kaysen, 1993). She sees these
criteria as charges something criminal, socially unacceptable and that warrants
punishment. She believes that if she had some other disorder, she would be blameless,
somehow. People with mental illness should never feel guilty, at fault, or that they
should be punished.
Finally, this population lacks credibility. Kaysen states that the nurses wrote that
patients indulged in eating or writing or speaking behavior, yet In the outside world,
people ate and talked and wrote, but nothing we did was simple (Kaysen, 1993). She
explains that they cant do what normal people can do without being placed under
suspicion. At one point in the book, a doctor says something strangw about her

diagnosis. Kaysen then says, He can say it because hes a doctor. If I said it, nobody
would believe me.
As a whole, I found Kaysens account of her time at McLean a candid, unguarded
viewpoint on a serious subject with bits of dry, blunt humor. She is clearly self-aware
and well informed on mental illness and her diagnosis. Yet, whether she considers herself
disordered, or whether or not she believes in the disorder, changes throughout the book.
Sometimes she believes in BPD, but does not identify with it, such as when she writes,
Insane people: I had a good nose for them and I didnt want to have anything to do with
them. I still dont (Kaysen, 1993). Sometimes she identifies with the criteria, but does
not believe it is a disorder, as evident when she rationalizes reasons behind her
symptoms. Sometimes she seems to embrace her label of crazy, and accepts BPD as a
legitimate diagnosis. This, in my opinion, is extremely ironic; as such constant
uncertainty, emotional instability, and struggle with self-identity are trademark for
individuals with BPD. The sense I was left with is that she still does not know whether to
identify as crazy or sane. She grapples with the delicate balance between sanity and
insanity, and her identification continuously teeters between the two throughout the
memoir. Near the end of the book she writes, I often ask myself if Im crazy. I
interpret this as mental illness is not curable. It is treatable, and manageable, yet never
quite goes away it is always a part of you. I know that my interpretation is a result of
my own experience with mental illness, but I believe that was intentional on Kaysens
part. I think she wrote this way so that the reader would come to her own conclusions.