How far are Larkin and Duffy alike in writing about the superficiality of society in their poetry?

In their poems, Duffy and Larkin’s personas convey a distaste towards societal conventions through exposing the reality of society’s workings.Whilst both poets come to bleak conclusions, Duffy recognises the virtues of society whilst Larkin is incessantly pessimistic. Duffy adopts a much more intimate and involved perspective of society, exposing society’s faults in a more genuine manner compared to Larkin, who assumes an impartial status, crudely commenting upon society’s duplicity. 
In “The Whitsun Weddings” and “Valentine” both personas explicitly discard the accepted societal notions of love and marriage, however Larkin’s narrative is wholly observational whereas Duffy’s strives for deeper meaning. Larkin’s person assumes a misogamist view, exposing the depressing reality of marriage. The persona observes how attendees at the wedding “shared the secret like a happy funeral” , the juxtaposition conveying how marriage signals the death of happiness. This dismal truth is further accentuated by the rigid form of eight stanzas of ten lines, creating a methodical, predictable rhythm of the train; all partnerships are predestined to end badly. This is archetypal of Larkin, whose strict adherence to regular metre and verse was inspired by Thomas Hardy’s tight control of sound and pace, demonstrated in “A Sunday Morning Tragedy”. Duffy’s persona similarly explicitly conveys such dire consequences, with the use monosyllabic lexis and modal verbs “It will blind you with tears” and “it’s scent will cling to your knife”. Larkin’s persona however differs as their tonality is wholly cynical, satirically mocking the “parodies of fashion” and the “Jewellery substitutes”. Furthermore the syndetic listing “banquet halls and bunting dressed/ coach party annexes”, denigrates the romantic union to simple images. Alternatively, the focus upon the external and the decorated may convey the whole relationship as a façade, exposing the superficiality of marriage as a societal construction. As Andrew Motion commented, “none of his poems register the achievement of complete calm success in love”.