The Yellow Wallpaper

Within the "Yellow Wallpaper," by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, the narrator transitions from a state of subordination to a state of authority; finding an escape from her husband and society's dominance through utter insanity.  Throughout the story, the narrator is treated as if she were a child and is placed in a nursery to emphasize her lack of authority within society, having as little power as an infant when it comes to her relationships and her status. John, the narrator's husband, never listens to her concerns and brushes off the severity of her case, postpartum depression, because he has "more serious cases" to tend to. When the narrator wishes to discuss important matters with John, he often speaks with the most condescending tone calling her his "blessed little goose" (1686 Gilman) and he even carries her to her room and reads to her until she falls asleep one night following a disagreement.  It is not until the narrator fully loses herself (her dependable and accepting nature that all women are "supposed" to possess) that she is able to experience a sense of freedom that she lacked in her marriage.  Earlier in the story the narrator mentions how inappropriate it is for a woman to creep in the open causing her to creep in private: "It must be very embarrassing to be caught creeping by daylight...I always lock the door when I creep by daylight" (1693 Gilman). The narrator is bound to society's rules and expectations so she hides whatever society deems unpleasant because she does not want to bring to light what the rest of the world does not wish to see. At the end however, the narrator is freed from her subordinate role through her lunacy and overcomes her husband when he finds her creeping by daylight: "Now why should that man have fainted? But he did, and right across my path by the wall, so that I had to creep over him every time!" (1695 Gilman).  John no longer has power over the narrator; she, on the other hand, brings to light the dire situation of her case and no longer allows him to prevent her from doing what she, not society as a whole, deems fit.

                Gilman attacks the "rest cure" within the "Yellow Wallpaper" because she believed that this treatment represented the inferiority of women during this time period. She wrote this cautionary tale not only to combat the "rest cure" but also to warn against the inevitable outcome if society did not change its view.  Gilman warns that women will eventually break free from their lesser positions in one of two ways, whether it be through society's change of heart or through madness.

Response to "Thanksgiving" by Celia Thaxter, in The Atlantic Monthly

I kind of liked Thaxter's "Thanksgiving" poem It just reminded me of "A Night Before Christmas," except there was a lot of description about nature: roses, irises, trees, and birds. She was giving thanks for all of the beautiful aspects of nature and personified the different natural wonders of the earth. It highlighted how amazing the annual cycling of the seasons are as it travels between death and rebirth year after year.  I do think it is strange when an author talks to inanimate objects and wishes for a response. I would rather admire in silence and accept that the roses do not have thoughts. I do appreciate Nature though. I think that it is often taken advantage of. As we grow older, its easy to forget and take for granted the miracles of nature. When I was a kid, I was mesmerized by nature and wanted to know all there was to know about it. As I have aged, I have also lost sight of the gloriousness of just everyday processes that flowers and trees and insects perform. Anyway, I choose this poem because it was published on my birthday, November 14, 1871. "Thanksgiving was originally published from The Atlantic Monthly, but was republished in this article from The Milwaukee. I was looking more for an actual Thanksgiving holiday story, but I have been having a very difficult time finding one, which is frustrating. However, I did like reading a poem that gave thanks to nature for everything that it does that we have the ability to sit back and enjoy.  We need to step back and "smell the roses" if you will. Another plus for the poem is it used the word gonfalons, which means a banner or pennant.

Kate Chopin's "Desiree's Baby!"

I was a little nervous about reading this short work because I was not a fan of, "The Awakening" at all in high school. It may have been that we read the novel at too young an age to really grasp the meaning and scandal, but I'm pretty sure that I got lost in the descriptions and never really put together the main plot. It was several years ago, but I distintly remember I did not like it. I was pleasantly surprised that I actually did enjoy "Desiree's Baby" a lot. It reminded me of the mini series North and South. I loved that series, but a woman within it, very light skinned, finds out that her mother was colored (she was adopted at a young age and no one knew of her past). She was married to a very cruel husband who would have killed her if he found out the truth. When her husband passed away and she was planning to marry her true love, who knew the truth and loved her anyway, she hesitated because she didn't want to place shame upon the name of her fiance. I think it is so strange that just the knowledge of "being cursed with the brand of slavery" even if one does not look like it, can make a husband fall out of love with his wife and child. Armand blames Desiree for ruining his family name, but she had no idea of her life before she was adopted. She was lucky enough in that time period to have light enough skin to pass as a white woman. The idea of slavery and thinking of a particular race so poorly, that you would send away your wife and son sickens me. And Arman is such a hypocrite. He too is of the colored race, as they called it, and just because he wanted to maintain his farce and save his reputation, he forces out the person he said he loved. Ohhhh,,,I think it just clicked for me. It wasn't Desiree that was colored but Armand was, so he blamed Desiree in order to save himself and his own reputation. What a jerk!

Edgar Allan Poe!!!!!!!

I love Edgar Allan Poe!  I really enjoy reading his works and delving into the darkness and well thought deceits of murderous beings.  I think it is interesting that the narrator in “The Tell-Tale Heart,” is so adamant on defending his sanity.  By so vigorously denying that he is mad, he further proves to the reader that he is not in his right mind.  He explains that he actually liked the “Old Man” he so carefully planned to kill. The narrator is obviously crazy; I think the question is when exactly did he become mad?  Before he killed the Old Man, due to guilt and his conscience forcing him to take responsibility for the murder of the Old Man, or was it way before he actually killed him?  I think he was mad all along; why feel the need to prove that you are not crazy, if you are not crazy.  I think the narrator’s definition of madness is a little different from that of the readers.  Killing another human being is never okay, but it becomes a lot more understandable when someone, in a fit of rage, kills someone.  No deceitful planning, no murderous intentions, but rather an action that was not intended and only performed when a person saw red and lost control.  I think that it takes a crazy person to plan the murder of someone that they care about because of something as trivial as an eye.  The narrator was so careful, he did not act rashly, he could have easily talked himself out of performing the murderous deed, but he didn’t.  He was so taken aback by an “Evil Eye,” that he had to take the Old Man’s life into his own hands. This need is obviously driven by a chemical imbalance of the brain; that is not a normal response to seeing something that makes you feel uncomfortable.  I think that it’s interesting that the narrator’s “highly acute senses” drove him to murder the Old Man, and also drove him to confess.  Which makes me wonder where exactly is the narrator telling this story.  Is he in jail or an insane asylum?  I think he is probably being treated at an asylum because he is so persistent on convincing us that he is not mad. 

The writing style for “The Cask of Amontillado” is very similar to that of “The Tell-Tale Heart.” The narrator wants to get revenge on his “friend” and he deceitfully lures Fortunato, the victim, to his own grave.  The plan was well thought out and required a lot of preparation, much in the same way the murder of the Old Man was not impulsive.  I wonder what Fortunato did that wronged the narrator so.  Poe does a good job at providing hints to the motives of the narrator, such as the description of the family crest, with the motto: “Nemo me impune lacessit,” meaning, nobody attacks me with impunity.  The narrator is often a fan of revenge, but obviously takes it way too far.  The two-faced character of the narrators in both “The Tell-Tale Heart” and “The Cask of Amontillado” creeps me out every time.  It makes me wonder what it is people are really thinking.

Response to Young Goodman Brown

I really enjoyed Nathanial Hawthorne’s “Young Goodman Brown,” which surprised me since I was not a huge fan of The Scarlet Letter.  I think Hawthorne does a good job at highlighting the high and fairly impossible expectations of the Puritans. Everyone sins, everyone makes mistakes; it is unreasonable to assume that people are perfect and never sin.  Most people have a desire, at some point in their lives, to break the rules a little bit, to not be practical for once, and to do something that is completely irrational.  Some people act on these desires; others do not.  Hawthorne illustrates an interesting scenario to expose the hypocrisy of Puritan society. Everyone that Goodman Brown believed would scorn the Devil, was at the meeting place deep in the woods.  The deacon, the “saintly minister,” his wife, ironically named Faith, every person that he believed was “good” and “sinless” in his society, did not live up to his expectations or to their “day-time” façade.  Every single person struggles with sin.  I guarantee that at some point in a person’s lifetime, they will succumb to peer-pressure, or give in and do the wrong thing.  The Puritan’s “pious” lifestyle is unreasonable and frankly is a farce. No one is that perfect, as Goodman Brown finds out.  It makes me wonder how well I really know the people around me.  The people whose lives from the outside may look and seem perfect,   may really just be putting on a show for the world.  I think it is extremely interesting that Goodman Brown is so appalled by the other people at the Devil’s meeting place, but fails to address the fact that he is in the fault just as much as the others. Faith tried to make him stay home, he refused. There were multiple opportunities that he could have gone home, he didn’t.  It seems even more hypocritical that Goodman Brown can return to the Puritan society and scorn and judge his neighbors, without accepting the fact that he too was tempted and succumbed to the Devil. Maybe, at the last second he tried to save his wife from the Devil and  turned away from the evil one, but he walked himself to the meeting…no one dragged him. I think that this is a huge criticism of the harsh judgments and actions associated with the Puritans.  They are quick to blame others for their sins (once other’s imperfections are exposed) but refuse to look at their own.  Maybe the reason the Puritans were so set on blaming other people and exposing their “unchristian ways”, was so that they could hide their own sins and imperfections. Now I’m rambling, but I still find the Puritan lifestyle fascinating.  

Thoughts on Thoreau

I really really liked Thoreau's style. I thoroughly enjoyed reading all that he had to say. I liked how he would take the normal, everyday occurrences of life and revert them in order to open our minds to the viewpoint of the world of an “awakened person.” Thoreau definitely has a point. We are all so caught up in getting through life as fast as possible, either looking to the future or regretting the past, at a certain point we fail to live it. I have been struggling a lot with this lately in my own life. I am a Biology and English major on the Pre-Med track, and I have very little time to really think about life in general. I am so caught up with getting through the next week, month, semester, that I don’t ever slow down to enjoy my college experience. If I am not studying I am either eating or sleeping. Just going through the motions, I haven’t taken the time to stop and “smell the roses” as it were. It’s interesting how Thoreau talks about the freeness of children and that they are the ones truly living. They get lost in their own curiosity and want to discover nature and the world by going out and exploring it. I miss that. I love that Thoreau speaks through irony. He takes a common statement and flips it around in a way that I was too lazy, distracted, or “asleep” to discover on my own: “I went to the wood because I wished to live deliberately” (892). In general, if someone goes to the wood, I would immediately think he/she wished to live in a life of solitude and relaxation. Thoreau takes a general belief and totally rearranges it, so I don’t know what to think anymore. He argues that by living far enough away from the hustle and bustle of village life, a person has the freedom to live a true life awakened. Someone surrounded by nature can learn to be one with nature with a little help from imagination. Imagination is the key to living; it is the factor that distinguishes children from adults. Requirements, expectations, obligations, strip a person of their ability to live. I love the fact that Thoreau doesn’t quote the bible, but rather alludes to Greek myths as well as Hinduism to make his points. By doing this, he is able to stand out from other authors and really focus not on the morality behind religion but rather on the different philosophies that help to explain the mysteries of life. Thoreau got me thinking. Hopefully one of these days I’ll eventually wake up.

Emerson's "Self Reliance"

This essay definitely shows the shift in ideals  from the Enlightenment to Romanticism. Emerson addresses the natural faults of human nature that are still prevalent today: the need to feel accepted, appreciated, and ultimately, to fit into the mold of society.  I can guarantee that every single teenager going through those awkward years, at one point or another, just wanted to be a part of the "cool crowd." When I switched schools in 6th grade, that is all that I wanted. You can't be an individual in middle school. No one has the luxury to be in "the midst of the crowd [and keep] with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." In middle school, conformity is a survival tactic. Of course, as Emerson mentions, this was not the case as a child. The ideal perspective is that of the young, who are not blinded by the desires and expectations that society forces upon us, but rather expresses thoughts and actions without hesitation.  Children are not constrained by the fears of adults.  The thought of humiliation or judgment often prevents people from expressing themselves truthfully.  Emerson advises that we be true to ourselves, that we forget about the rules and regulations of society and bide by what we determine is correct. He warns his readers not to live in the past, or look to the future, but rather to live in the present.  Oftentimes, we are so caught up in past regrets and future hopes, we miss out on life itself.  Emerson also mentions that nothing is more real than perception.  It's funny, I was literally talking about this with my roommate last night.  She told me that it is not one's intent that matters, but instead how another person perceived that particular action.  What is portrayed to the world makes up reality, not necessarily your good intentions.  I like Emerson's message. All you need to do is look to yourself. There is nothing more true than the original you that must not be swayed by the judgments and opinions of others.  Unfortunately, this is definitely easier said than done.  There is a fine line between being an individual and being an outcast.  People need to find a way to be able to express themselves truthfully without pushing others away.  

The Pennsylvania Gazette

The Pennsylvania Gazette

Number 1513

December 27, 1757

            Looking at newspapers that were read back in the 1700s is so fascinating to me. It is so interesting to see what people were worrying about in those days, what they were interested in, and what scientific advancements they had made.  I still find it interesting that colleges in the United States were founded long before the Revolution. That people were going to schools that are renowned today, since the late 1600s, early 1700s.  One of the excerpts in the paper summarizes a lecture that was given at the University of Pennsylvania. It is introduced with the amusing title, “For the Entertainment of the Curious.” It discusses the known aspects of electricity that, once harnessed, could be extremely useful to humans. It’s weird to think that the importance of education and progress was stressed even back then. I also find it strange that the article speaks of the basic fundamental properties of electricity in general, and it is with the use of electricity that I am able to find this newspaper and read it and discuss matters pertaining to the different parts. The paper opens with a piece about the basic layout of a new magazine that will be published starting in January 1758. The first half of the new magazine will discuss the history pertaining to the establishment of the colonies as well as other historical events that occurred leading up to the “present.” Once again the importance of education is highlighted as the author of the piece attempts to convince people to subscribe to his magazine: “to satisfy the public that even this New World is not destitute of Learning and Learned Men…and our Youth…will be naturally allured to improve themselves in Knowledge and polite Literature.” The importance of truth and character is often repeated in the description of this upcoming magazine. This is a nice change to much of the trash and garbage that is printed by popular magazines today which are filled with assumptions and speculations of the rich and famous. Much like the newspapers we see today, there is a lot of information in the Gazette pertaining to other parts of the world, particularly to London. There are speeches and explanations of laws and letters from other important people, not living in the colonies. I think it would be extremely difficult to get word about the happenings occurring overseas and thus, the reporting must have been way after the actual occurrence that took place. This is a strange thought as we live in a world where it takes only a split second for an event to occur before it goes viral. There is also an absurd amount of poetry published within the Gazette. I don’t mind, I like poetry, but I don’t think that the everyday person views poetry as a sense of entertainment, unless they really like English or are English majors. The last page of the Gazette is filled with advertisements, which is not unlike the papers we see today.  I sincerely enjoyed reading this paper from the past. Some parts were really difficult to read due to ink smudges, differences in spelling, and formal and eloquent diction. The “s” also looked like an “f” which stumped me a few times as well.

A response to: "The Author to Her Book" by Anne Bradstreet

A response to: "The Author to Her Book"

I actually love this poem. I've read it before and I love that sense of familiarity you get when you pick something up and realize you've seen it before. Anyways I think her metaphor is incredibly strong. She compares her book, or any piece of writing really, to a child. Unfortunately, the relationship the author has with her book is not a loving and nurturing one, but rather filled with disappointment and unreached expectations. She refers to her writing as her "ill-formed offspring" and her "rambling brat." Obviously she is not proud of her works. All she is able to see are flaws and imperfections. Because it is something that she created, I don't think it will ever be good enough. She explains that her friends took her writing prematurely and got it published, which only resulted in embarassment and disatisfaction. Every time she looked at the book (her so called child) after that, she was ashamed to be associated with it. I think that actually happens a lot with parents and children. Parents will sometimes set unreasonable expectations for their kids, and then reprimand and punish them when they are unable to live up to them. It's hard because parents are always associated with their child. Every decision that is made, action that is taken, word that is spoken by the child will always be related back to their parents. Often times parents are blamed for the mistakes of their offspring because "they did not practice good parenting". When Bradstreet talks about her book she is merciless. She is harder on herself because, as human beings, that's what we do. In my opinion, no matter how much time she had to edit, change, manipulate her writing into whatever she wanted it to be, it never would have been ready to "send...out of door."

Response to A Brief and True Report of the New Found Land of Virginia

I am not so sure what I think of Thomas Harriot. As I read his text from, A Brief and True Report of the New Found Land of Virginia, I thought that Harriot's descriptions of the colonist's relationship with the Native Americans was interesting since he focused on the peaceful interactions between the different tribes and the colonists. I don’t believe this optimistic outlook gives a good depiction of what was actually occurring, however, since tensions had begun to arise between the European settlers and the Natives by this time. When speaking of the Native Americans, Harriot uses a condescending tone that, frankly, is annoying. He does not give the tribes much credit and wishes to settle the fears of the colonists who had worries about the "savages from the New World." He describes the Native American's lack of weapons, but fails to mention that they are far superior in knowing the way of the land, what crops grow best in different regions, and how to hunt. While the colonists may have more weapons, they did not, without the help of the Native Americans, have the knowledge base needed to survive in their new environment. When on the topic of religion, Harriot seems to enjoy the fact that the natives think that the colonists are gods, or rather the European God loved the colonists more than them. I found this interesting that the Native Americans would come to the colonists and ask for their prayers. Harriot writes that the natives should come to "honor, obey, fear, and love us" (42). Harriot speaks with a superior tone that resembles that of a Godly figure. I think he's letting the image portrayed by the Native Americans get to his head. How does he know such detailed stories of the religion practiced by the natives anyway?? I was surprised how similar their religion was to that of Christianity. They believed in an afterlife of bliss or misery. They also told of men rising from the dead to teach other believers about the afterlife. When first coming to America, I would be more focused on surviving than converting the Native Americans to Christianity. I think it is interesting that Harriot places such a large emphasis on conversion and transformation. It definitely puts into perspective what was important during that time period. The last sentence of the piece reprimands the authorities for behaving "too fierce[ly]" towards the Native Americans, but he brushes it under the rug saying that everything will be fine. If it were the other way around, if a Native American had behaved "too fierce[ly]" Harriot would not have had such a nonchalant tone referring to the killing of innocent colonists.