Write a response to the student essay. Discuss whether or not you agree with the thesis and why. Use evidence from the stories to support your response. The response should be minimally 3 paragraphs.
For homework review your notes from "Three Seasons" (20). In class students will respond to the story using the prompts on page 77. Use the list on page 15 to develop your notes.
7 comments:
Marie Heide
English 1B
06 Feb 2012
Prof. Sabir
Today in class, we read a student essay in response to two stories; "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin and "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. In her thesis statement, Melanie Smith states that "When twenty-first-century readers first encounter literature of earlier times, it is easy for us to apply our own standards of conduct to the characters and situations" (p.79). I do agree with the thesis when it is applied to "The Yellow Wallpaper." However, I disagree with the thesis when it is applied to "The Story of an Hour." In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's story, the reader is clearly submerged in a male-oriented lifestyle, where as Kate Chopin's story is not quite clear what the male's role in the story is in relation to his wife.
In "The Yellow Wallpaper," it is clear that the male role of that time period was clearly a dominating one. The main character/narrator is controlled by her husband in such a strict manner that she cannot do something as simple as writing freely in the open. "I did write for a while in spite of them..... having to be so sly about it, or else meet with heavy opposition" (p.64). A twenty-first-century reader, such as myself, regarded this statement as an excessive exhibit of control that limits a simple right to express one's feelings/thoughts through words.
In "The Story of an Hour," it is unclear if the male character represents that of an oppressor. It is a short story that does not give much detail into the lives of Mr. and Mrs. Mallard, and is unclear why after being told that her husband has been killed, that Mrs. Mallard is overwhelmingly engulfed with the sense of freedom. "Free! Body and soul free!" (p.62). I did not get the feeling that Mrs. Mallard was being controlled or mentally abused, such as the narrator in "The Yellow Wallpaper." However, I did question if maybe this was a marriage that just did not work out. Maybe, after being married for so long, they became bored or frustrated with one another. During this period, divorce was probably frowned upon, therefore, the only way out of such a marriage, would have been by death.
Allen Lee
Professor Sabir
English 1B
6 February 2012
After reading Melanie Smith's essay on the similarities of "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman and "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin, I had a different interpretation. Smith argues that the male in both stories loves their wife and some of the neglecting actions was caused by the standard of society during that time. Yes, I agree that society played a key role in influencing male to become more dominant as a way of increasing their power and ego. Smith was half right; "The Yellow Wallpaper" shows that the husband did not love his wife, but treats her as a trophy, evidence of his accomplishment as a man.
Smith argues that both men in both stories love their wife, but she's wrong. Brently Mallard, a character from "The Story of an Hour", was the only one of the two husbands who cherished his wife. When he was reported dead, the wife fell into depression. That is a sign that he was close to her, enough to make an impact of her life and that if he were to disappear she would be greatly influenced. Her recovery left remnants of over joy attitude. Not joy that she is free from her husband, but joy that she can live her life without the burden of depression, fear, and sadness. "She knew she would weep again when she saw the kind, tender hands folded in death" (P. 62). She would start to weep not because of Brantly's dead hands but death itself. The way depression takes a toll on a person is through lost of will (giving up on life goals and ambitions).
In the story "The Yellow Wallpaper", John was a man who did not cherish his wife as Smith interpreted. He neglected her and basically treated her like a prisoner. He dominated her life as a sign of superiority. "He knows there is no reason to suffer, and that satisfied him" (P.66). He provided her the minimal to survive. Smith was right that society affects how people act. Since John was a physician, he has a high social status. Having a complete life was an important matter to him. Leaving her would have caused people to judge him. Instead, he kept her as a dusty trophy, pointing at it as evidence of his accomplishments as a man.
Maribel Arrizon
Professor Sabir
English 1B
6 February 2012
After reading the essay by Melanie Smith comparing and contrasting the short stories “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin and “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, I came to the realization that I agreed with the thesis. Both short stories deal with gender roles in the nineteenth century and how oppressed women were. In the essay, Melanie Smith shares a new perspective by stating that it isn’t the husband’s fault that they oppressed their wives because such behavior was considered acceptable in a good marriage and so only looked oppressive to the twenty-first century students reading the stories.
In “The Story of an Hour” very little is known about the marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Mallard and so it is supposed that the husband must have been oppressive to his wife. He probably was, but not in the way that modern students think. To me, when I read the story, it seemed that the mere concept of marriage and what that entails—having to bend ones will “in that blind persistence with which men and women believe” is correct—is what is suppressing Mrs. Mallard, of course as a woman she doesn’t get the better half of the deal, instead she has to deal with the fact that her freedom is now her husbands and no matter how loving he is, her freedom is now a privilege she doesn’t posses and she has to be a good wife if she wants to keep her freedom.
In “The Yellow Wallpaper” the relationship between the couple is much more detailed, but above anything, I think the husbands’ oppressive nature is due to the fact that he is a physician who is misinformed about her condition; of course all physicians were like that in the nineteenth century. John restricted his wife in the belief that she might harm herself if exposed with a lot of stimulus. If in fact at that time science had revealed that depriving someone of stimulation made things worse then as a doctor I think he would have given his wife as much freedom as she pleased. She went mad because she was basically locked up in her house bored to death and because she was bored to death her imagination went wild and took on a new shaped that can be categorized under insanity.
Billy Russell
English 1B
February 7, 2012
Professor Sabir
Although there is definitely some truth to Melanie's argument, I disagree with her thesis. Melanie argues that the husbands are not at fault, they are simply doing what they feel they are supposed to based on Victorian era society. The husbands in each story, John and Brently, are the antagonists. They both have different flaws, John doesn't take his wife seriously, and it seems that he has little respect for her. We know little about Brently, but it can only be assumed that his marriage to his wife was sub par.
John's reasons for not listening to his wife are actually very logical. He is a physician, and he is simply doing what he thinks is best for his wife. He doesn't take her seriously because he believes her to be sick. A situation like this could happen during any time period. John is simply trying to help his wife get better, he believes that he knows best, and his methods will improve her health. His problem is that he trusts logic and medical wisdom more than emotions. As the narrator puts it, "he scoffs openly at any talk of things not to be felt and seen and put down in figures" (p.63).
So little is know about Brently that it is impossible to determine what kind of husband he was, he could have been incredibly emotionally abusive for all we know. The odd part of "The Story of an Hour" is that, in the very last line, it is said that Mrs. Mallard dies of, "Joy that Kills" (p.63). This is odd, because if she truly hated her husband why would she experience joy when she found out he was still alive?
Ryan Gozinsky-Irwin
English 1B
6 February, 2012
Professor Wanda Sabir
Period 8-8:50
Yesterday morning, in the dead silence of the full english, we read a short story, "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin and an essay response by Melanie Smith which also included examples from Charlotte Perkins Gilman short story,"The Yellow Wallpaper".
I agree with Miss Smith's thesis, "Their only real crime is that they adhere too closely to the conventional victorian wisdom about marriage"(p.79) because we both believe that it is societies standards during the 19th century that is oppressing the women and not necessarily their husbands.
I enjoyed Miss. Gilman's story the most because it allowed the reader to really develop with the characters. Having a narrator who also who was the main character of the story was also an interesting ride. As a reader you connect with more emotions of narrator and her disappointment at times or her excitement like when she collected, "Hurrah! This is the last day"(p.75). I enjoy being able to relate more of my emotion to her.
Ms. Chopins story is less personal but I really enjoyed how they set the scene in the limited length of the story. With the quick introduction into what the scene is, with Mrs. Mallards husband being presumably dead, they author painted such a vivid picture of her new beginning, "She could see in the open square before her house the tips of trees that were all aquiver with the new spring"(p.61). I think that it is a great metaphor for a new start with spring and planting your season for a new thriving harvest of food. The news proposed a new start for Ms.Mallard, however the disappointment ideas of freedom with a new start.
Wanda Sabir
English 1B
Juan Sanabria
02/6/2012
The story of an hour is a tale of a doctor and his wife who is ill. To me it seemed as though her husband thought it would be best if he kept her isolated from society. As I was reading story of an hour,it made me to believe that the wife’s doctor was depressed. One thing about depression is that you can feel it.Depression can cause, anxiety, psychic well being, empty, hopeless, and amongst other symptoms.
Keeping her away from common social life tells me that he is insecure of her experiencing new places, and establishing different ideas. Kate Chopin [1851-1904] Story of an hour writes “She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance. Pg 61” Having somebody is a room that is not use to that environment can make a person’s mind wonder randomly. The mind has to be connected with its immediate social environment in order to function properly.
This segment in the book writing about literature speaks volumes in the way we use to communicate with each other years ago. Sounds like in the short chapter women where isolated from the norm of which makes us function as human beings.
The husbands use illness as a way to control their women into thinking they’re not feeling okay, and generate their thinking pattern indifferently. What was surprising was that she was hearing stories about herself and “womanhood” that she had not heard before. Thus, the good doctor trying to prevent her from healing.
Giao Bui
Professor Sabir
English 1B
7 February 2012
The essay “Good Husbands in Bad Marriages,” by Melanie Smith, compares the husbands of the protagonists in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” and Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour.” In both stories, the protagonists are women who feel oppressed by their marriages. Smith argues that the husbands of both stories should not be viewed as the villains of the stories, as they are victims of standard of their time. She mentions that the readers of the stories should take into account the perspective of someone of the late 19th or early 20th century person. Throughout the essay, Smith tries to prove that “they really don’t intend to be oppressive” (81). The husbands are not complete villains but I still disagree with the thesis of the essay. It makes the husbands seem as if their only crime was trying to be good husbands on the basis of the type of intentions they had. Gilman and Chopin were women capable of thinking ahead of their time so the men of their time should not be pardoned for being unable to do the same.
In “The Story of an Hour,” there is not sufficient information about Louise Mallard’s husband to know if he were a good or bad husband. What we do get is to know how Mrs. Mallard feels about her marriage life. Mrs. Mallard feels freedom, when she believes her husband is dead, and shows distaste for the gender roles of her time:
“There would be no one to live for her during those coming years: she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime as she looked upon it in that brief moment of illumination” (62).
The fact that Mr. Mallard was or was not working hard for his marriage is irrelevant. The results are clear, whether his actions were well intended or not, his wife is unhappy. She feels oppressed. I also absolutely agree with her thoughts on the fact that is does not matter what kind of intention is in an action. If the husbands in either story had kind intentions, it still led to them never to understanding their wives.
The actions of John, the husband in “The Yellow Wallpaper,” are more observable. Because he is also the protagonist’s doctor, he is very controlling of her actions. John appears to be a good man as all the things he does for the sake of his wife’s health, believing that he knows best. The protagonist mentions that she has to be sneaky about writing or else she would be criticized (64). Albeit she is only able to write clandestinely, she does express frustrations in ways that should be easily observed such as her mentioning that she is “Better in body perhaps—” (71). John cuts her off showing that he is willfully trying to be ignorant of the fact that her mind is unsound. Throughout the story he dismisses the simple wishes of the protagonist and refuses to acknowledge that his treatment of her is making her worse. Ultimately John aids in making the protagonist insane. He ignored all the signs that would have allowed him to help her sooner. Smith believes that he seems oppressive only to the modern mind but that is not the case at all. He was more than controlling of her actions than necessary, as many of her wishes were not for things that would be looked down upon by their society. In being willfully ignorant in order to be controlling of his wife, John commits a very, very grave crime similar to Mr. Mallard. In the end, intentions are not really important when the result is clear. Neither men should be forgiven for the fact that they failed miserably as husbands because they did not mean to.
Works Cited
Gardner, Janet E. Writing About Literature: A Portable Guide. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2009. Print. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin
Post a Comment