The following blog post is notes and my thoughts upon reading a critical essay about The Awakening and The Yellow Wallpaper.
Both Chopin and Gilman have established a new era for literature in their works, their ideals that were presented in their texts now firmly planted in history. They were representing the “new feminine presence.” A literary convention is something that brings a set of inferences with it to influence the reader and shaped the appearance of the novel authors were trying to form. In Chopin and Gilman’s case, they look at the conventions of marriage and propriety (meaning to conform to the accepted standards of behaviour). However, as readers we could still question whether reader of the time when these books were released into the literary world were recognised for the message they were sending across. Chopin and Gilman tackle this difficulty by presenting their protagonists cry out for help in the form of rebellion. In their novels, these women “give birth” to new female conventions that are based upon the words they have chosen.
The “mother-woman” (Chopin, 8) is a role that is identified with the convention of propriety. “It is a behavioral code which bases a woman’s identity on her capacity to bear children, look after them and worship the patriarch.” As a modern reader, we can clearly see how skewed this view is of the responsibilities of women and how they should act. This is particularly prominent when the narrator in Gilman’s piece writes “There comes John’s sister. She is a perfect and enthusiastic housekeeper, and hopes for no better profession.” This already degrades the ambitions of a women, society seeing them as limited and always within the house. We see that this has been rooted so much in society that even the women themselves can’t seem them striving for anything better. The Latin root of the word propriety is propietas, which means ownership, linking to how society saw women as objects or property to men. Chopin uses this in her novel, it being reflected as the norm in society as Leonce says to Edna that ” You are burnt beyond recognition,’ he added, looking at his wife as one looks at a valuable piece of property which has suffered some damage.” We can see immediately how degrading this is of Edna as she is compared to a piece of property of her husband.
It can be argued in both novels they the topic of marriage being “the ultimate indemnification of patriarchy” is presented and criticised. It is not presented as a partnership, but more of a man and property relationship, designed to see ridiculing women as the social norm. Gilman addresses this when the she writes “John laughs at me, but one expects that in marriage.” Chopin equally critcises this skewed view of marriage when Edna takes out her anger on that “small gold ring”. Chopin writes that “Once she stopped, and taking off her wedding ring flung it upon the carpet. When she saw it lying there, she stamped her heel upon it, striving to crush it”. Edna’s rebellion is apparent here and precise. “Her frustration is emphasized by the fact that her attempts are met with absolute resilience.”
Reference: Michael James Mahin. Women Writers, Online. Internet. 12/09/16 http://www.womenwriters.net/domesticgoddess/mahin.htm
littlebookcornerblog 