To: Graduation Planning Sub-Committee
Cc: Dr. Danette DiMarco
From: Melissa M. Panutsos
Date: 12/11/02
RE: Final Selection of Key-note
Speaker and Seating Chart
Key Note Speaker:
After carefully reviewing the works of each author, the decision has been made that Charlotte Perkins Gilman will be our next graduation key-note speaker. She is a well-educated woman and a “celebrated essayist and public speaker” (Gilman 366). She has the potential to guide and prepare future generations on gender related issues, based on her own experiences and the personal truth behind her short story “The Yellow Wallpaper.” After Giving birth to her only daughter, Gilman began suffering severe depression. The doctor she went to prescribed her to the “rest cure” (Gilman 365). This incident was the inspiration for her short story.
The story is about a sick woman whose husband refuses to see her as a person. Because of his neglect for her true well being, she loses her mind completely. However, in the process of losing her mind, she also learns to stand up for herself and stop letting her husband stand in the way of what she knows she wants.
It does not take long to realize that the narrator’s husband has no respect for her. She writes, “John laughs at me, of course, but one expects that” (Gilman 366). This is proof that he looks down on her and perhaps treats her like a child. What makes this even worse is that the narrator thinks such behavior is acceptable because it is expected. Evidence of John’s overbearing personality can be found throughout the story with such lines as: “There comes John, and I must put this away – he hates to have me write a word,” “He laughs at me so about this wallpaper,” and “Then he took me in his arms and called me a blessed little goose” (Gilman 368).
He has no respect for her. He does not listen to anything she has to say, even regarding her own health. How can anyone claim to know more about how a person feels than the actual person herself? For example, the narrator is an author, and she knows that writing makes her feel better. Often people write to sort out their thoughts and to clear their head. Many people find peace and serenity in doing so. The narrator says, “I think sometimes that if I were only well enough to write a little it would relieve the press of ideas and rest me” (Gilman 369). If she feels that writing would help her, why should her husband forbid her to do so? It sounds like a power issue in relation to gender. He is a physician and a man, so obviously he must know more about his wife, and what would help her, than she knows about herself. John’s character is overly masculine, and the narrator’s character is overly feminized. Twice on page 366 she uses the phrase “what is one to do?” The first time is when she talks about how her husband does not believe she is sick, and the second time is when she says she does not think the rest cure that her brother and husband prescribed will work. The phrase “what is one to do?” reminds the reader of a time when woman had no say in anything, and men did all of the talking. It sounds as if the narrator feels powerless simply because she is a female. Just because a person is female, does not mean she has to be feminine.
John, the narrator’s husband, constantly tells her how she feels and what she needs. She writes “there is something strange about the house – I can feel it. I even said so to John one moonlight evening, but he said what I felt was a draught, and shut the window” (Gilman 367). On page 372 he says, “you really are better dear, whether you can see it or not.,” when she confronts him and tries to talk to him about how she truly feels. It seems as though he does not really care about what she wants or honestly needs. All he really seems to care about is what is best for him. He even says that she must take care of herself “for his sake” and get well (Gilman 371). He leaves her alone in the room all the time to stare at the sickening wallpaper, and ignores her pleas for freedom. She writes, “he is very careful and loving, and hardly lets me stir without special direction” (Gilman 367). This sounds more like a “control freak” than a loving husband. On page 371, she writes, “I wish John would take me away from here!” although one may wonder why she thinks she needs a man to rescue her. She has two legs, afterall. The narrator reeks of weakness, dependence, and feminization.
In the first half of the story, it seems as if the narrator is not very sick at all. Her writings make sense, she has no crazy tendencies, and all she seems to want, is to be heard and understood. John makes her stay in a room that she obviously hates. Her obsession with its ugliness, fed by her boredom and loneliness, is what caused her to truly lose her mind. Her whole attitude begins to change. She says, “I cry at nothing, and cry most of the time. Of course I don’t when John is here, or anybody else, but when I am alone. And I am alone a good deal just now” (Gilman 370). She seems to feel abandoned. Perhaps if John had been with her more often instead of hiding her away in the attic, she would have gotten well. She also says “I don’t know why I should write this. I don’t want to. I don’t feel able” (Gilman 371). This is a big change from the first half of the story and her rebellious determination to write as much as possible. She said, then, that it made her feel better. What caused her to change from wanting to feel better, to no longer caring? In relation to the wallpaper, she writes, “I fancy it is the pattern that keeps her so still. It is so puzzling. It keeps me quiet by the hour” (Gilman 373). Imagine being left alone in a dreadfully sick-looking room all the time. It is no wonder the poor woman has lost her mind.
About halfway through the story, the narrator begins to free her mind and detach herself from reality. She begins to resent her husband. The line “And John is so queer now that I don’t want to irritate him. I wish he would take another room!” is proof of her resentment (Gilman 375). She also says, “I want to astonish him” (Gilman 376). This is a big step up from the previous “but what is one to do?” She now wishes to spite him, or to get back at him. She does so by tearing all of the paper off the walls freeing “the woman behind”. She writes “I pulled and she shook. I shook and she pulled, and before morning we had peeled off yards of that paper” (Gilman 376). On the topic of Gender Lessons, this is her way of rebelling against the men in her life and against the old norms of society, which stated that women must be submissive to their men.
Towards the end of the story she says in relation to the “creeping” women she sees outside, “I wonder if they all come out of that wallpaper as I did!” This is her first call of victory. Subtly, what she is saying is that she has symbolically “come out of the wallpaper” and is no longer trapped. She feels that she is free now and that John can no longer stand in her way. She wonders how many other women have freed themselves from the overbearing men in their lives. “Now why should that man have fainted,” she writes, “But he did, and right across my path by the wall, so that I had to creep over him every time!” (Gilman 377). This is proof that she is not going to let John stop her anymore. When he gets in her way she will simply climb right over him.
Many people can benefit from this very twisted, yet positive story.
It is about a cry for help, followed by a call of victory. It is
sad and unfortunate that the narrator had to lose her mind in the process
of her growth, yet it still leaves a somewhat positive, triumphant message
to the audience because of the enormous change in her personality from
passive and feminine to independent and masculine. This is just one
example of what Charlotte Perkins Gilman has to offer to her listeners.
Relating to the Gender Lessons theme, she can teach the women of our graduating
class to stand up for themselves, and show the men what can happen when
they treat women like porcelain dolls. Listening to Gilman’s speech
will provide young adults with insight and understanding of the opposite
sex, which will prove to be useful when they enter the real world and start
families and relationships of their own.
Seating Chart:
Selecting only nine authors from the invition list of forty-five proved to be a very difficult task. The chosen nine authors, in alphabetical order, are T. Boyle, John Cheever, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Ralph Lombreglia, Gabriel Marquez, Linda Pastan, Sylvia Plath, Anne Sexton, and William Yeats. Each of the selected authors was chosen for a particular quality that makes him or her unique from all of the others. They have all been seated according to their personalities.
Table Three consists of the authors with the best senses of humor or the most original works of literature. Anne Sexton, Ralph Lombreglia, and Gabriel Marquez have been chosen to sit at this table. The stories and poems generated from these three authors have proven to hold the reader’s attention to the very end. Marquez and Sexton used mysticism in their literature, whereas Lombreglia kept his story interesting by relating life to a video game.
Anne Sexton was the first writer assigned to this table because of her sarcastic, twisted version of the Disney story, “Cinderella.” In her version of the story, the first of Cinderella’s step-sisters cut off her big toe in order to fit into the glass slipper. The prince did not even realize what she had done and was ready to accept her as his bride, until a “white dove told him to look at the blood pouring forth” (Sexton 694). The second stepsister cut off the heel of her foot, but again, “the blood told as blood will” (Sexton 695). The two stepsisters had very feminized characteristics. They were irrationally trying to control fate, but in reality, they were powerless to do so. Anne Sexton’s poem begins by mocking four stories of women going from rags to riches. Then, by the twenty-second line, it moves into her version of the story of Cinderella. Instead of having a fairy-god-mother, the savior of this “Cinderella” is the white dove. The dove is masculinized, because it actually has the ability and the power to change Cinderella’s fate. Cinderella herself is both feminine and masculine. On one hand, she allows herself to be pushed around by her stepmother and stepsisters, which shows weakness in character. However, she eventually rebels against her stepmother and ultimately gets to marry the prince. Anne Sexton is one of the most interesting authors on the guest list.
The second author chosen for Table Three was Ralph Lombreglia. His sense of humor becomes evident in his short story, “Creating ‘Jungle Video’”. On the second and third to last pages of the story, the main character is transformed from the uptight perfectionist, into a new laid back man in a gorilla suit (Lombreglia 292). Lombreglia will benefit this table with his light and uplifting stories, along with his lessons on life and personal growth.
One may argue that Gabriel Marquez, the third author chosen for Table Three, does not belong in this table because of the serious symbolic messages behind his short story, “A Very Old Man With Enormous Wings.” However, how can someone who lacks a sense of humor come up with a title like that? There are a few instances in the story that are quite humorous as well, such as the miracles performed by the angel. Instead of recovering a blind man’s sight, he granted him the growth of three more teeth. The paralytic did not get to walk, but he almost won the lottery, and the leper’s sores “sprouted sunflowers” (Marquez 364). Marquez uses a different type of humor, slightly subtler than the others at this table. His sense of humor focuses more on irony.
Table Two is reserved for the more serious authors. All of the authors chosen to sit at this table – William Yeats, John Cheever, and Linda Pastan – have written about lifetime experiences, and growing up. All three of these authors focus on the life cycle and how things change when you get older. This table will probably hold more wisdom than the others, and the most “grown up” mature discussions.
Linda Pastan, the author of “Ethics,” was the first chosen for this
table. Her poem begins with an adaptation to children, explaining
how her mind worked when she was young and faced with
the question of choosing to save an old woman or a painting.
It was her ethics teacher who proposed the question to her asking, “If
there were a fire in a museum, which would you save, a Rembrandt painting
or an old woman who hadn’t many years left anyhow?” (Pastan 832).
The narrator once remarked, “why not let the woman decide for herself?”
This is a very feminine way of thinking, because the narrator is trying
to pass the responsibility on to someone else, rather than make the important
decision herself. The last nine lines of the poem jump from the past
to the present, where the narrator is facing the Rembrandt painting as
an old woman. She says, “This fall in a real museum I stand before
a real Rembrandt, old woman, or nearly so, myself”. This gives her
a masculinized sense of wisdom and maturity. She describes the colors
in the painting as being darker than autumn and darker than winter, and
in the end of the poem, she says, “I know now that woman and painting and
season are almost one.” This line is interesting because woman and
painting and season are all part of a lifecycle. None of these things
last forever. Seasons change, women die, and paintings eventually
deteriorate. This is the reason that women, paintings, and seasons
are “all beyond saving by children” (Pastan 833).
The second author chosen for this table was John Cheever, author of the short story, “The Swimmer.” Cheever’s story follows the downward path of a young man from contentment to destruction. In the end of the story, the narrator is shocked to find his house empty, because he does not remember anything that happened along the line (Cheever 278). Perhaps he has amnesia, or lost his mind, or maybe this is all a dream. The reader is never told for sure, but that does not take away from the value or content of the story. His story gives the reader an outlook on life and change.
Another author that focuses on change is William Butler Yeats, the third author chosen to sit at Table Two. His story’s focus is more of an outlook on death. His poem, “Sailing to Byzantium,” is about a man’s journey through Purgatory. At first, the narrator is bitter and depressed. He says “that is no country for old men,” meaning he has no purpose left in the circle of life, except to die (Yeats 725). By the end of this poem, his attitude changes, and he accepts the fact that he is going to die. He even seems prepared for it. Yeats will get along fine with Cheever and Pastan, because of his ability to look back on life.
The first table, Table One, is where the decided upon key-note speaker will sit. Along with Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Sylvia Plath and T. Coraghessan Boyle will be seated at this table, as well as myself. This table was carefully constructed to invoke the most interesting conversation. Gilman is a feminist, Boyle uses hyper-masculinity in his story, and Plath laughs in the face of death and welcomes depression. With the diverse combination of personalities at this table, the conversation will most likely never stop.
Charlotte Perkins Gilman is a feminist whose short story, “The Yellow Wallpaper,” focuses on the insanity of her main character, and the main character’s transformation from a weak feminine female into a strong masculine woman. A complete analysis of “The Yellow Wallpaper” has already been covered in the first part of this memo with the final selection of key-note speaker. Gilman is the only chosen author whose story’s main character is a writer. This contributes to the diversity at this table, because it portrays how she feels about the other authors’ and her own profession.
After seating Gilman, Boyle was chosen for his contrast to her feministic
style. Boyle’s short story, “Greasy Lake,” is about a boy and his
friends trying to be “bad.” His story uses hyper-masculinity, demonstrated
in the first line of the story, “There was a time when courtesy and winning
ways went out of style, when it was good to be bad, when you cultivated
decadence like
a taste” (Boyle 119). Boyle and Gilman will more than likely
rise some strong discussions because of their conflicting gender roles.
The next person chosen for this table was Sylvia Plath. She is particularly interesting because of her optimistic pessimism. Only she can sound so satisfied and content and almost happy to be so miserable. In her poem, “Daddy,” she uses lines like “At twenty I tried to die and get back, back, back to you” (Plath 836). By repeating the word “back,” it almost seems as if she is singing or even laughing at the words she is saying. She mocks death. In the beginning of the poem, she reflects back on her childhood and how she feared her father. She refers to him as a “gastly statue with one grey toe big as a Frisco seal” (Plath 834). She confesses that after his death, she used to pray to recover him. The narrator says that she could never talk to her father, “the tongue stuck in my jaw,” and confesses, “I have always been scared of you” (Plath 835). The narrator’s weakness and fear are signs of feminism. Later in the poem we learn that she has married a man in the image and likeness of her father. This is also a very feminine thing to do, because she is giving up on any chance of moving away from the pain and torture of her childhood. Instead, she seemingly tries to relive it. It is not until the last line of the poem, “Daddy, daddy, you bastard, I’m through,” that her character takes on a more masculinized quality (Plath 836). It sounds as if she is ready to move on. Perhaps, Sylvia Plath may learn the benefits of becoming a strong woman, after listening to Charlotte Perkins Gilman speak. If that does not work, maybe Boyle will be able to teach her that people change, and that it is never too late to grow up and begin to improve her life. In any case, both Gilman and Boyle end their stories with positive, happy feelings, which Plath can definitely benefit from, and Plath can share with the rest of the table, her experiences with death.
I seated myself at Table One, simply because I feel that the most interesting conversations will take place here. However, I plan on moving around from table to table, so that I may meet and hear what each author has to say.
M.P.