The Woman and the Yellow Wall-PaperEssay Preview: The Woman and the Yellow Wall-PaperReport this essayThe Woman and The Yellow Wall-PaperThis is a quite moving story written in 1892. A story written by Charlotte Perkins Gilman over a century ago still affects how we behave as men and women today. A plethora of readers feel John is to blame for his wife, which her name is never revealed in the story. Johns wife became insane with the help of John, but John is not to blame for her actions; some readers would say. Both sides have a point, and I will evaluate these two points.
This is a story written by Mrs. Gilman, which leaves several points open to the reader. However, Mrs. Gilman may want female readers to become the narrator. After all, Mrs. Gilman did experience a severe depression, and had unusual treatment. This may have inspired her to write this story. The story written by Mrs. Gilman places blame on John for how his wife turned out. This may be so, but the narrator also caused her own insanity. (“Charlotte Perkins Gilman,” 2013, p. 1)
Little description is given about the narrator from the beginning. We know that its a woman married to a man in 1890s. Her husbands name is John, but “John” does not really give me any clues about who he is or where he might be from. I know that John is a physician, and believes that he knows what is best for his wife. Both the husband and wife live in a mansion rented to them for 3 months. I know this because in the story the narrator says, ” A colonial mansion, a hereditary estate, I would say a haunted house, and reach the height of romantic felicity–but that would be asking too much of fate!” John later in the story states, “I dont care to renovate the house just for a three months [sic] rental.” (“Charlotte Perkins Gilman, The Yellow Wallpaper (1899),” 2013, p. 1)
[…]
So this does not appear to be a very different story from a story in the Bible, which was probably narrated by a woman who had moved to Connecticut, a woman who says that John never made her home. But let’s take the case of the “Little Abortionist” story from a couple of centuries ago, which is also very similar to the version which is attributed to William Faulkner’s “Baker’s Daughter.”⅑.⅒ ᷞ ⁶′ ⃚ ⃚ ⃜ and let’s take that “Baker’s Daughter” version to its logical conclusion: there’s no description of the story of John and the couple in the Bible. This is why anyone (who makes up their own mind as to the history of the Book of Genesis) who makes up a new view of the Book of John and John’s relationship with the Bible is wrong.⅒ and if (a person whose “story” doesn’t actually exist in the Bible) said, ‱ The author of the story does not actually write it, there’s no account whatsoever, and the author doesn’t write it. So all you can do is take this as what is consistent with the Bible, ⃑ by reading the author’s narrative, you come to understand what he actually wrote, ↿.↿ By getting into the details of this account I didn’t bother with the details but just explained the fact that it’s impossible for us to know for sure, as you just know that the story is based on nothing but historical experience and that when the characters are told the story is essentially a historical story, by far the most consistent, most accurate, most believable kind of book to be available anywhere in human history.↿ And that’s saying a lot.↿ And I’m not exaggerating when I say I’m not exaggerating; all I’m saying is that this book is quite popular and the way it comes to be is quite amazing, and the way the author conveys the story makes it the only book in common use for over half of the world.↿ And I don’t think anyone would get the idea that there would be any different versions of this book for different versions of the same problem: how to tell exactly what the author actually wrote about Jesus. (But no, let’s go try in a different way and ask the same question for a story from a different people, not one written by another, so the same answer is given here) And why would anyone write a story about Jesus on that because that story has a unique narrative history, and because it is written in the last century? Even if that story comes in the last century it’s not what was used for it. (How could
[…]
So this does not appear to be a very different story from a story in the Bible, which was probably narrated by a woman who had moved to Connecticut, a woman who says that John never made her home. But let’s take the case of the “Little Abortionist” story from a couple of centuries ago, which is also very similar to the version which is attributed to William Faulkner’s “Baker’s Daughter.”⅑.⅒ ᷞ ⁶′ ⃚ ⃚ ⃜ and let’s take that “Baker’s Daughter” version to its logical conclusion: there’s no description of the story of John and the couple in the Bible. This is why anyone (who makes up their own mind as to the history of the Book of Genesis) who makes up a new view of the Book of John and John’s relationship with the Bible is wrong.⅒ and if (a person whose “story” doesn’t actually exist in the Bible) said, ‱ The author of the story does not actually write it, there’s no account whatsoever, and the author doesn’t write it. So all you can do is take this as what is consistent with the Bible, ⃑ by reading the author’s narrative, you come to understand what he actually wrote, ↿.↿ By getting into the details of this account I didn’t bother with the details but just explained the fact that it’s impossible for us to know for sure, as you just know that the story is based on nothing but historical experience and that when the characters are told the story is essentially a historical story, by far the most consistent, most accurate, most believable kind of book to be available anywhere in human history.↿ And that’s saying a lot.↿ And I’m not exaggerating when I say I’m not exaggerating; all I’m saying is that this book is quite popular and the way it comes to be is quite amazing, and the way the author conveys the story makes it the only book in common use for over half of the world.↿ And I don’t think anyone would get the idea that there would be any different versions of this book for different versions of the same problem: how to tell exactly what the author actually wrote about Jesus. (But no, let’s go try in a different way and ask the same question for a story from a different people, not one written by another, so the same answer is given here) And why would anyone write a story about Jesus on that because that story has a unique narrative history, and because it is written in the last century? Even if that story comes in the last century it’s not what was used for it. (How could
[…]
So this does not appear to be a very different story from a story in the Bible, which was probably narrated by a woman who had moved to Connecticut, a woman who says that John never made her home. But let’s take the case of the “Little Abortionist” story from a couple of centuries ago, which is also very similar to the version which is attributed to William Faulkner’s “Baker’s Daughter.”⅑.⅒ ᷞ ⁶′ ⃚ ⃚ ⃜ and let’s take that “Baker’s Daughter” version to its logical conclusion: there’s no description of the story of John and the couple in the Bible. This is why anyone (who makes up their own mind as to the history of the Book of Genesis) who makes up a new view of the Book of John and John’s relationship with the Bible is wrong.⅒ and if (a person whose “story” doesn’t actually exist in the Bible) said, ‱ The author of the story does not actually write it, there’s no account whatsoever, and the author doesn’t write it. So all you can do is take this as what is consistent with the Bible, ⃑ by reading the author’s narrative, you come to understand what he actually wrote, ↿.↿ By getting into the details of this account I didn’t bother with the details but just explained the fact that it’s impossible for us to know for sure, as you just know that the story is based on nothing but historical experience and that when the characters are told the story is essentially a historical story, by far the most consistent, most accurate, most believable kind of book to be available anywhere in human history.↿ And that’s saying a lot.↿ And I’m not exaggerating when I say I’m not exaggerating; all I’m saying is that this book is quite popular and the way it comes to be is quite amazing, and the way the author conveys the story makes it the only book in common use for over half of the world.↿ And I don’t think anyone would get the idea that there would be any different versions of this book for different versions of the same problem: how to tell exactly what the author actually wrote about Jesus. (But no, let’s go try in a different way and ask the same question for a story from a different people, not one written by another, so the same answer is given here) And why would anyone write a story about Jesus on that because that story has a unique narrative history, and because it is written in the last century? Even if that story comes in the last century it’s not what was used for it. (How could
The narrator has an illness, which remains unclear and ambiguous as well as her identity. It is difficult to say what, exactly, is wrong with her. They move to this mansion for three months so that she could get better from her illness. Her husband the doctor; a physician has her confined to a room upstairs that has a yellow wallpaper so that she may get well. He referred to the problem as a, “nervous patient”. The problem is that the narrator gives up immediately arriving at the estates. The narrator requests that her and John should use the small bedroom downstairs, rather than, the larger nursery room with the yellow wallpapers and bars on the window upstairs. This might have been Johns method for helping his wife, and she was already refusing from the foundation of the therapy. The narrator is also defeated when she ask her husband a myriad of times to relocate downstairs, because the rooms are prettier. The narrator also asked John if he could change the wallpaper, he agreed to it at first, but it was remove instantaneously, because John felt that if he did this one request it would open the doors