Talk:The Yellow Wallpaper

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2019 and 17 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sergio2023, M1kaylaCannaday. Peer reviewers: M1kaylaCannaday.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

See Also Questionability

I won't remove the link under "See Also" mainly because I'm uncertain of particular reasons for its inclusion... However having viewed the "Brown Dog Affair" (read: glanced over), I can find no real relationship between the story and the activism. I understand how they occurred during similar time periods and feature activism of some kind, however comparing feminism to animal activism with nothing else linking the two articles... Seems unnecessary. DelSnazzy (talk) 04:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. While the Brown Dog Affair article does make references to activists' connections between animal rights and women's rights, there is no direct connection between the two ideas. There are many articles out there relating to women's rights in this time period and there is no reason why these two should be linked. It should be noted that this page is not mentioned on the Brown Dog Affair page. I removed the "See Also" section in this article, and I'd like to hear the rationale if anyone reverts that change. Twilighttremolo (talk) 16:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

same information

the information in sections 'Perkins Gilman's Interpretation' and 'Background' are very similar, I suggest either adding information that would help to either merge the two, or add more information to the 'Perkins'.. section. Who is Perkins Gilman anyway (I'm assuming the header is missing 'Charlotte'?)? All for the purpose of clarity, my good man! [smbgood : 8/27/07] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smbgood (talk • contribs) 03:19, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

editing

I changed the language of this article a bit, and cleared out this talk page (which contained the text of the article itself for some reason.) This synopsis is good, though we could probably use a few more references.... Geeman 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Creeping

I has been claimed that creeping is female masturbation... Which would fit in with the rape idea stated below. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.81.128 (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Door Opening/Rape

The scene at the end where her husband opens the door is widely seen as the male rape of the woman; this is stated in many interprations of this work; think this should be included.Fishystick 23:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I have never heard of this interpretation before. Can you please tell me what critic or scholar might have taken this angle and where I can find it?Tdh5609 (talk) 01:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Woman's Name

In the story the speaker mentions her name as someone who has failed her, giving name to the "woman" referred to in the article.

"well meaning husband"

I saw someone said this about her husband John, however, from reading the story he doesnt seem at all "well-meaning" towards her. He seems more patrinizing than anything. He be-littles her in many instances. Curiously, I would like to know why the author of this article put he was "Well meaning"? Why did he force her to stay in the room she didnt like? She asked to be put downstairs. Why did he tell her he would take the wallpaper down and then not do it? He was "satisfied" with thinking there was "no reason for her to be upset." He would laugh at her on occasion and basically tell her "I am the doctor here so you should obey."

• The problem is that you are reading the story through 21st century glasses. The husband is well-meaning, but part of the problem is that the gender relationships of the time period are so messed up that he is culturally unable to relate to his wife in any meaningful way. The author was rather clear she saw the story as attacking the doctor and the gender roles society placed on people - not on the well-meaning but ineffectual and clueless husband. Rabidwolfe 03:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, he may have noted her intense interest in the wallpaper and may have decided not to rip it down. Maybe he thought that she liked it and that it was helping her heal. I support this idea from this quote in the story. "John is so pleased to see me improve! He laughed a little the other day, and said I seemed to be flourishing in spite of my wall-paper. I turned it off with a laugh. I had no intention of telling him it was because of the wall-paper—he would make fun of me. He might even want to take me away." He might have insinuated that the wallpaper was helping her. --ThePlaneFan (talk) 00:30, 12 March 2013 (UTC)ThePlaneFan

is this part of the Cthulhu Mythos?

Am i the only person who finds this more in line with Lovecraftian stories of the strange?

This just seemed to be very in line with how Mythos stories are written, where someone finds a terrible secret and then is driven mad by it. 72.166.243.226 04:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

That's a very funny observation. I haven't actually heard the Cthulhu reference before, but I think this story fits comfortably within the gothic and supernatural / ghost stories traditions -- as a response to them, of sorts -- and Cthulhu / Lovecraft is also related to those genres. (PS, original research & observations are not appropriate for wikipedia, but if you can find some scholarly publications on this topic it would be appropriate; however, other non-wiki resources (like the http://wiki.feministsf.net/ ) would be appropriate for original research & observations like this.) --lquilter 04:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Description of the Wallpaper

I read this story in a college class, and my teacher had us reread the sections where she describes the wallpaper pattern. A toadstool in joints (mushroom) and a head on a broken neck with two upside down eyes are the two descriptions. When my teacher drew it on the board, it showed a pattern of male genitalia. The woman in the wallpaper is trapt behind bars made of male genitals. I have not been able to find any better interpretation than this, especially considering the theme of males controlling female's lives back then.

Can anyone see a different picture? I wonder if there could be other meanings to the shapes described. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Balewis2s (talk • contribs) 23:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

just a question

in my class we were asked if the color had any meaning? would the story change any if there wallpaper was red or green doese anyone have any fealings on this? when i told her no she preseeded to tell me that i was wrong and everything has meaning evan the name JOHN ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.80.0.2 (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

does the color have any real meaning? i was asked the same thing in my class, i believe that she meant that yellow usually signifies happiness and light, but it came to mean everything that was foul and yellow. 75.209.14.83 (talk) 20:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

In the commentary by Susan S Lanser, it is stated that the color Yellow meant "not only to the Chinese, Japanese, and the light-skinned African-Americans but also to Jews, Poles, Hungarians, Italians, and even the Irish” and symbolized “inferiority, strangeness, cowardice, ugliness, and backwardness” (Lanser, Susan S. “Feminist Criticism, ‘The Yellow Wallpaper,’ and the Politics of Color in America.” Feminist Studies 15 (Fall 1989): 415-437) I don't quite understand, but that's what was said. Also, in the Wikipedia article on Yellow, "In Ancient Egypt, yellow was associated with gold,which was considered to be imperishable, eternal and indestructible." Further along, it says, "During the Middle Ages and Renaissance, yellow became firmly established as the color of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Christ... yellow also took on took associations with envy, jealousy and duplicity." The color yellow, based on this, may represent that John (a generic name, possibly representing his everyday-ness) treated the room as both safe and precious to his wife, while she saw it as the ultimate betrayal, and her duplicate side. Also, in the 19th century when the story was written, yellow dyes were occasionally colored with arsenic, possibly representing the poisoning of her mind. In fact, some arsenic may have leaked into her, as the color rubbed off the wall, and drove her mad. That is only supposition, and it isn't supported in the story. Also, Yellow represents fear on the Emotional Spectrum (from the Green Lantern comics), so although this is fictional, it sheds light on another possible connotation. It often commonly represents caution, and in turn, danger. In the article on yellow, it states that in China "it is the color of happiness, glory, and wisdom." It may represent that the color yellow gives her happiness and a sense of her true self. Also, and I touched on this before, the name John may represent generic people of that time. Also, interesting to note (in my opinion): if the name John was picked for being generic, the presumed name of the narrator? Jane. This may represent that the woman in the story is supposed to be every woman in the modern world... --ThePlaneFan (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)ThePlaneFan

Diagnosis

I've taken out this sentence from "Psychological and Medical Interpretation" section:

"As to what mental illness the woman develops towards the end of the book, it appears to be either psychosis or schizophrenia, judging by her severe delusions and hallucinations."

This sounds like a general observation/opinion which needs a verifiable source before being included. Gingerwiki (talk) 01:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It is a general obvervation; the "appears" is there for a reason. The person who wrote this obviously knew they had no evidence, otherwise would have written, "As to what mental illness the woman develops towards the end of the book, it is either psychosis or schizophrenia, judging by her severe delusions and hallucinations." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.189.235.66 (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think yellow is meant to symbolize disease. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.172.34.198 (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:YellowWallpaperCover.jpg

Image:YellowWallpaperCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Plot synopsis

Much of the "Plot synopsis" section is poorly or awkwardly written. Worse, it adds very little that isn't already covered. It should be tightened and cleaned up -- or perhaps deleted altogether. Thoughts? Patricia Meadows (talk) 14:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the writing in this section is awkward, but more importantly (to me) much of the wording discredits the experiences of the main character by reason of her mental health status. The use of this tone is exactly opposite of what would be appropriate in terms of supporting (or just communicating even) the main points that were brought out by this (excellent) short story in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.232.103.42 (talk) 05:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed that undermining rather than communicating the points of the book is not what a good article does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.72.212 (talk) 19:49, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Date of Publication

1891 or 1892? Both are given in the article. Danceswithzerglings (talk) 02:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It was 1892. I just changed the last mention in the article from 1891 to 1892. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.184.122 (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

When dealing with interpretations

A thought: Any text that seeks to deal with subject matter of this nature should not be framed in terms like "feminist interpretation" (how can you have a "feminist interpretation" of the issue of abuse of women?). It is reductive and problematic wording - to the effect of presenting a global human rights issue as more of a theory. A seemingly recurring problem within Wikipedia articles. I did not know quite how to rectify this though so I'll leave it to someone more skilled at crafting Wikipedia articles to correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.72.212 (talk) 18:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

A seemingly recurring problem within Wikipedia is people leaving problems for someone more skilled to correct. But that said, it's actually a very wise thing not to edit Wikipedia, you'll only get pulled into it and then someway or another, banned by ArbCom as countless well established editors find out. 142.35.157.10 (talk) 20:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

For nearly a century, the story has been treated as a brilliant, classic, gothic horror story, one of the best by man or woman. But, faintly echoing a comment above, it feels like it’s been hijacked as a feminist issue as if the story is just another Gaslight.

In fact, the characters of the two pieces are polar opposites. Yet one critic writes:

“When "The Yellow Wallpaper" first came out, the public didn’t quite understand the message. The piece was treated as a horror story, kind of like the 19th century equivalent to The Exorcist. Nowadays, however, we understand "The Yellow Wallpaper" as an early feminist work.… but that people back in the 19th century just didn’t get that.”

People in the 21st century don’t get it. In October 1913, Gilman herself wrote "Why I Wrote The Yellow Wallpaper,” a guide to her thinking at the time. In the article, she speaks of her own illness and the failed prescriptive advice (while treating the erring doctor kindly). As happens with some medical advice today, she came to reject it and set off on a healing course of her own. As with many authors, she took a personal experience and spun a story from it, one she hoped would both entertain and help others.

And yet when we turn to the Wikipedia article, we’re bludgeoned with “androcentric hegemony” of which her “antagonist husband, John,” is a part, as if dredging up Gaslight again. In the Wiki article and comments, we’re treated to wild suggestions of abuse, wrongful imprisonment, rape, incest, masturbation, entrapment in a marriage. In the process, Gilman’s personal experience is denigrated and diminished, her own words lost in the trash heap of reinterpreted literature. Is there any hope for recovery?

--Unicorn Tapestry ^{say} 13:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems pretty essential to the story that she's female and her husband treats her with complete condescension. He also sees no problem with having his wife as a patient, because, well, that's just what men did back then: they knew best. That's not reinterpreting: it's right there on the surface text of the story. 129.110.242.30 (talk)Kenneth129.110.242.30 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:06, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

And therein lies the problem, wikipeds certain they know better than the author to the extent of ignoring the author's own discussion of the story. --71.47.172.126 (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

"Nowadays, however, we understand "The Yellow Wallpaper" as an early feminist work"' is' offensive and arrogant for several reasons. First, it asserts our "modern", more pertinent notions somehow trump earlier thought, when clearly the modernists either don't understand the story at all or have perverted it to their own ends. Notice how the writer two paragraphs above even outdents her/his paragraph as if it's more important than anyone else's. Another problem is that by claiming it's a feminist screed is that it detracts from the Gilman's remarkable accomplishment of writing an outstanding ,timeless story, tops in the horror genre. But I'm equally sure that if someone tries to correct the article, that ire and brimstone will rain down upon such a foolish person who would challenge the wiki powers that be. --71.55.229.47 (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

As a Straw man fallacy e.g. (infallible) I'd argue the wallpaper is a source of inspiration in "The Yellow Wallpaper" we are reading the story as it is being written. The author was well aware of this in fact it made her job easier she even wrote a second paper "Why I Wrote the Yellow Wallpaper" it's as if she wanted to see herself on TV watching TV. The only thing backing this fallacy is inspiring minds like an artist being inspired to paint or in this case the author being inspired to write. One might ask what is a New Years resolution article without the honorable mention of smokers and the overweight.19dreiundachtzig (talk) 16:37, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The narrator's name

The woman in the story's name is Jane I believe. The reason for this:

Last few lines: "I've got out at last," said I, "in spite of you and Jane. And I've pulled off most of the paper, so you can't put me back!"

The only woman that was in the house with John other than the narrator was Jennie. There was no person with the name Jane ever mentioned anywhere before that.

It can be assumed that the narrator has been possessed by the ghost behind the wallpaper (or has gone mad) and does not see herself as Jane anymore. That is why she says "you and Jane". --L22W (talk) 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The narrator's name is NOT Jane

Hi

There is a fatal error in the content:

"Presented in the first person, the story is a collection of journal entries written by a woman (Jane) whose physician husband (John) has confined"

The narrator's name is not Jane, that is the name of the nurse. The narrator has no name. In fact that is one of the points of the story - it could happen to any one.

Regards Sam

Hi, thanks for pointing this out. It was changed here. We should probably revert to the version before that. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:58, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Yellow Wallpaper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://home.comcast.net/~radiotales/horror.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121003054551/http://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/wohlpart/alra/gilman.htm to http://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/wohlpart/alra/gilman.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Arsenic poisoning?

Victorian era wallpaper was often made with toxic arsenic-based dyes, and the theory that microscopic dust flakes from arsenic-containing wallpaper could make people sick was beginning to gain popular acceptance around the time the story was written. The narrator could very well have been stating the literal truth when she said that the wallpaper in her room was causing (or at least exacerbating) her symptoms. CronoDAS (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Request to add link to Gothic double article

Hi, I've been working on editing the Gothic double article for the past few months. It is still classified as a stub so I'm looking to divert some more traffic to the article in order for its classification to go up. I have a section on how the motif is used in The Yellow Wallpaper, and was wondering if I could please add a sentence or two in this article mentioning the use of the motif, and with a hyperlink to my own article? Please let me know. Thank you so much! Snowdrop Fairy (talk) 07:52, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Paragraphs that need splitting

Specifically, the third and fourth paragraphs of the section "[f]eminist". Could anyone please tell me where to split them?--Thylacine24 (talk) 05:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)