Blogging Carnival: Unusual Perspectives

| | Comments (1)

Exploring women's roles in literature, especially in the late nineteenth century is a passion of mine. Nina Baym, the editor for those monstrous volumes of American Literature that we all have, is quoted in Kolondy's article as saying, "women were expected to write specifically for their own sex and within the tradition of their woman's culture rather than within the Great Tradition (196)."

Charlotte Perkins-Gilman, Kate Chopin and Susan Glaspell are women who broke that idea. Chopin actually had a career as a writer and was well respected among her peers. Then she published "The Awakening" and was shunned. Her career was ruined because she dared to write a real story for real women.

I could go on about Kate Chopin's story for days. Has anyone else read it? What about Glaspell and Gilman? Did they suffer for their work the same as Chopin or in different ways?


james lohr said:

Im certain they did, i dont have any actual knowledge of what they might have went through, but just being a women of the time put doubts toward how much worth you actually had. Even the smartest women seemed to be considered dumb when compared to the most idiotic man in the room. For the simple reason that she is a she and he is a he. It amazes me that people thought this way, and that many still seem to.

As far as writing for other women, i believe this is completely true. What women would understand anything a man might be trying to say? I wonder how many men realized then that these women were breaking into the Great Tradition?

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.