The feministic approach in society remains tricky
and often conspicuous. Theorists approach feminism under a microscope of
analytical practice. Females give speeches to open the mind of society and humanity
to a different view. Feminism brings out rebuttals in people which either ends
horribly or with a sense of gained knowledge. Why is the word feminism under such skepticism? Hasn't
society moved past inequality? We live in a society where gay marriage is not
deemed unlawful and we make up a cultural mixing pot of diverse cultures. So why
does feminism not fall under these categories? Why is it still looked at like a
rare species? Take Emma Watson's speech at the United Nations conference
entitled "HeForShe." Watson states the definition of feminism: "The
belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the
theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes.” In
Heilbrun's essay, Writing a Woman's Life,
I feel that the definition Watson uses is the point Heilbrun is making in
regards to female autobiographies and biographies.
I
found Heilbrun's essay quite interesting and the writing brought out a sense of
urgency in myself. As my eyes followed the endless words on the page, I could
only ponder on how mind bottling it was that women felt limited when writing an
autobiography. Although Heilbrun states that this changed in the 1970's, the
fact that it existed and may still exist seems wild. Heilbrun states: "if
one is not permitted to express anger or even to recognize it within oneself,
one is, by simple extension, refused both power and control" (13). In Virginia
Woolf's feminist essay Three Guineas her
essay was condemned because of it's horrible angered "tone." Why was
this essay condemned? What was wrong with it? Well, at that time period the
essay was looked at as containing feminism.
Heilbrun then states that, "forbidden anger, women could find no voice in
which publicly to complain; they took refuge in depression or madness"
(15). After reading this sentence I could only think of Charlotte Gilman's, The Yellow Wallpaper.
Charlotte Gilman wrote The Yellow Wallpaper in 1892. The story was published in The New England Magazine in 1892 and is considered an early form of feminist writing. From the research that I have done on The Yellow Wallpaper and Charlotte Gilman, it is my interpretation that Gilman used this story as a way to protest. Keep in mind that according to Heilbrun, female autobiographies didn't change until 1970. Heilbrun makes me question the idea of anger and tone in Gilman's The Yellow Wallpaper. Gilman compiles 6,000 words into the short story to critique the oppression women faced at that time. My question, is if the story would have contained a tone of "anger" instead of "madness" would the story have been critiqued in a different light? Would Gilman's "power" be contributed in a special way through a different story? Heilbrun defines "feminist ideology" as "another word for trying to understand, in the life of a woman, the life of the mind, which is, Nancy Miller has noted, not coldly cerebral but impassioned" (16). To not understand a woman's life is to deny them any power. So if a woman does not have any power in what they write about themselves, who is their audience? Did woman before 1973 have agency?
Heilbrun's feminist undertaking essay uses the words power, powerlessness and sexual politics to discuss how power changed the female autobiography. Once females made discussions and took a stance in the 1970's, a sort of freedom came about in women. But, Heilbrun goes on to discuss all of this and then ends on page 25 by stating, "above all, the public and private lives cannot be linked, as in male narratives." My understanding from this is that until women and men are viewed as completely equal, then there will be no equality in literature.
--Anjelica MacGregor
Citation:
Heilbrun, Carolyn. “Introduction.” In Writing a Woman’s Life. New York:
Norton, 1988. 11-24
Angelica,
ReplyDeleteYou pose some extremely valid questions, and I agree with your comments. You post a comment at the end: "until women and men are viewed as completely equal, then there will be no equality in literature", and I think that is exactly what Heilbrun was trying to say in her writing. In fact, I think that each question you wrote was probably a question Heilbrun herself struggled to answer (which is probably what drove her to suicide and has driven many other feminist writers to that point as well). However, I do think that literature has come a long way since this essay in terms of feminist writing, and I think that women have come a long way in terms of expressing their true selves. We have seen a lot more women being honest in their writing, and in their lifestyle, especially celebrities, exploring their experiences with drugs, sex, alcohol, music, homosexuality, etc., and it makes women look bad, so I post this question: will women ever be equal to men? Let's look at Miley Cyrus. She was the epitome of a good girl when she starred on Disney Channel as Hannah Montana and then in The Last Song alongside Liam Hemsworth. Then, she decided that "that wasn't her" and decided to do a complete 180 and present us with a life filled with drugs, sex, alcohol, partying, cursing, "twerking" and obscene gestures. But, to Miley, she is just expressing herself as a woman but yet she is being frowned upon. Yeah, she may have done this for attention, but she was trying to express who she claimed she really was, rather than hiding behind the good girl image she had to put on to break into the business. In short, I do think that men and women should be viewed equally, but I don't think that they ever will be because women will always be seen in a light where they cannot fully express themselves without being judged.