Though Charlotte Perkins Gilman, author of “The Yellow Wallpaper, was a profound feminist and merited as an icon for feminism and other social rights activism, Gilman left her opinions on race, class, and nativism up in the air, leaving her audience to ponder on her stance in this part of intellectual history. Ganobcsik-Williams comments on the critics of Gilman who claim the reasons for Gilman’s lack of mentioning are her naiveté and ignorance of being influenced by the traditional condescending attitudes towards those of non-European descent in the American nineteenth century.
However, Ganobcsik-Williams argues that Gilman’s biases are far more complex than just bigotry, as Gilman was consistent in stating that laws of social evolution will …show more content…
Ganobcsik-Williams feels the scope of this study of Gilman is limited as a presumption with assuming she was a well-known, white, middle class individual, and that is works such as the “Yellow Wallpaper” class is not even discussed and stories like that one have continued on in fame, whereas the seemingly classist titles have certainly died down in popularity. Ganobcsik-Williams seems to somewhat sympathize with the unfortunate reputation Gilman has taken on and maybe is not to blame for much of her backwards mentalities as she did live through an unhappy childhood, the divorce of her parents, a divorce of her own, and basically the giving up of her child. Ganobcsik-Williams is at the defense of Gilman in regard to class as she feels too many assume Gilman’s economic status, and though being a descendent of those of the middle class, such as her Great-Aunt Harriett Beecher Stowe, Gilman denounced too many of the commonplace female roles in a middle-class society that consisted of things such as the stereotypical petting and complacency, and also did not receive some very formal education like many of the middle-class women could. Gilman could also be a reflection of her childhood in which on top of all of the tragedies she already had to live through, she was also moved from relative to relative alongside her mother and brother growing up, creating lack of stability. Ganobcsik-Williams denounces any beliefs that Gilman solely focused on the upper middle class as she was never really a part of that herself until gaining fame from her writing, and even that was short lived as she began questioning her own ability to encourage people to strive for long-term social reconstruction. Gilman also wrote rarely on the working class but did occasionally lecture at female suffrage meetings and union
However, Ganobcsik-Williams argues that Gilman’s biases are far more complex than just bigotry, as Gilman was consistent in stating that laws of social evolution will …show more content…
Ganobcsik-Williams feels the scope of this study of Gilman is limited as a presumption with assuming she was a well-known, white, middle class individual, and that is works such as the “Yellow Wallpaper” class is not even discussed and stories like that one have continued on in fame, whereas the seemingly classist titles have certainly died down in popularity. Ganobcsik-Williams seems to somewhat sympathize with the unfortunate reputation Gilman has taken on and maybe is not to blame for much of her backwards mentalities as she did live through an unhappy childhood, the divorce of her parents, a divorce of her own, and basically the giving up of her child. Ganobcsik-Williams is at the defense of Gilman in regard to class as she feels too many assume Gilman’s economic status, and though being a descendent of those of the middle class, such as her Great-Aunt Harriett Beecher Stowe, Gilman denounced too many of the commonplace female roles in a middle-class society that consisted of things such as the stereotypical petting and complacency, and also did not receive some very formal education like many of the middle-class women could. Gilman could also be a reflection of her childhood in which on top of all of the tragedies she already had to live through, she was also moved from relative to relative alongside her mother and brother growing up, creating lack of stability. Ganobcsik-Williams denounces any beliefs that Gilman solely focused on the upper middle class as she was never really a part of that herself until gaining fame from her writing, and even that was short lived as she began questioning her own ability to encourage people to strive for long-term social reconstruction. Gilman also wrote rarely on the working class but did occasionally lecture at female suffrage meetings and union