So I often read “The Yellow Wallpaper” with my students and I just read it again this quarter. I’m always amazed at how it’s structured and how Gilman reveals subtle clues throughout the story. On this last reading, I noticed more closely how the descriptions of the room the narrator is in change. I don’t mean the descriptions of the wallpaper itself, but the other things in the room. For instance, the bed gets more gnawed as the story progresses, a sign that she’s been chewing on it long before she mentions doing so. But one of the amazing things about the story is that it’s still shocking today. Students are often confused at the mention the baby. I sometimes have to tell them outright that the narrator is a mother. Then the students are confused as to why she would abandon her child. Their narrative is that mothers just don’t do that. So they retreat to the easy answer that “she’s just crazy.” I try to get my students to entertain the idea that maybe taking care of the baby contributed to her going crazy. But post-partum depression is a difficult concept. Partly this is due to the fact that most of my students have never had to take care of a child. But part of it is the old narrative that being a mother completes a woman. “Women naturally long to be mothers and they are naturally good at it,” the narrative tells us. And since there aren’t many narratives that contradict this idea (partly because of shame on the part of the women who could tell us otherwise), most people accept the narrative.
All this is a long preamble to say that a film of “The Yellow Wallpaper” is in production. It may turn out to be a good movie in and of itself. Yet it’s hard for me not to see the changes that have been made to the story and shake my head.
I don’t care that they changed the narrator’s name to Charlotte (a nod to the fact that the story fits closely to Gilman’s own experience, I assume). I don’t care that Jennie is now the narrator’s sister and not the narrator’s husband’s sister. I’m not too upset about the couple being destitute, either. What really annoys me is what they’ve done with the baby. The baby is dead. She died in the fire that made the family destitute. So Charlotte’s madness is motherly grief at the loss of her child. Yes, parents lose children. Yes, it is probably the worst grief a person can face. I have a friend who lost her eleven-year-old son, so I’ve seen some of this first-hand. It is not the subject matter itself that I object to, but from that which it was changed.
You see, a mother grieving the loss of her child conforms to narrative of motherhood I mentioned above. In this movie, madness is caused by a woman not being allowed to be a mother, her “true” role. So the movie refuses to challenge the common narrative of motherhood. Which means that this movie isn’t as brave as Gilman’s story. Her story doesn’t only explore the feelings of a woman feeling trapped by conforming to the narrative of motherhood, but also trapped by a patriarchal system that governs marriage and medicine. The story attempts to challenge and deconstruct the many assumptions that pervade the narrative of femininity. What this film version shows us is that 118 years later, challenging this narrative is still taboo. How far have we really come?






