For anyone interested in an interesting little side trip related to The Yellow Wallpaper and the "rest cure", there is a book written in 1982 (won 1984 Pulitzer) that delves into how women were perceived by the emerging medical field that I highly recommend -- The Social Transformation of American Medicine by Paul Starr. It puts the "rest cure" into a context. In early medical texts the definition of female was a pathological condition.


amazon.com/gp/product/0465079350/ref=pd ... HW6FEVYP07

Another piece of literature dealing with the 'rest cure' is the novel The Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann. It's an extensive narrative of the rest cure as the best resource available to cure TB before the advent of antibiotics (early XX century). Many people include this novel among the best of the XX century. The story shows the conflict of the patients with the disease, with themselves, and with the other patients in the sanatorium. The group of people living in this place (separated from society) is a good sample from humanity, very diverse, and with different levels of social skills. One of the few reliefs that the ill people encounter there, are the beauty of nature and friendship (for those able to make friends). I recommend it highly!!!
Jusareader

Such an amazing story. (Kind of Kate Chopin meets M. R. James.) I actually got to use it in an anthology I edited recently, pairing it with Oliver Onions' THE BECKONING FAIR ONE, which has always struck me as the other side of the coin. What's the quote from Jung? Something about "unconscious contents" going unrecognized until they "give rise to negative activity and personification."

justareader wrote:Another piece of literature dealing with the 'rest cure' is the novel The Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann. It's an extensive narrative of the rest cure as the best resource available to cure TB before the advent of antibiotics (early XX century). Many people include this novel among the best of the XX century. The story shows the conflict of the patients with the disease, with themselves, and with the other patients in the sanatorium. The group of people living in this place (separated from society) is a good sample from humanity, very diverse, and with different levels of social skills. One of the few reliefs that the ill people encounter there, are the beauty of nature and friendship (for those able to make friends). I recommend it highly!!!
Jusareader

I highly recommend, "Magic Mountain" too, it is a very multi layered novel, and IMHO it was the best book I read in 2010. Those living on the "mountain" insolated themselves from the reality of the war that was raging below at that time. Evenutally however, war was able to reach the top of the mountain and the invalids enjoying the rest cure, believing they could not be touch by the war had to face reality. This novel combines science, religion, philosphy, magic, war and history in beautifully written prose, and a good dose of humor as well.

I do believe "MM" is one of those novels you could read many times, and find something new with each reading.

Wow, I just responded to a post that is a year old. That's what happens when you don't have your glasses on!

Hi Suzanne, I have read the yellow wallpaper twice the last time at a course in our local senior college where we read stories of dysfunctional families "Raisin in the Sun", one about the boy on the rocking horse and I forget what else.

I hated Yellow Wallpaper.

Suzanne, what you quote about inheritance and such (I'm afraid to go back a/c I don't want to lose this post) that wasn't true is this country? My great grandmother who was born in 1860 owned property in her own right. We have to remember that women are often widows for a great number of years and were in earlier times also. Thus they would have had quite a bit of independence. It is true though that my own mother eloped because she had been in nurses training and hated it so quit. But when she went back home she had tasted freedom and no longer wanted to be under her fathers dominance. This was in 1926.

Now that I think about it when my Dad died in 1971, we children all had to "sign" off something to do with either the house or other inheritance. But Suzanne, I think most laws like that are individual by state, such as marriage, divorce etc. etc.

I have often looked at Magic Mountain on my bookshelf and now I will read it as I loved "Death in Venice"

Was the protagonist suffering from post natal depression? The baby is mentioned several times.
There is a film, can't recall the title, concerning a highly intelligent man being held prisoner. He has a nice, sterile room, receives meals, but is condemned to boredom. He's not allowed to speak a word to anyone or them to him. Nor is he allowed to read or write. His intellect is condemned to die.
One day, is he called upon to appear and speak to some interrogator for a few minutes concerning his alleged spying. On the way out, he sees the man's overcoat and there is a book hanging out of the pocket. He grabs it and makes away with it and is thrilled almost to tears about having something to read. Alas.....turns out the book is a guide on how to play chess. He then teaches himself chess using bits of napkins and the shadows on the bars to his room. This intellectual stimulation makes him not only a world-class chess player, but saves his sanity.
Okay, synopsis over--but there is a similarity: the author of The Yellow Wallpaper as well as her protagonist, are condemned to get "well" using the very same treatment that the male protagonist suffers, in order to drive him insane.

lady of shallot wrote:one about the boy on the rocking horse

"The Rocking Horse Winner", D.H. Lawrence

lady of shallot wrote:Suzanne, what you quote about inheritance and such (I'm afraid to go back a/c I don't want to lose this post) that wasn't true is this country?

Of course it was true in the United States. Husbands could give the marital home to whomever they wished. The husband could give the home to his mistress and leave the wife out in the cold. This often happened, many states abolished the dower and curtesy laws, I believe only four states still uphold these laws. Statutory elective laws have been established, not too long ago to protect widows.

Dower and curtesy rights have been abolished in most states. Laws of descent and distribution, divorce and property distribution, and use of joint tenancies are now common for possession and distribution of marital property. Eleven states have adopted the Uniform Disposition of Community Property Rights at Death Act. Most states have abolished dower and curtesy because discrimination on the basis of sex is now illegal in most states and provide the same benefits regardless of sex. Now a marital share is often known as a statutory or elective share. A statutory or elective share is the portion of a deceased person’s estate that the surviving spouse is entitled to claim under state law. In many states, the elective share or statutory share is about one-third of a deceased spouse’s property. In most states, if the deceased spouse left a will, the surviving spouse must choose either what the will provides or the elective share.

http://dowerandcourtesy.uslegal.com/

Even if a husband leaves the entire marital home to anyone besides his wife in his will, the wife is entitled to her elective share. Long gone are the days when a husband could cut out his wife from his will. It's a good thing.

Suzanne, most people I know have the homes in the names of both husband and wife and to the best of my knowledge (in my lifetime of 76 years) this has been the case.

I do remember that about 20 or so years ago my same aged friend wanted to buy a place in Florida in her own name and had a hell of a time doing so (she is married)

Also I know that when choosing an option for retirement pension benefits at my husbands place of retirement, in order for a husband to disregard his wife receiving any portion of these benefits past his lifetime, the wife herself would have to physically attend a signing off of such rights. Interesting. Maine where I live is rather more advanced than most states (that is traditionally) in recognition of these rights.

My married sister in law owns the home she has shared with her husband for the last 20 plus years in her own right. If she divorces, she may receive more than her half share, however, if she dies, it doesn't matter what the will says, she could leave the entire estate to her children, or die intestate, however, the husband gets a portion of the house by law. This is an example of the issue I originally addressed. This was not the case years ago, and there is a current trend where couples will share a home owned by one person then get married. Many married couples will not change the ownership of the home unless they refinance. Ownership follows the note, property follows the deed. Both parties need to be on the note to jointly own property. In the situation where the note is in the name of one, the wife/husband cannot force the living spouse out of the home by will. The only caveat to this would be in the situation of an inheritance. The surviving spouse may get less in this situation. All other inheritances, belongs soley to the person it was given to. It is not until the money is comingled in joint accounts where this inherited money becomes joint property. This is the situation I am in. I inherited a home, while married, it was soley in my name. However, when I sold that home and bought my current residence, the proceeds from my former home, now belongs to my husband because we are both on the note on my current house eventhough 80% of the cost of my current home was paid by that inherited property. But, like my sister in law, if I was to divorce, I may get more than my half share of the home, but if I die, hubbie gets it.

lady of shallot wrote:Suzanne, most people I know have the homes in the names of both husband and wife and to the best of my knowledge (in my lifetime of 76 years) this has been the case.

More and more, this is not the case. Many people marry later in life, and have already established themselves in their own homes. Survivors rights have become an issue again.

lady of shallot wrote:Also I know that when choosing an option for retirement pension benefits at my husbands place of retirement, in order for a husband to disregard his wife receiving any portion of these benefits past his lifetime, the wife herself would have to physically attend a signing off of such rights. Interesting.

Wow, this is more than interesting, it's bizarre. A wife is entitled to a husband's pension, pensions are considered marital property even if the pension was created pre-marriage. Some pensions due require a fee for a spouse when the pension recipient is still alive, but I have never heard of denying a wife of a husbands pension after death. A question that comes to my mind after reading your scenerio is; does the wife get the pension if the husband dies before retirement age? Pensions can amass quite a bit of cash before retirement age. I suppose pensions can vary from establishment to establishment, and probate law varies from state to state, but I would have to do some serious research before I would be fool enough to sign away my rights.