Pages

Friday, August 30, 2019

Tax Law

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Tax Law. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Tax Law paper right on time.


Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Tax Law, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Tax Law paper at affordable prices!


BLO06 Tax Law & Practice


Assignment


Question 1


a) As a result of Joanne receiving $5000 for the cancellation of one of her employment contracts, it is deemed to be ordinary assessable income. The reason that it is ordinary assessable income, is because the payment was for income that Joanne had lost, upon one of her contracts being cancelled. Furthermore, since Joanne also had another employment contract in which she was receiving income, she relied upon those payments to base her lifestyle. In other words, the compensation payment covered the amount that Joanne was going to receive throughout the six month period, even if one of her contracts was not cancelled.


Buy cheap Tax Law term paper


The compensation payment of $5000 was convertible into cash, which further emphasizes the fact that the payment is assessable income, under the ordinary usage of the word. The only time that the compensation payment would not be ordinary assessable income, is under Section 6(e) of the 16 act, as stated by the master tax guide (001,p.47) . However, the tax commissioner would not accept the compensation payment being ordinary income, where the entitlements are placed into a lump sum which will be described as compensation for lost earning capacity, which is also outlined in the master tax guide (001, pp.48-4) . In this case, it would be classified as a capital receipt and not ordinary assessable income.


According to the Core tax legislation (001,p.175) , Section 6.5 of the 17 act, classifies compensation payments as a result of a contract being cancelled, as being ordinary assessable income. However, this particular section does not go into any real detail of defining the term Ordinary Income. Instead, the common law provides grounds as to what falls under the Ordinary Income definition, which is; 'The word income is not a term of art, and hat forms of receipt are comprehended within it…. must be determined in accordance with the ordinary concepts and usages of mankind'. This definition was generated from Jordan CJ, who presided over the case ofScott v Commissioner of Tax (NSW) (15) 5 SR 15 at 1, asstatedby Kobetsky, Dirkisand O'connell (001,p.64) .


An example of a case which supports the $5000 compensation payment that Joanne received as being ordinary assessable income is Californian Oil Products.ltd v FCT (14) 5 CLR 8 ( ATD 10), which is outlined by Kobetsky et.al (001,p.176). Itinvolveda case where the company was appointed to act as an exclusive agent over a 5 year period for selling a particular brand of petroleum products in NSW. It was agreed that the company would not sell a competitor's petroleum products. The contract was cancelled during its first year, and as a result, the company received compensation in ten half-yearly installments. Therefore, the commissioner argued that the compensation payments received were ordinary assessable income. The High Court ruled that the payment was a capital receipt on the grounds that the business was terminated. However, Kobetsky et.al (001,p.176)highlights that their honours rejected this and ruled that the compensation payments as ordinary assessable income, which ultimately agrees with the fact that the compensation payment received by Joanne is indeed ordinary assessable income.


b)Given that Peter was a dairy farmer, the distinction between a capital receipt and ordinary assessable income is related to the effect of the structure ofthe business and that which is part of the product of the structure of the business. According to Sections 70-75 and 70-110 of the 17 act as discussed in the core tax legislation (001,p.7 & 400) , this transaction is deemed to be a capital receipt because the bamboo is not part of the trading stock of the business and the bamboo was removed outside the ordinary course ofPeter's dairy farm business. Therefore, since the facts state that Peter accepted $00 for every truckload of bamboo that was removed, it is a capital receipt.


This scenario is related to the difference between a fruit tree and the fruit of the tree. The fruit tree is known as the structure of the business, while the fruit of the tree is the product of that business structure. This means that the bamboo is a product of Peter's dairy farm business structure. Even though the information largely suggests that it is a capital receipt, further information is needed because it must be known as to whether Peter relied upon the bamboo as a source of earning income under Section 70-10 of the 17 act, despite the definition not including whether a specific part of farmland is trading stock and therefore, being ordinary assessable income. It also must be known that if Peter received the $00 for every truckload of bamboo removed was in the nature of regular and recurrent payments. In other words, if the payments received came on a periodical basis.


However, under Section 6-5 of the 17 act, it states that if Peter had an expectation of payment, then it is likely to be assessable income. An appropriate conclusion cannot be reached as a result of the facts not stating whether the bamboo was used as a source of earning income within the ordinary scope of the business. An example of a case as outlined by Kobetsky et.al (001,p.168), which illustrates the conflict between a Capital receipt and Ordinary assessable income is that of Westfield.ltd v FCT (11) 1 ATR 18. According to Kobetsky et.al (001,p.168) , the structure of Westfield's business was the design, construction, letting and management of shopping centres. Therefore, Westfield purchased a large block of land that was adjacent to one of its shopping centres, so it could be used for future development. Before this was done, Westfield sold its present shopping centre to AMP and negotiations were initiated with AMP over the adjacent block of land.


Westfield generated profit from the sale of the block of the land and the tax commissioner had assessed Westfield on that profit, which the commissioner had classified as ordinary assessable income. As a result, Westfield objected to this assessment, based on the argument that the profit generated, was a capital receipt. Initially, the courts dismissed Westfield's appeal in which the profit was not ordinary assessable income. However, Westfield appealed to the Full Federal court and the Judges unanimously ruled that the profit generated from the sale of the land was a capital receipt. Additionally, Kobetsky et.al (001,p.168)states that the sale of the land did not fall within the ordinary scope of Westfield's business activities or even a necessary incident of their business. During the time that Westfield purchased the block of land, there was no intention to resell the land. As a consequence, the profit that Westfield generated was a capital receipt.


From this particular case, the payment that Peter received for every truckload of bamboo that was removed, it is of a capital nature, as the transaction does not fall within the ordinary scope of his business activities, and prior to the zoo approaching Peter, he did not have any intention to have the bamboo removed from his land, as illustrated in Westfield's case. Even though that Peter is clearly running a business, the bamboo was not used as a means of generating profit as dairy farmer. The only way that Peter could be assessed on the $00 that has been received for every truckload of bamboo removed, was if it was not on a restrictive covenant basis, and if the bamboo was actually used within the day to day runnings of his business.


c)Martha's early retirement package of $47,000 falls under the eligible termination payment (ETP) scheme ofthe 16 act, Section 7B to 7H. Therefore, the eligible termination payment (ETP) scheme qualifies as ordinary assessable income. The reason that the $47,000 early retirement payment package is ordinary assessable income is that under Section 7E of the 16 act, as outlined in the core tax legislation (001,p.788) , the early retirement of employees is an approved early scheme if


-the scheme is offered to all employees within a class that is identified by the employer;


-the scheme is entered into with a view to rationalizing or reorganizing the employer's operations with specific objectives; and


-the commissioner has approved the scheme prior to its implementation.


This means that Martha may have retired voluntarily after working for Ansett for 1 years. As a result, the tax commissioner could treat the eligible termination payment (ETP) scheme as approved early retirement where special circumstances exist, such as where the scheme was introduced because of a delay in processing an application for its approval or it could be implemented without approval, because the employer was unaware of the tax implications. Furthermore, Martha must have decided to retire early, because her employer would not have been aware that when they paid Martha the $47,000, it was not part of her superannuation fund.


Nevertheless, the $47,000 will be ordinary assessable income on the additional grounds that


-if the employer and the taxpayer are not dealing at arm's length in relation to the termination, the ETP must not be greater than an amount which could be reasonably expected to have been paid, if the parties were dealing at arm's length; and


-at the time of termination, there should not be any agreement between the employer and employee to re-employ them after that time, which are all outlined in the master tax guide (001,p.).


Another reason that Martha may have taken early retirement although it has not been specified, could be her age. However the master tax guide (001,p.4), also states that early retirement can also be classified as a bonafide redundancy payment, which means that it is part of an ETP, which is made to a taxpayer, upon employment termination which is greater than an amount, that the person could reasonably expect to have received. This could be as a result of Martha voluntarily resigning.


The retirement payment package would not have been ordinary assessable income, should Martha have been sacked. The word "Redundancy" means where an employer no longer needs the employees to perform a particular kind of work at a certain location. It normally occurs in a scenario where the dismissal has not been caused by any consideration, in which the employee perceives it to be in unusual circumstances. Therefore, it will not extend to an employee being dismissed for personal or disciplinary reasons, or because that the employee was performing inefficiently.


Furthermore, an eligible termination payment (ETP) which is made as a consequence of the termination of a person's employment due to redundancy according to the master tax guide (001,p.4) , must satisfy the conditions that are outlined in the criteria for early retirement scheme payments, before it is treated on a concessional basis. In other words, if the $47,000 early retirement package was made in the conditions that are stated above, then Martha could only end up paying 5% of that $47,000. This is because that the payment was made after the 1st of july 14 as part of the early retirement scheme. This means, that Martha gets to keep 5% of the $47,000 early retirement payment package, and only 5% is ordinary assessable income.


d)Even though that Nigel is an accountant by profession, the payments that he receives through his activities as a keen gardener is enough to suggest that it is generated through providing a personal services business. Therefore, these receipts are ordinary assessable income through Nigel selling roses on a weekly basis and would fall under the personal services income category. Since that Nigel sells his flower bouquets from $0 upwards and in which he would supply 5 or 6 flower arrangements each week, this constitutes that the receipts are received on a periodical basis.


However, the scenario does not indicate whether Nigel relies upon the receipts to base his lifestyle. Given that Nigel is an accountant, it would be deemed that the income in which he receives from that occupation would be relied upon by him. Nevertheless, his receipts from selling flower bouquets is still ordinary assessable income on the grounds that the receipts are received on a regular basis and despite the fact that gardening is a hobby of Nigel's. The additional reasons for the payments being ordinary assessable income, is that it satisfies the criteria that is outlined as being income under the ordinary concept by Kobetsky et.al (001,p.65) , these are


-the income is normally received on a periodical basis;


-the amount must be income in the hand of the taxpayer;


-income must be received by the taxpayer and must belong to them;


-income must be cash or a gain that is convertible to cash;


-the income must be a gain which is realized by the taxpayer; and


-the income is normally derived from the provision of services, as a return from property or from a business.


Inorder to further emphasise the fact that Nigel is carrying on a personal services business, the cases according to common law, which are used to support this argument is Walker v FCT (185) 16 ATR 1 and also Ferguson v FCT (17)ATR 87. In Walker v FCT, Walker was a farmer who intended to breed a special type of goat. Therefore bought an Angora goat in the hope that he would generate a profit from selling the offspring of the goat. As a result, Walker entered the Angora goat industry and set up a small stud farm. However, his activity was not successful as the goat died shortly after only producing two kids. One of them also died without producing. The goat who survived was used to breed offspring and ended up producing two kids. Walker then decided to end his activities after three years and in which he sold the three remaining goats. The only income that Walker received was the Proceeds from the sale of the goats. The court had held that Walker was carrying on a business despite making a loss. However, the court was satisfied that Walker had set up the stud farm with the intention of generating profit, and in which his activities were on a regular basis.


A similar outcome arose in Ferguson v FCT, in which Ferguson intended to set up a primary production business. He entered into an agreement to lease five cows over a four year period. Ferguson also made arrangements with a company for managing the cows over a ten year period. The court referred to Section 6(1) of the 16 act in basing their decision in which the business includes any profession, trade, employment or vocation, but excludes the occupation as an employee. Therefore, Kobetsky et.al (001,p.14) states that the decisions in Walker and Ferguson demonstrate that the courts attached limited weight to the scale of operations upon the determination as to whether a person is carrying on a business.


As a result, the decisions in Walker and Ferguson are enough to justify that Nigel is carrying on a business, by providing flower bouquets on large occasions. The issue of the hot houses also adds more strength to the fact that Nigel has set up these inorder to ensure a year round supply of flowers on his property, to enable him to sell them.


Therefore, Nigel has been carrying on a business through generating income from his hobby on a regular and intentional basis, which concludes that the receipts he receives through selling these flower bouquets is ordinary assessable income, and not a capital receipt.


Question


Given that Paul has started up his own company inorder to work in conjunction with Yoyo Pty.Ltd, it is considered to be an alienation of income. However, under section 87 of the 17 act, the income that Swindon Pty.ltd receives cannot be alienated, due to that income being derived from Yoyo Pty.ltd. Therefore, the $75,000 that Paul's company receives is coming from one single source, which is known as personal services income (PSI). Inorder for Swindon Pty.ltd to be classified as a personal services business (PSB), it needs to be known whether the personal services business is in force, in other words if Swindon Pty.ltd was set up for the sole purpose of undertaking contract work for Yoyo Pty.ltd. Given the facts that are stated in the scenario, this is quite clearly the case.


Even though that Paul's company is clearly a personal services business, it must also be known as to whether that Paul is providing his own equipment under Section 87(18) and where the company's premises is located. For example, whether the company is located at Paul's home or at another location. Also under section 87 of the 17 act, it must also be known whether Paul is employing any other people besides his wife. However, under section 86-1 of the 17 act according to the core tax legislation (001,p.40) , the salary of $40,000 in which Paul receives from the rendering of personal services through his company will be treated as income under the ordinary concept. This is because that according to Kobetsky et.al (001,p.151) , receipts that are connected to the ordinary scope of a person's business is income according to the ordinary concept. This means that Paul's $40,000 salary and the $75,000 that Swindon Pty.ltd receives from Yoyo Pty.ltd is ordinary assessable income.


According to Section 86-1 of the 17 act, this will only be the case when the income belongs to Swindon Pty.ltd and the full amount is not promptly paid to Paul as a salary. Section 86-1 will not apply if the other entity (Yoyo Pty.ltd) is conducting a personal services business. However, there are limits which apply to the entitlement of dedudtions for Swindon Pty.ltd inorder to offset against the $40,000 which is treated as Paul's income. Section 86-5(1), demonstrates the following for the alienation of personal services income, as exhibited by the core taxlegislation(001,p.404)


(Swindon Pty.ltd)


Performance of


the personal


services


Supply the contract Contract Payments


(Yoyo Pty.ltd)


Salary PaymentsOther income


contract distributions


(Paul)


Therefore, Section 86-5() states that it has the effect of attributing thepersonal services entity's income (Swindon pty.ltd), from the personal services to the individual (Paul) who performed these services (unless that income is instantly paid as a salary). There are also certain deduction entitlements of the personal services entity (Swindon pty.ltd) which can reduce the amount of the attribution. Under Section 86-0(!) of the 17 act as outlined by the Core taxlegislation (001,p.405)_,the amount of Paul's personal services income, which is included in his assessable income under Section 86-15 could be reduced by an amount of certain deductions to which Swindon Pty.ltd is entitled. This deduction comprises of the $11,000 in operating expenses which Swindon Pty.ltd has incurred. As a result, the $75,000 that Swindon has received from Yoyo Pty.ltd will be assessable income because Paul dad formed the company for the sheer purpose of performing contract work for Yoyo Pty.ltd.


An example which emphasizes these tax consequences for Paul is in the case ofGP International Pipecoaters Pty.Ltd v FCT (10) 1 ATR 1. This is in which the company succeeded in gaining pipe coating work for the State Electricity Commission of Western Australia (SECWA). As outlined by Kobetsky (001,p.151), , the company was only created for the purpose of performing the contract, and as a result, the construction payments which were received by the company was within their ordinary scope of business. Therefore, the court ruled that the payments were income under these circumstances. This means that under Section 86-15(5) of the 17 act, the $40,000 which Paul has received would be assessable income.


As a result, if the only income in which Swindon Pty.ltd receives is from its contract with Yoyo Pty.ltd, then it is clearly assessable income.


By Adric Limneos


56400


000 Words.


BIBLIOGRAPHY


1.Kobetsky.M, Dirkis.M, O'Connell.A, (001),


Income Tax Text, Materials & Essential Cases, rd edn,


The Federation Press, Sydney.


.Barkoczy.S, (001),


Core Tax legislation & Study Guide, 4th edn,


CCH Australia.Ltd, Sydney.


.Australian Master Tax Guide, (001)


nd edn, CCH Australia.Ltd, Sydney.


Please note that this sample paper on Tax Law is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Tax Law, we are here to assist you.Your cheap custom college paper on Tax Law will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.


Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!


Tuesday, August 27, 2019

Kino analys

If you order your essay from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Kino analys. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Kino analys paper right on time.


Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Kino analys, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Kino analys paper at affordable prices!


1.MAN AS PART OF NATURE


Steinbeck was fascinated by natural science. He had taken science courses at Stanford University, had worked in a fish hatchery, and was a good friend of Ed Ricketts, a marine biologist. While studying the shallow waters off the coast of Baja California, Steinbeck witnessed the war for survival among the various ocean species, as well as their many forms of interdependence. He saw striking similarities between human beings and other species.


When you read Chapters III and IV youll notice Steinbecks comparison of a town to a colonial animal. Very primitive single-celled organisms (paramecia, for example) often group together into colonies- sometimes called aggregations- for the purpose of feeding or mating. Steinbeck used this biological aggregation as a model for the social groupings of higher level animals, including human beings. Human society is composed of individuals (like the single-celled animals), whose survival depends on interrelationships. Kino is alone when he finds the pearl, but the discovery of the pearl quickly travels throughout the village- the social, or colonial, animal- which reacts as an entirety with greed, envy, and dreams.


Kino is an impoverished Indian fisherman, but more important is his allegorical role as a man faced with the temptation of wealth beyond his wildest dreams. Because the novella is concerned with Kinos moral obligation and not his civic obligation, it concludes with Kinos casting the pearl back into the sea, a renunciation of material wealth that indicates he has learned a moral lesson. It is important that the novella does not conclude with Kinos arrest or continuing flight from justice, as a realistic novel concerned with civic punishment for ethical transgression might.


Order College Papers on Kino analys


Kino


Kino is at first characterized in very simple terms as a man of few


wants; he is content with his family life, proud of his son and his


heritage, and satisfied with his meager living that provides his


basic needs. Because he is calm and peaceful, Kino lives in


harmony with nature. He enjoys the simple things around him,


including the sounds of the night, the movements of the ants, the


splendor of the sea, his wife lying beside him on the cot, his child


lying in the hammock, and the little splash of morning waves on


the beach. He and his wife have been together so long that words


are unnecessary between them; they communicate their feelings


with signs and music. Kinos music in the beginning is the Song


of Family. He is a picture of total contentment.


To provide for his family, Kino is a pearl-driver. He works hard


each day, weighing himself down with a stone and repeatedly


diving down to an oyster bed. He dreams about finding a large


pearl, but is happy that he can provide food for his family through


his efforts. He is also thankful to have a fine canoe to use in his


work; it has been passed down from his grandfather to his father to


him. Kino values the canoe as a tie to his past and as his bulwark


against starvation.


Kino, though a poor man, is extremely dignified. He is proud of his


past, his wife, his son, his canoe, and his home. He is also aware of


his place in society. He realizes that the civilized world of the


people in town has no place for him since he is poor and


uneducated. He wants to give his son the opportunity to enter this


world and, thus, dreams of his son getting an education and


learning to read. Kino cannot be married in the church because he


cannot pay the priest properly. He cannot get medical help for


Coyotito from the doctor in town because he is poor and cannot


pay the medical fee. In frustration over his situation, Kino bangs


on the doctors gate and hurts his hand. Throughout the book, the


injured hand serves as a reminder of Kinos place in the poor,


native, lower class.


When Kino finds the greatest pearl in the world, he is unprepared


to handle the jealousy and envy generated by his treasure. Kino has


never possessed anything more valuable than his canoe; thus, he is


naive about the reactions of other people to someones wealth. He


looks at the pearl and sees its rare beauty; he also sees it as a


means of providing a proper wedding for Juana and himself and an


education for his son. Other people see the pearl and selfishly want


it to bring fortune their way. The priest sees the pearl as providing


a means for getting the needed repairs for his church. As a result,


the priest, filled with hypocrisy, goes to call on Kino. He tells Kino


to thank the Lord for his treasure and to remember his duty to the


church (the one that has refused to marry him and Juana). Then the


doctor comes to call on Kino and now offers to treat Coyotito. In


order to ingratiate himself to the owner of the pearl, he first gives


the infant a medicine to make him appear sicker. Then the doctor


returns and pretends to cure Coyotito. While at Kinos hut, he tells


the Indian that he is worried about his safety and suggests that he


keeps the pearl for him. Through these two visitors, Kino begins to


understand the envy and evil that now surrounds him.


Next Kino must deal with the pearl buyers, who try to trick him out


of the pearl. In a united front, they all tell him the pearl is


worthless and offer Kino a ridiculously low sum. Kino bravely


stands up against them breaking native tradition, and refuses their


offer. Instead, he plans to leave the security of his home and go to


the capital to sell his pearl. Before he can leave, he is attacked


three times in the darkness of night and is forced to kill one of his


attackers. His canoe is destroyed, and his hut is burned. In spite of


these horrendous events, Kino refuses to part with the pearl. He


still naively believes it is the answer to his dreams and the security


for his family. When Juana tries to throw it back into the ocean, he


wrestles the pearl away from her. In his rage against her actions, he


also hits and kicks the woman that he loves. The pearl is obviously


changing him.


When Kino leaves La Paz with Juana and Coyotito, he feels like a


hunted animal. They travel in the darkness of night and leave false


trails for the trackers who seek them. When the trackers finally


close in, Kino decides to attack them. He stabs two of the men and


fires a rifle at the third. Ironically, one of the stray bullets hits and


kills his greatest treasure, his son Coyotito. Now Kino accepts that


the pearl has produced only evil effects in his life, and he chooses


to get rid of it. After returning to La Paz to bury his son, he and


Juana go to the beach and fling the pearl back into the sea. While


he possessed the treasure, Kino lost the real treasures in his life,


his peaceful lifestyle, his contentment, his appreciation of nature,


his canoe, his hut, and his only son. It is no wonder that at the end


of the book he stands as a bitter and defeated man who feels he has


lost everything.


CONFLICT


Protagonist


The protagonist of the novel is Kino, the pearl diver, and the entire


plot revolves around him. At the beginning of the play, Kino is


described as a simple family man, content with his surroundings


and wanting nothing more than a full stomach and a placid life.


When the scorpion bites his son, he takes him to the doctor. The


doctors curt response and refusal to help Coyotito causes Kino to


search for the pearl. He discovers the greatest pearl in the world,


which seems to incur the wrath of the gods. After finding the pearl,


Kino must endure continuous hazards, which leave him afraid, yet


unrelenting and defiant. Although he fights the evil forces behind


the pearl, he cannot overcome them. He finally loses his most


precious possession, his only son to the evil forces. The novel


comes full circle with Kino flinging the pearl back to the sea from


where it had come. Kinos character as a tough, resilient hardy man


has been beautifully depicted.


Antagonist


Kinos antagonist is the beautiful pearl, which breeds greed, envy,


and evil amongst the people around Kino, who are jealous of his


newfound wealth.


Climax


In chapter six, Kino and his family flee from their country to go


and sell their pearl. Evil trackers, hoping to steal the pearl, follow


them on their journey. Coyotitos cry reveals the presence of Kino


and his family, and the trackers shoot and kill their son. Finally,


Kino hurls the pearl back into the sea.


Outcome


The novel ends in tragedy. After the death of Coyotito, there is


nothing left for Kino and Juana. The pearl has no value to them,


for the main reason for selling it is to provide for their son. Now he


is gone. The novel ends with Kino and Juana returning to their


country, utterly forlorn and defeated. As the entire village follows


them, the couple walks to the sea. There, Kino takes the pearl in


his hand and flings it into the water, where it slowly disappears.


For me, Kino is heroic. He is forced into an adventure (or misadventure) with his discovery of the Pearl of the World -- a discovery beyond anything he could imagine. His love of home and family, however misguided, is genuine.


What makes Kino a modern heroic figure is his lack of a guide or god to intervene on his behalf. Kino has only the ancient songs to direct and warn him. The bravery he possesses is visceral and almost bestial rather than rational and divine. The scene where Kino strips off his clothing to pursue his trackers comes to mind. For him, there is no gift from the gods.


Kino and Juana are wiser at the end of the story when they decide to return the pearl to the sea, but at what personal cost? Steinbeck leaves me with a sense of hopelessness. The Pearl may be a modern parable, but the face of poverty seems all too real.


Kino is a tragic hero whose ruin illustrates the extent to which greed and ambition can destroy ones life. Although he is much wiser by the novels conclusion, he has paid too costly a price.


I dont see Kino as a hero. To me he seemed more to symbolize The average Joe.


Nor do I agree that he paid a price because he was greedy. The things he imagined that the Pearl of the World would bring him were, in my estimation anyway, very humble, modest improvments to his familys quality of life.


Nothing he dreamed of was symptomatic of greed. The greed that was described in this story was exhibited by the doctor, pearl buyers, and whoever it was who hired the trackers.


Kino was not particularly brave either was he? I mean, his struggles with the night visitor, the attacker by the boat, and the trackers were pretty much unavoidable (and self defense).


I think if I ever find a treasure, Ill keep quiet about it. If Kino had not howled in joy at his discovery, no one would have known that there was a pearl to steal. His ignorance of the ways of the world doomed him. He didnt stand a chance.


The narrator says that the story is a parable and, as with all often-told tales, there is only good and bad. This statement prepares us for clear-cut judgment of things to come -- for an either/or type of view of the events yet to happen. The narrator states there is black and white; with no distinction in between. [Thus Steinbeck prepares us for his packaged presentation of good versus evil, and the fact that evil does exist in life in society.]


In chapter one we meet with Kino and his good wife, Juana, both living in a village just outside La Paz, Baja California in Northwestern Mexico. Their lives follow a pattern which is greatly established since they follow the same pattern of life their ancestors led. Juana always awakens before Kino, fans the fire, and prepares the same breakfast. Always the same simple and humble breakfast of corn cakes, for they have not for more. Kino always knows exactly what Juana is doing, even without watching. Juana faithfully goes about her tasks, always humming the same ancient song of her ancestors. [This shows us how unified they are with their past and with their predecessors -- how traditional they are in their ways.] Kino is content with his routine, unbothered at all by it. This all makes him feel satisfied and secure; alive and safe. However, the routine will soon be shattered by the events that follow.


As Kino, before rising, listens to the sound of the waves, he hears the soft and clear Song of the Family. When he goes outside, he hears the same song coming from inside the hut. The song of himself, and Juana, and home, and Coyotito, their baby, all living the same tune, in harmony and balance. These small, early-morning events suggest the UNITY of Kino, his past, and his world -- the WHOLE. When he suddenly sees the scorpion, for the first time he hears the Song of Evil. It quickly drowns out the Song of the Family, and after the scorpion bites Coyotito, the Song of Evil becomes intense and roars in his ears, and indeed in his very head.


Kino and Juana both notice the malignant scorpion at the same time, but it is Kino who too carefully and confusedly tries to knock it off from Coyotitos hanging bed-box. Tragically, as we will see later, he misses it completely. The scorpion lands on Coyotitos tender arm and stings him. Then savagely, but too late now, Kino crushes into the ground, grinding it into a pulp.


Contrary to Kinos harsh attitudes, Juana is the soft answer to the problem. Still following the traditional ways of her people, Juana mixes ancient magic with her prayers as she springs into action, sucking the poison from the wound. Kino, on the other hand, watches helplessly, admiring Juanas strength with awe.


The fat and wealthy doctor, who surrounds himself with all sorts of luxuries, is interested only in Kinos capacity to pay. The obese doctor is in bed eating sweet biscuits and drinking hot chocolate when Kino arrives at his house. The fat doctors servant, also one of Kinos people, relays Kinos message to the doctor. But the doctor is insulted and enraged by Kinos request for help. He says that he has better things to do than to treat Indians. The servant himself treats Kino with disdain as he gives Kino the doctors answer. Only if Kino can pay will he take Coyotito as patient. Of course, unable to pay, Kino takes Coyotito back to the village.


Although it is still early morning, the air is hazy and the sun beats down. Vision is thus blurred, obstructed and impeded. Clarity in perception is lost this way. It is a symbol the author is projecting in the story. A symbol which will keep Kino from seeing things clearly later on. And if it is analyzed more closely, we can assume it is also a form of foreshadowing what is to come -- a bleak and tragic series of events and circumstances.Top


The haze of the early morning magnifies some things and blots out or eliminates others. It seems to make the land almost dream-like, and the main characters state of mind equally dream-like. Vision, therefore cannot and should not be trusted. The physical perception of things is distorted. The people of the Gulf are used to the haze and are accustomed, rather, to trust the things of the spirit and of the imagination rather than of the eye. They are used to relying on instinct and intuition. This is the safe way of life for them. But Kino will soon forget about this and fall into the hands of tragedy and fate.


Kinos most valuable possession is his canoe. The same canoe that had belonged to his grandfather -- who had later passed it on to his father and who in turn had passed it on to him. It represented tradition. It represented the pride which each one took in making a life from the sea and from the capture of fish. It was a means of survival and a source of purpose and unity in the men that owned it. A heritage which held the men together in an ability to deal with the sea. It was a union with nature itself. The canoe had forever been lovingly cared for and preserved, and thus meant everything in the small and humble family. As a tradition, it gave Kino something to live for and be proud of.


Then, while searching in the oyster beds, Kino hears the Song of the Undersea, a mixture of all the songs of his people. Diving into the oyster beds for pearls had for ages been his peoples tradition. As Kino fills his basket, he faintly hears the Song of the Pearl That Might Be. [He senses the possibility of something wonderful this time.] There is a chance that one of the oysters might contain a pearl. Today, the Song of the Pearl grows stronger and stronger, with complete phrases entering the Song of the Undersea. The Song of the Pearl That Might Be drives Kino on today. Kino also knows that Juana is above praying hard for the find of a pearl -- any pearl -- so that they might be able to pay the doctor for Coyotitos cure. [Again we see the closeness between them in this. They are so close to each other they know one another well.]


Juana senses Kinos excitement as he surfaces, but condescendingly pretends to look away. Juana knows that it is not good to want something too much. Pretending not to see the large oyster, Kino first opens a small oyster. Both Kinos and Juanas simple form of life and uncomplicated manner is shown here. Their desire to simply have what they need and be satisfied is also depicted even up to this moment. But soon, very soon, things are about to take a turn.


Kinos anxiousness is secretly hidden behind the fact that he first opens the small oyster and pretends to ignore the very large one. Kino is reluctant to open the large one, afraid that what he had earlier seen when down at the bottom of the oyster bed was only an illusion, a figment of his imaginative head. Perhaps he had not really seen that there was a pearl inside it. Still hesitating in the shy and humble way his people did when they approached a new situation, Juana finally told him to open the oyster.


Then, Kino expertly began to pry and cut the oyster open. And when it was finally vanquished, as Kino lifted the tender oyster flesh, Both he and Juana saw the greatest pearl anyone had ever found. It was the size of a sea gulls egg. Juana reacted with awe and amazement at the sight of the great pearl, perfect and round and silver in the rays of the sun. But to Kino, it was the beginning of a dream-like state, where he first experienced the breaking of the song of victory, only to be swallowed afterward by the intrusion of the desire for things. Things now wanted. His mind began a flow of desires, a flow of dreams of things.Top


It is highly significant at this very point that Juana instinctively should go to Coyotito to examine the wound under the poultice she had made for it, and that she should find that the swelling and harshness of the sting had gone away. She immediately reported it to Kino -- but, Kino did not notice the true meaning of this. He was blinded by the size and worth of the pearl. He was so absorbed by its material worth that he went rigidly into a process of intoxication and possession by the great pearl. He now became possessed by the material significance of the pearl. If Kino had listened to Juana and had truly understood that Coyotito was now safe from the danger of dying, another story entirely different from the tragedy about to happen would have developed. An entirely different route their lives would have taken, and it would have probably preserved their valuable union and happiness. But Kino was now foolishly blinded by the pearl, its size, and its worth among the civilized townsmen in La Paz. He was now in a trance. He was now possessed by the idea that now his family and he could have anything they wanted. Now, he perhaps thought to himself in a millionth of a second, he and his family could be like the rest of the people who had for centuries humiliated him and his people. Now he could be like the white conqueror of his land and no longer need to feel pushed below him. Now he could feel as human as they. But greed is the road to evil, and it only leads to ultimate self-destruction and tragedy. It conduces to evil and the loss of the soul. But... Kino did not know this, for he had never had something like this happen to him before. So, the story continues and we prepare to find out what happens.


The town is described as a colonial animal. The choice of words and analogy here are interesting to examine. Colonial alludes the provincial setting of the events; and animal implies a living organism. But not just an ordinary organism. It has no heart, and no ethics, no moral discrimination, nor conscience. Simply stated, it is not even human. But it does have a nervous system, and a head and other connecting parts. Such that the town and its people serve as a connected living mass, affecting each other, and yet thriving on each in one way or another. Everything is known in the town and everything is monopolized and controlled by those who cooperate with each other jealously to serve as the head of the whole organism. But the additional meaning in this story is that the town equally serves to exploit others like Kino and his people. Anyone who goes there is an outsider, and the animal will treat him as such. All the parts of the animal will cooperate in one way or another to devour the outsider.


In a town, news spreads very quickly -- faster than anyone can even tell. La Paz was no different. Even before Kinos own fellow fishermen all knew about it, the news of the pearl was already in the animals mouths. Kino had found the Pearl of the World. But, as a devouring animal who preys on the smaller and weaker, the town feels that it too wants a share of the wealth of the pearl. Everyone there is now eager to get some of it, or all of it if it be possible. The town is like a scorpion now producing venom and getting ready to strike.


Naive and unaware of the potential for evil in great wealth, Kino and Juana have no idea whatsoever what their unusual discovery has unleashed, liberated. Jealousy, covetousness, desire, greed, and envy have all been set loose about the town. Why should an Indian possess such a marvel when it is only they who can have such things, think the townspeople. The animals appetite is voracious and now wants satisfaction. But Kino and Juana have any idea of what these people can do to get the pearl. They are simple people who have always been condescending and submissive, always giving in to the impositions of the powerful in the town. They do not know any better than to tell all of their discovery. Their simple and uncomplicated minds do not understand the existence of such evil as the one in the ambitious and greedy parts of the voracious animal. They will foolishly exhibit the pearl to all and any who wants to see it. They do not understand the evil that the pearl represents.


Kino sees in the pearl a church wedding for him and Juana, along with fine clothes for the three of them. He sees also a new and fine harpoon made of iron. Then he sees something which at first seems an impossibility but which later lingers in his mind. He sees a rifle, a Winchester carbine. Finally he sees an education for Coyotito. And as Kino told the fellow fishermen in his hut all theses dreams, for the first time in a long time, perhaps, Juana sees Kino with eyes of admiration. She wonders at the great strength which emanates from Kino as he shares his dreams with the villagers.


At first, after having discovered the great pearl, Kino hears the Song of the Pearl, merged, combined with the Song of the Family. When the priest enters into the story, Kino faintly hears the Song of Evil. He suspects of the priests pretensions and attitude, but finds it hard to believe anything evil could be involved with this man who traditionally holds strong influence over his people. Then this song grows stronger when the doctor arrives and almost drowns out and erases the Song of the Family. The doctor lies to Kino about Coyotitos situation and Kino begins to doubt his instincts and allows the doctor to malignantly cheat and deceive him and Juana by giving Coyotito an emetic, a vomiting agent, telling them that the baby will be attacked by the poison in an hour. Kino is still under the spell of ambition and desire. He does not ratify and accept the evil surrounding him and his family now.


After the fat doctor has gone, the sea is described by the author as the fat man sits at his home eating his supper. This time it is the little fish heard as the bigger fish try to eat them. The splashing of their attempts to escape can be heard by the villagers. In other words, everyone will now watch as the town tries to get at Kinos great pearl.Top


An hour or so later, Coyotito really becomes ill , and the first thing Kino believes is that the doctor was right about the scorpions poison. The doctor reenters and pretends to cure Coyotito with ammonia drops in water, but Kino is suspicious of him. When pressed by the fat man for his payment, Kino instinctively looks towards the spot in his hut where the pearl is buried. The doctor now knows where it is, and the scene is set for the oncoming events and tragedies.


When a thief attempts to steal the pearl, Kino is described as he defends his home and the pearl in complete darkness. Never is the thief seen directly by him for there is no light within. Kino is struck on the head by the thief, but he is unconcerned by it. Juana now realizes what has been building inside her is fear. She realizes it is the fear that this great pearl is a source of evil because of the desire it has awakened in the people surrounding them. She tells Kino of the evil that it has brought and describes it as a great sin which should be got rid of immediately. But, Kino is determined now more than ever that the pearl will change their condition and status in the community. He sets himself against the will of the townspeople. It is now also a question of his prideful will against the poisonous will of the town scorpion.


Since the pearl buyers all work for only one man, they will not make any personal profit from the purchase of a great pearl such as Kinos. Yet, they are authentically excited about getting their hands on it. Symbolically here, they are excited about participating in the symbolic hunt to see who gets the prize -- indeed, who gets the quarry. They receive a certain kind of thrill or excitement from the negotiating and bargaining, from the arguing over the price. Seeing who gets the best of the other is what motivates their actions. Getting the greatest pearl for the lowest price possible is now beyond a simple thrill. Escaping from one to the other of the buyers, it almost seems like a mouse trying to get away from the hungry felines. Kino feels thus and decides he is being cheated, for they have agreed not to push up their price.


Even though Kino had been careful to tilt his hat forward in sign of confidence and aggressiveness, it did no good against the conspiracy awaiting him in the town. Before this, the villagers had attempted to pool their pearls together to give to agents representing them. The idea had been to have the agents sell them at the capital for much more than in the town, but the agents had never returned. As Kino walks with Juan Tom s (his brother) to the pearl buyers, they both squint their eyes, just as their grandfathers and great grandfathers had done 400 years before. This simple technique was their only defense against higher authority. It was a sign of defiance of that authority and an attempt to reclaim some of their own. With this defensive physical action they felt better provided for the defense of their rights and interests.


Until this day Kino has marveled at the beauty of the pearl, but he is shocked at its grotesqueness when he looks at it under the magnifying glass offered him by one of the buyers. This is the beginning of its detriment in Kinos eyes, for it will become even uglier later on. The pearl buyers attempt to cheat Kino by trying to convince him the great pearl is nothing but a monstrosity or curiosity. But he returns to his hut greatly bothered. He feels that they are attempting to cheat him out of Coyotitos education and prosperity. He is bothered chiefly also because he has lost his world, but he has failed in achieving another. He is also afraid, afraid of the monstrous capital where he must now go if he should sell the pearl for a more reasonable price. As he stands by the entrance to his hut he can sense the evil lurking out there, waiting to steal the pearl and Coyotitos education from him. But he will not let them. And as Juana quietly watches him, she contributes to his cause by remaining silent and close to him. Next to his side, Juana is courageous by encountering the Song of Evil with her own Song of the Family as she holds the tender baby in her arms. Yet, as Kino announces his determination to go to the capital, Juana tells him the pearl may even get a man killed, and she suggests to throw the pearl back into the sea. Kino tells her to hush, and reminds her that he is a man.


The following morning just before dawn Juana rushes out of the hut in an attempt to throw the pearl back into the sea, but Kino stops her just in time and strikes her and kicks her on the side as she lays on the ground by the shore. Juana remembers that he is a man, brave and aggressive, and resigns to what has happened, knowing also that she is just a woman and in need of a man. Yet, the truth is that their relationship is deteriorating, to the point where she has dared to defy Kinos authority and where he has dared to inflict violence and brutality on her.


Juana believes that men are half madmen and half a god. Men are motivated by courage, reckless pride, and honor. Juana is herself quite courageous but more reasonably so. She acts out of concern for Kino and their son, and she makes decisions intuitively and instinctively. Yet, she serves as a source from which Kino draws strength and courage at times.


Returning to the hut herself, Juana finds the pearl behind a stone, glittering in the momentary moonlight, for all was still very dark. Then she finds two figures on the sand. One is a dead man and the other is the unconscious Kino. As he had returned to their hut, Kino had been attacked another time by thieves seeking the pearl. In his defense, Kino had slashed his knife out and killed one of the attackers by cutting his throat open. Juana now realizes that they must leave. It will do no good to try to save themselves by explaining the death was caused in self-defense. But Juana also realizes that their happy, normal way of life has all been lost.


Kino agrees after her persuasion and decides to get the canoe ready, but is enraged when he sees it had been previously damaged by the thieves. It had a great hole at the bottom of it. He is enraged because he feels that the murder of a boat is less than of a man since a boat has no way of protecting itself. But the truth is that Kino realizes they have shattered his heritage, his inheritance from father to son -- they have shattered his past, present, and future. Indeed, they have also shattered part of himself.


So reverent is Kino of something so personal as a canoe, that he does not even think of taking one of his neighbors canoes. Things again might have turned out differently if they had done so.


As Kino turns from the beach to return to his hut, he suddenly realizes there is a devouring fire burning down their hut. Juana rushes to him with the baby in her arms and says the dark ones set fire to the place while she was still in it. [It is interesting to notice in the novel how Steinbeck, along with all the other extremes, manipulates and exploits the light with the dark. In this part of the story, everything is darkness and they can barely make out the things happening in fragments. The figures of the men marauding their place inclusive are only dark figures. There is never any identity involved. It is anyone and at the same time everyone from the town. No one is to be trusted, and all are to be feared as a source of impending destruction.]Top


As Kino and Juana quickly move away from their flaming brush hut, they seek shelter in Juan Tom ss place, where they find Apolonia, Kinos sister-in-law. There they find refuge until evening time comes around, time for them to flee. Juan Tom s contributes to their safety by diverting the neighbors attention with stories of Kinos flight to the south, and at the same he asks to borrow things that Kino will need some beans; rice; and a long eighteen-inch knife. Kino tells his brother that now he must keep the pearl more than ever because it is now his misfortune -- indeed it has even become his soul. Meanwhile, the winds of the day which have made it unsafe for the boats to go out have also foreshadowed the impending danger and tragedy of the story. Additionally, the same winds will favor Kinos flight because they will erase the familys tracks, making it difficult for anyone to pursue them.


When they first set out to escape the evil of the great scorpion, the society of people they now fear, Kino hears a triumphant Song of the Pearl, again mixed with the Song of the Family. But then later when he looks at the pearl, the music suddenly becomes sinister and menacing. In the pearl he looks for his rifle and instead sees the dead body of the man he killed; and instead of a church wedding he sees Juana, beaten and dragging herself home; and instead of an education for Coyotito, he now sees the babys feverish face. Yes, the song has become threatening now.


Then, as he sleeps in the thin shade of the brush, for the weather here is hot and dry, Kino suddenly awakens as if fighting with someone. Juana says it was only a dream. But Kinos awakened primitive instincts, like those of a hunted animal, lead him to see in the distance the figures of the three men following him. One of them, the rich controller of pearls, is on horseback, while the other two are bent to the ground searching for traces of Kino and his family. It is interesting to note how Kinos wilder instincts have resurged and now come into play -- thus also making him more equal with his pursuers. In the town he was totally underneath, so to speak; but here, in the wild of the desert and in flight from his pursuers, Kino has been raised to a certain equality by the awakening of his instincts and more savage heritage. The trackers are expert in finding their prey, he realizes. These are the trackers from inland where there is little to eat, unless they learn to track down their prey. But now, he and his family are the prey. The music of evil grows stronger still as the trackers approach. It becomes secretive and poisonous as his pounding heart gives it rhythm.


The trackers come up to the very bush where Kino is hiding, but then they continue moving ahead on the road Kino has been using to move north. Now Kino is in a panic and decides to move away from the road and into the mountains. But his fear makes him consider giving up, to which Juana reacts with objective reality, telling him the men would kill him in any event. Sure that the trackers will eventually find their tracks, Kino does not even bother now to try to erase them. They must get to safety first, and head for the mountains. The music of evil sang loud in Kinos head now.


On their way, Kino proposes he go on by himself and Juana and the baby hide, but Juana refuses to leave him since they must stay together. Juanas courage motivates Kino again and gives him new strength. He intelligently zigzags and leads an irregular path, so as to confuse the trackers and make them lose time.


By the time the sun is going down, they come to a pool where water falls from the mountain top. They stop to cool down and quench their thirst. Then Kino spots the two experts far into the distance and realizes they will be there by nightfall. After examining the terrain, Kino finds a series of small erosion caves only thirty feet above. They were very shallow, but he found one they could use. The trick now was to remain ever so quiet when the trackers got there. The baby had to remain silent, too.


By sundown the three men were there by the place where Kino and his family had been. They noticed the tracks leading up to the next bank on the mountainside that Kino had purposely left, and decided to camp here below. At night Kino decided that the best thing to do was to get the man with the rifle first, and then he could deal with the other two. The night was dark and the moon had not come out yet. As Kino crawls slowly downward, and as he prepares to attack, the music of the enemy almost disappears, and in its place, the Song of the Family becomes fierce and sharp driving him down on the dark enemy courageously.


The hand of fate comes into plain view now. As Kino is close to the watcher and ready to spring into feline action, there is suddenly a cry from above, exactly from where Coyotito and Juana are hiding. The man with the rifle turns and one of the others says it could be a mother coyote with her pup. An amazing symbol used by the author here. The man aims to shoot towards the cave as Kino jumps into action. Kino kills the man with the long blade in his feline hands, but not before the man is able to fire the rifle. Then he deliberately strikes the head of the second man with the rifle itself and then deliberately aims at and deliberately shoots the third man. He finishes him off by deliberately shooting him between the eyes. [It is interesting how Steinbeck here contrasts the first killing with these. The first was unintentional and in self-defense, but now it is entirely deliberate and purposeful.]Top


The conclusion to the story is interesting in many regards. The novel had opened up with the beginning of a new day. Now, Juana and Kino come back to the town when the sun is about to set. Juana no longer follows Kino as was their usual habit and custom. Now, Juana and Kino walk side by side. There is change in both of them -- this can clearly be seen. They are now partners in life -- partners in death. Coyotito is dead, as his little body is limp in Juanas shawl and on her back. They are now united in death by the very death of Coyotito, who had been killed by the bullet that was aimed at an unseen coyote in the darkness of the night. Kino and Juana both walk into the town withdrawn from reality and from living experience, for they have suffered the greatest loss any man or woman could possibly experience. The fatigue and the emptiness on their faces seems almost magical to the townspeople. In Kinos ears the Song of the Family was as fierce as a cry. It had now become his battle cry. His and Juanas world had been totally destroyed now. The union that once was, with Coyotito, is no longer. The world had become totally blurred to them. They saw nothing. No town, no people, not a single thing. There was only one mission left in their wearied minds. They were headed for the place where it all began. They were headed for the beach of that great ocean.


Once they had reached the waters edge, Kino took out the pearl and looked on its surface once again. But this time it was no longer beautiful. It was gray and ulcerous ... like a malignant growth. And in it he saw the light of burning fire; the terrified eyes of the man at the pool; Coyotito lying in the cave with the top of his head shot away. The music and the song which it emitted was now distorted and insane. Kino took it and flung it with all his might into the distance of the ocean under the setting sun.


Juana


Juana is Kinos wife, his helpmate, his strength, and his anchor.


Juana is the perfect wife, who considers her husband to be the most


important person in her life. She always is awake before her


husband in order to prepare his breakfast, tend to their child, and


look after her family with total devotion. She is loyal,


hardworking, strong, uncomplaining, and almost subservient in


carrying out her domestic duties. When tragedy strikes, she is


levelheaded. When the scorpion bites Coyotito, Juana takes charge


of the situation and hustles her husband and child to the doctor.


When her husband is attacked the first time by people seeking his


pearl, she realizes the destructive powers surrounding the pearl and


suggests that Kino get rid of it. When he is attacked the second


time, she takes matters into her own hands, finds the pearl, and


attempts to toss it back into the gulf. Her effort is stopped by Kino,


who seizes the pearl from her and in a rage, strikes her to the


ground and kicks her. She accepts the punishment in a sheepish


manner, for she has never needed to stand up to her husband


before. But when he punishes her, she accepts that the pearl is now


part of their existence.


Juana, like the other Indian folk, is quite superstitious. When the


scorpion bites her son, she offers incantations to the gods that


ironically ends with a Hail Mary. When Kino comes out of the


water with the oysters, she persuades him not to open the biggest


one first, for it might seem that they are too eager and, thus,


displease the gods. But Juana uses her primitive knowledge to the


advantage of the family. When Coyotito is bitten by the scorpion,


she places a poultice on his shoulder to help the swelling abate.


When the evil forces attack her husband, she knows how to clean


his wounds and gives him a soothing native drink.


Juanas courage, loyalty, determination, innate ability, and strength


make her an interesting character and wonderful wife for Kino.


•KINO


Kino is an honest, dignified pearl diver who works hard to support his family. He is a simple and natural being who functions well in the traditional ways of the village. Kino is conscious of his poverty and knows that money could buy things he lacks. He hopes to find a pearl that will guarantee him future peace. Like most human beings, he wants to get ahead.


Kino depends on nature for his income. When the waters are rough, he cannot go diving. When the sun sets, his workday ends. The discovery of a great pearl changes Kinos life. The man who usually hears the Song of the Family- the harmonious, soothing message that all is well in life- begins to hear the voice of suspicion, the sounds of danger- the Song of Evil. This song is really a powerful internal voice that he hears when danger arises, which links him to his ancestors as a sort of built-in protection against death. It is Steinbecks poetic way of referring to Kinos survival instinct.


On the other hand, Kinos intelligence and growth in social awareness help him realize that he and other Indians have been exploited by the rich and powerful. At first, instinctively, he senses the danger with the doctor and pearl buyers, but it is only after his brutal encounter with the trackers that he becomes aware of the extent of this exploitation. He comes to realize that human beings will kill in order to gain money and power.


As Kino moves away from his natural habitat, he becomes isolated. With the pearl in hand, he marches toward the city- a symbolic move toward a more complex civilization- in his belief that he can deal with civilized people. He lays claim to the benefits of civilization- power, money, an education for Coyotito- but soon realizes, when pursued by the trackers, that he is a victim of the very society in which he hopes to earn a profit. Some readers believe that Kino brings about his own downfall by going against the forces of nature. What do you think Kino should (or could) have done with the pearl? What do you think the end results would have been?


Kino loses more than his social innocence in the novel. He learns that he, too, can kill to protect his chance for wealth and power.


If the characters in The Pearl are symbols, what does Kino symbolize? Some readers say that Kino is the exploited but innocent man who loses his innocence when he tries to venture beyond his social boundaries. Others see Kino as the symbol of an honest, hard-working man destroyed by greed. Still others see him as a man unable to escape his fate.


•JUANA


Juanas relationship to Kino, her husband, is made clear in the first chapter of The Pearl. She is a loving and devoted wife, the stabilizing force in Kinos life. At first you may see her simply as subservient. But Juana has great inner strength and determination. For example, when Coyotito is bitten by the scorpion, Juana acts immediately and sucks out the poison. She also insists that they see the doctor- an unheard of event in the village.


Juana has a strong survival instinct where her family is concerned. When the doctor refuses to treat the baby, Kino responds by ineffectually punching the gate; Juana puts a seaweed poultice on the babys shoulder. She responds with the same kind of direct action when she decides that the pearl is a threat to her family. She tries to throw it back in the sea.


If you are trying to decide what each character represents, you could say that Juana represents the integrity of a simple way of life. Throughout The Pearl, Juana appears to be in tune with nature and aware of what will save her family. Unlike Kino, who dreams of a new life, Juana does not believe in pursuing the unattainable.


1.One of the most important themes in The Pearl is that of Kino and Juanas struggle for survival. Even though their way of life may differ from yours, it contains the same kinds of struggles that everyone faces at some time- the struggle for food and shelter, and the struggle to fight off attacks from nature (the scorpion) and from other human beings, who burn their hut, destroy their canoe, hunt them down, and kill their child.


.Some people believe that human beings are never really free, because the course of their lives is determined by outside forces. Others insist that each persons life is formed by a series of choices.


Some aspects of Kinos life are, of course, determined for him. His race and social status are two examples. But other elements are the direct result of his actions- his determination to keep the pearl, his decision to go to the capital, and so on. Are Kinos decisions made freely, of his own accord, or are they based on factors beyond his control?


What does the end of Kinos story say about his ability to control his destiny? Is the finding of the pearl a quirk of fate? Without it, would Kino have any choices to make? All these questions may help you think about the role of choice in your own life, as well as Kinos.


More than anything, Kino wants money so that he can pay for his sons education, purchase a rifle, and provide economic security for his family. But Kino never has the chance to find out if money buys happiness. Instead, he learns that the pearl is more of a curse than he can handle. The pearl, like an evil magnet, attracts a host of greedy people, and the only way for Kino to escape these people is to get rid of the object they seek. Kino discovers that wealth and good fortune are beyond his reach.


The critical situation that Kinos family faces is significant to show the great importance of the fortune that Kino will receive, for it provides not only the possibility of material goods but may buy the life of his child. Kinos encounter with the doctor sharply illustrates this, as the doctor essentially allows Coyotito to die because Kino cannot pay for treatment.


Please note that this sample paper on Kino analys is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Kino analys, we are here to assist you.Your persuasive essay on Kino analys will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.


Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!


Friday, August 23, 2019

Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America

If you order your research paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America paper right on time.


Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America paper at affordable prices!


The difference between mad people and sane people, Brave Orchid explained to the children, is that sane people have variety when they talk-story. Mad people have only one story that they talk over and over. -Maxine Hong Kingston, The Woman Warrior Memoirs of a Girlhood among Ghosts, p. 184


In 17, a new publishing house with the brave name of The Feminist Press reprinted in a slim volume Charlotte Perkins Gilmans The Yellow Wallpaper, first published in 18 and out of print for half a century. It is the story of an unnamed woman confined by her doctor-husband to an attic nursery with barred windows and a bolted-down bed. Forbidden to write, the narrator-protagonist becomes obsessed with the rooms wallpaper, which she finds first repellent and then riveting; on its chaotic surface she eventually deciphers an imprisoned woman whom she attempts to liberate by peeling the paper off the wall. This brilliant tale of a white, middle-class wife driven mad by a patriarchy con- trolling herfor her own goodhas become an American feminist classic; in 187, the Feminist Press edition numbered among the ten best-selling works of fiction published by a university press.


The canonization of The Yellow Wallpaper is an obvious sign of the degree to which contemporary feminism has transformed the study of literature. But Gilmans story is not simply one to which feminists have applied ourselves; it is one of the texts through which white, American academic feminist criticism has constituted its terms. My purpose here is to take stock of this criticism through the legacy of The Yellow Wallpaper in order to honor the work each has fostered and to call into question the status of Gilmans story-and the story of academic feminist criticism-as sacred texts. In this process I am working from the inside, challenging my own reading of The Yellow Wallpaper, which had deepened but not changed direction since 17.


Buy custom Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America term paper


My inquiry will make explicit use of six well-known studies of The Yellow Wallpaper, but I consider these six to articulate an interpretation shared by a much larger feminist community. The pieces I have in mind are written by Elaine Hedges, Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar, Annette Kolodny, Jean Kennard, Paula Treichler, and Judith Fetterley, respectively, and their publication dates span from 17 to 186. Reading these essays as a body, I am struck by a coherence that testifies to a profound unity in white, American feminist criticism across apparent diversity.5 That is, although Hedges is concerned primarily with biography, Gilbert and Gubar with female authorship, Treichler with textual form, and Fetterley, Kolodny, and Kennard with interpretation, and although each discussion illuminates the text in certain unique ways, the six readings are almost wholly compatible, with one point of difference which is never identified as such and to which I will return. I will also return later to the significance of this redundancy and to the curiously unchallenged, routine elision from nearly all the discussion of one of the storys key tropes. The theoretical positions that The Yellow Wallpaper helped to shape and perhaps reify may be clearer if we recall some of the critical claims with which U.S. academic feminist criticism began. In the late sixties and early seventies, some academic women, most of them trained in Anglo-American methods and texts, began to take a new look at those works by men and a few white women that comprised the standard curriculum. The earliest scholarship-Kathryn Rogers The Troublesome Helpmate {166), Mary Ellmanns Thinking About Women {168), Kate Milletts Sexual Politics (170), Elaine Showalters Women Writers and the Double Standard (in Women in Sexist Society, 171)-was asserting against prevailing New Critical neutralities that literature is deeply political, indeed steeped in (patriarchal) ideology. Ideology , feminists argued, makes what is cultural seem natural and inevitable, and what had come to seem natural and inevitable to literary studies was that its own methods and great books transcended ideology.6 This conception of literature as a privileged medium for universal truths was defended by the counterclaim that those who found a works content disturbing or offensive were letting their biases distract them from the aesthetic of literature.7 Feminist criticism was bound to challenge this marginalization of social content and to argue that literary works both reflect and constitute structures of gender and power. In making this challenge, feminist criticism was implying that canonical literature was not simply mimesis, a mirror of the way things are or the way men and women are, but semiosis-a complex system of conventional (androcentric) tropes. And by questioning the premises of the discipline, feminists were of course arguing that criticism, too, is political, that no methodology is neutral, and that literary practice is shaped by cultural imperatives to serve particular ends.8 Although the word deconstruction was not yet in currency, these feminist premises inaugurated the first major opposition to both (old) scholarly and (New) critical practices, generating what has become the most widespread de- constructive imperative in the American academy. Yet the feminist project involved, as Gayle Greene and Coppelia Kahn have put it, not onlydeconstructing dominant male patterns of thought and social practice but also reconstructing female experience previously hidden or overlooked.


In the early 170s, the rediscovery of lost works like The Yellow Wallpaper, Kate Chopins The Awakening, and Susan GlaspellsA Jury of Her Peers offered not only welcome respite from unladylike assaults on patriarchal practices and from discouraging expositions of androcentric I/images of women in literature but also an exhilarating basis for reconstructing literary theory and literary history .The fact that these works which feminists now found so exciting and powerful had been denounced, ignored, or suppressed seemed virtual proof of the claim that literature, criticism, and history were political. The editor of the Atlantic Monthly had rejected The Yellow Wallpaper because I could not for- give myself if I made others as miserable as I have made myself!10 Even when William Dean Howells reprinted Gilmans story in 10 he wrote that it was terrible and too wholly dire, too terribly good to be printed.Feminists could argue convincingly that Gilmans contemporaries, schooled on the I/terrible and I/wholly dire tales of Poe, were surely balking at something more particular the I/graphic representation of raving lunacy in a middle-class mother and wife that revealed the rage of the woman on a pedestal.


As a tale openly preoccupied with questions of authorship, interpretation, and textuality, The Yellow Wallpaper quickly assumed a place of privilege among rediscovered feminist works, raising basic questions about writing and reading as gendered practices. The narrators double-voiced discourse-the ironic understatements, asides, hedges, and negations through which she asserts herself against the power of Johns voice-came for some critics to represent womens language or the language of the powerless. With its discontinuities and staccato paragraphs, Gilmans narrative raised the controversial question of a female aesthetic; and the lame uncertain curves, outrageous angles, and unheard of contradictions of the wallpaper came for many critics to symbolize both Gilmans text and, by extension, the particularity of female form. The story also challenged theories of genius that denied the material conditions-social, economic, psychological and literary-that make writing (im)possible, helping feminists to turn questions like I/Where is your Shakespeare? back upon the questioners. Gilbert and Gubar, for example, saw in the narrators struggles against censorship the story that all literary women would tell if they could speak their speechless woe. 1/15The Yellow Wallpaper has been evoked most frequently, however, to the- ~~ orize about reading through the lens of a female consciousness. Gilmans story ~ has been a particularly congenial medium for such a revision not only because ~ the narrator herself engages in a form of feminist interpretation when she tries to r read the paper on her wall but also because turn-of-the-century readers seem to J have ignored or avoided the connection between the narrators condition and patriarchal politics, instead praising the story for its keenly accurate case study of a presumably inherited insanity. In the contemporary feminist reading, on the other hand, sexual oppression is evident from the start the phrase John says 1 heads a litany of benevolent prescriptions that keep the narrator infantilized, immobilized, and bored literally out of her mind. Reading or writing her self upon the wallpaper allows the narrator, as Paula Treichler puts it, to escape her husbands sentence/ and to achieve the limited freedom of madness which, virtually all these critics have agreed, constitutes a kind of sanity in the face of the in- sanity of male dominance.


This reading not only recuperated The Yellow Wallpaper as a feminist text but also reconstituted the terms of interpretation itself. Annette Kolodny theorized that emerging feminist consciousness made possible a new, female-centered interpretive paradigm that did not exist for male critics at the turn of the century. Defining that paradigm more specifically, Jean Kennard maintained that the circulation of feminist conventions associated with four particular concepts- patriarchy, madness, space, quest - virtually ensured the reading that took place in the 170s. Furthermore, the premise that we engage not texts but paradigms, as Kolodny puts it in another essay, explodes the belief that we are reading what is there. Reading becomes the product of those conventions or strategies we have learned through an interpretive community - Stanley Fishs term to which Kolodny and Kennard give political force; to read is to reproduce a text according to this learned system or code.


These gender-based and openly ideological theories presented a radical challenge to an academic community in which close reading has remained the predominant critical act. A theory of meaning grounded in the politics of reading destabilizes assumptions of interpretive validity and shifts the emphasis to the contexts in which meanings are produced. A text like The Yellow Wallpaper showed that to the extent that we remain unaware of our interpretive conventions, it is difficult to distinguish what we read from how we have learned to read it." We experience meaning as given in the text itself." When alternative paradigms inform our reading, we are able to read texts differently or, to put it more strongly, to read different texts. This means that traditional works may be transformed through different interpretive strategies into new literature just as patriarchys terrible and repellent Yellow Wallpaper was dramatically transformed into feminisms endlessly fascinating tale.


It is, I believe, this powerful theoretical achievement occasioned by The Yellow Wallpaper that has led so much critical writing on the story to a triumphant conclusion despite the narrators own unhappy fate. I have found it striking that discussions of the text so frequently end by distinguishing the doomed and mad narrator, who could not write her way out of the patriarchal prison-house, from the sane survivor Charlotte Perkins Gilman, who could. The crucial shift from narrator to author, from story to text, may also serve to wrest readers from an unacknowledged over-identification with the narrator-protagonist. For just as the narrators initial horror at the wallpaper is mirrored in the earlier critics horror at Gilmans text, so now-traditional feminist re-readings may be reproducing the narrators next move her relentless pursuit of a single meaning on the wall. I want to go further still and suggest that feminist criticisms own persistent return to the Wallpaper-indeed, to specific aspects of the Wallpaper-signifies a somewhat uncomfortable need to isolate and validate a particular female experience, a particular relationship between reader and writer, and a particular notion of subjectivity as bases for the writing and reading of (womens) texts. Fully acknowledging the necessity of the feminist reading of The Yellow Wallpaper which I too have produced and perpetuated for many years, I now wonder whether many of us have repeated the gesture of the narrator who will follow that pointless pattern to some sort of conclusion (p. 1)-who will read until she finds what she is looking for-no less and no more. Although-or because-we have read The Yellow Wallpaper over and over, we may have stopped short, and our readings, like the narrators, may have reduced the texts complexity to what we need most our own image reflected back to us.


Let me return to the narrators reading of the paper in order to clarify this claim. The narrator is faced with an unreadable text, a text for which none of her interpretive strategies is adequate. At first she is confounded by its contradictory style it is flamboyant and pronounced, yet also lame, uncertain, and dull (p. 1). Then she notices different constructions in different places. In one recurrent spot the pattern lolls, in another place two breadths didnt match, and elsewhere the pattern is tom off (p. 16). She tries to organize the paper geo- metrically but cannot grasp its laws it is marked vertically by bloated curves and flourishes, diagonally by slanting waves of optic horror like a lot of wallowing seaweeds in full chase, and horizontally by an order she cannot even figure out. There is even a centrifugal pattern in which the interminable grotesques seem to form around a common centre and rush off in headlong plunges of equal distraction (p. 0). Still later, she notices that the paper changes and moves ac- cording to different kinds of light (p. 5). And it has a color and smell that she is never able to account for. But from all this indecipherability , from this immensely complicated text, the narrator-by night, no less-finally discerns a single image, a woman behind bars, which she then expands to represent the whole. This is hardly a matter of correct reading, then, but of fixing and reducing possibilities, finding a space of text on which she can locate whatever self-projection will enable her to move from John says to I want. The very excess of description of the wallpaper, and the fact that it continues after the narrator has first identified the woman behind the bars, actually foregrounds the seductiveness of her interpretive act. And if the narrator, having liberated the paper woman, can only imagine tying her up again, is it possible that our reading too has freed us momentarily only to bind us once more?


Most feminist analyses of The Yellow Wallpaper have in fact recognized this bind without pursuing it. Gilbert and Gubar see the paper as otherwise incomprehensible hieroglyphics onto which the narrator projects her own passion for escape.1 Treichler notes that the wallpaper remains indeterminate, complex, unresolved, disturbing.0 Even Fetterley, who seems least to question the narrators enterprise, speaks of the narrators need to impose order on the impertinence of row after row of unmatched breadths.1 Kolodny implicates all critical practice when she says that the narrator obsessively and jealously emphasiz[es] one section of the pattern while repressing others, reorganiz[es] and , regroup[s] past impressions into newer, more fully realized configurations--as one might with any complex formal text. And Kennard states openly that much , more goes on in both the wallpaper and the story than is present in the standard account and that the feminist reading of The Yellow Wallpaper is far from the final and correct one that replaces the patriarchal misreading once and for all. Still, Kennards position in 181 was that despite all these objections ...it is the feminist reading I teach my students and which I believe is the most fruitful; although suggesting that a new interpretive community might read this and other stories differently, she declined to pursue the possibility on grounds of insufficient space-a term that evokes the narrators own confinement. In light of these more-or-less conscious recognitions that the wallpaper remains incompletely read, the redundancy of feminist readings of Gilmans story might well constitute the return of the repressed.


I want to suggest that this repressed possibility of another reading reveals larger contradictions in white, academic feminist theories and practices. Earlier I named as the two basic gestures of U .S. feminist criticismdeconstructing dominant male patterns of thought and social practice and reconstructing female experience previously hidden or overlooked. This formulation posits as oppositional an essentially false and problematic male system beneath which essentially true and unproblematic female essences can be recovered-just as the figure of the woman can presumably be recovered from beneath the patriarchal pattern on Gilmans narrators wall (a presumption to which I will return). In designating gender as the foundation for two very different critical activities, feminist criticism has embraced contradictory theories of literature, proceeding as if mens writings were ideological sign systems and womens writings were representations of truth, reading mens or masculinist texts with resistance and womens or feminist texts with empathy. If, however, we acknowledge the participation of women writers and readers indominant. ..patterns of thought and social practice, then perhaps our own patterns must also be deconstructed if we are to recover meanings still hidden or overlooked. We would then have to apply even to feminist texts and theories the premises I described earlier that literature and criticism are collusive with ideology , that texts are sign systems rather than simple mirrors, that authors cannot guarantee their meanings, that interpretation is dependent on a critical community , and that our own literary histories are also fictional. The consequent rereading of texts like The Yellow Wall- paper might, in turn, alter our critical premises.


It is understandably difficult to imagine deconstructing something one has experienced as a radically reconstructive enterprise. This may be one reason- though other reasons suggest more disturbing complicities-why many of us have often accepted in principle but ignored in practice the deconstructive challenges that have emerged from within feminism itself. Some of the most radical of these challenges have come from women of color, poor women, and lesbians, frequently with primary allegiances outside the university , who have exposed in what has passed for feminist criticism blindnesses as serious as those to which feminism was objecting. In 177, for example, Barbara Smith identified racism in some of the writings on which feminist criticism had been founded; in 180, Alice Walker told the National Womens Studies Association of her inability to convince the author of The Female Imagination to consider the imaginations of women who are Black; in 178, Judy Grahn noted the scathing letters the Womens Press Collective received when it published Sharon Isabells Yesterdays Lessons without standardizing the English for a middle-class readership; at the 176 Modern Language Association meetings and later in Signs, Adrienne Rich pointed to the erasure of lesbian identity from feminist classrooms even when the writers being taught were in fact lesbians; in the early 180s, collections like This Bridge Called My Back Writings by Radical Women of Color and Nice Jewish Girls A Lesbian An- thology insisted that not all American writers are Black or white; they are also Latina, Asian, Arab, Jewish, Indian.4


The suppression of difference has affected the critical canon as well. In 180, for example, Feminist Studies published Annette Kolodnys groundbreaking Dancing Through the Minefield Some Observations on the Theory, Practice, and Politics of a Feminist Literary Criticism to which my own elucidation of feminist premises owes a considerable and respectful debt. In Fall 18, Feminist Stud- ies published three responses to Kolodny, criticizing the essay not only for classism, racism, and homophobia in the selection and use of womens texts but also for perpetuating patriarchal academic values and methodologies. One respondent, Elly Bulkin, identified as a crucial problem the very social and ethical is- sue of which women get published by whom and why-of what even gets recog- nized as feminist literary criticism.5 Bulkin might have been speaking prophetically, because none of the three responses was included when Dancing Through the Minefieldwas anthologized.6


All these challenges occurred during the same years in which the standard feminist reading of The Yellow Wallpaper was produced and reproduced. Yet none of us seems to have noticed that virtually all feminist discourse on The Yellow Wallpaper has come from white academics and that it has failed to question the storys status as a universal womans text. A feminist criticism willing to deconstruct its own practices would re-examine our exclusive reading of The Yellow Wallpaper, rethink the implications of its canonization, and acknowledge both the texts position in ideology and our own. That a hard look at feminisms Yellow Wallpaper is now possible is already evident by the publication in 186 of separate essays by Janice Haney-Peritz and Mary Jacobus which use psycho- analytic theory to expose the limits of both the narrators and feminist criticisms interpretive acts.7 I believe we have also entered a moment not only of historical possibility but of historical urgency to stop reading a privileged, white, New England womans text as simply-a womans text. If our traditional gesture has been to repeat the narrators own act of underreading, of seeing too little, I want now to risk overreading, seeing perhaps too much. My reading will make use of textual details that traditional feminist interpretations have tended to ignore, but I do not propose it as a coherent or final reading; I believe no such reading is either possible or desirable and that one important message of The Yellow Wa1l- paper is precisely that. At the same time, I concur with Chris Weedon when she insists that meanings, however provisional, have real effects.8


One way back to The Yellow Wallpaper is through the yellow wallpaper itself through what I mentioned earlier as the point of difference and the point of silence in the feminist interpretations I have been discussing here. I begin with the difference that occurs within and among otherwise consistent readings when critics try to identify just whose text or what kind of text the wallpaper represents. For Hedges and for Gilbert and Gubar, the wallpaper signifies the oppressive situation in which the woman finds herself; for Kolodny the paper is the narrators own psyche writ large; for Treichler it is a paradigm of womens writing; and for Fetterley it is the husbands patriarchal text which, however, becomes increasingly feminine in form. Haney-Peritz alone confronts the contradiction, seeing the wallpaper as both Johns and his wifes discourse, because the narrator relies on the very binary oppositions that structure Johns text. It seems, then, that just as it is impossible for the narrator to get that top pat- tern ...off from the under one (p. 1), so it is impossible to separate the text of a culture from the text of an individual, to free female subjectivity from the patriarchal text. Far from being antitheses, the patriarchal text and the womans text are in some sense one. And if the narrators text is also the text of her culture, then it is no wonder that the wallpaper exceeds her ability to decipher it. If, in- stead of grasping as she does for the single familiar and self-confirming figure in the text, we understand the wallpaper as a pastiche of disturbed and conflicting discourses, then perhaps the wallpapers chaos represents what the narrator (and we ourselves) must refuse in order to construct the singular figure of the woman behind bars the foreign and alien images that threaten to knock [her] down, and trample upon [her] (p. 5), images that as a white, middle-class woman of limited consciousness she may neither want nor know how to read. In avoiding certain meanings while liberating others from the text, in struggling for the illusion of a fully conscious knowing, unified, rational subject,0 is the narrator going mad not only from confinement, or from the effort to interpret, but also from the effort to repress? In this case, are those of us who reproduce the narrators reading also attempting to constitute an essential female subject by shutting aside textual meanings that expose feminisms own precarious and conflicted identity? If the narrator is reading in the paper the text of her own unconscious, an unconscious chaotic with unspeakable fears and desires, is not the unconscious, by the very nature of ideology, political? If we accept the culturally contingent and incomplete nature of readings guaranteed only by the narrators consciousness, then perhaps we can find in the yellow wallpaper, to literalize a metaphor of Adrienne Rich, a whole new psychic geography to be explored.1 For in privileging the questions of reading and writing as essential woman questions, feminist criticism has been led to the paper t while suppressing the politically charged adjective that colors it. If we locate Gilmans story within the psychic geography of Anglo-America at the turn of the century, we locate it in a culture obsessively preoccupied with race as the r foundation of character, a culture desperate to maintain Aryan superiority in theface of massive immigrations from Southern and Eastern Europe, a culture openly anti-Semitic, anti-Asian, anti-Catholic, and Jim Crow. In New England, where E Gilman was born and raised, agricultural decline, native emigration, and soaring c immigrant birth rates had generated a distrust of the immigrant [that] reached ~ the proportions of a movement in the 1880s and 180s. In California, where Gilman lived while writing The Yellow Wallpaper, mass anxiety about the Yellow Peril had already yielded such legislation as the Chinese Exclusion Act of c 188. Across the United States, newly formed groups were calling for selective t breeding, restricted entry, andAmerican Protection of various kinds. White, Christian, American-born intellectuals-novelists, political scientists, economists, sociologists, crusaders for social reform-not only shared this racial anxiety but, j as John Higham puts it, blazed the way for ordinary nativists by giving popular racism an intellectual respectability.4 These intellectual writings often justified the rejection and exclusion of immigrants in terms graphically physical. The immigrants were human garbage hirsute, low-browed, big-faced persons of obviously low mentality, oxlike men who belong in skins, in wattled huts at the close of the Great Ice age, ready to pollute America with non-Aryan elements. Owen Wisters popular Westerns were built on the premise that the eastern United States was being ruined by the debased and mongrel immigrants, encroaching alien vermin, that turn our cities to Babels and our citizenship to a hybrid farce, who degrade our commonwealth from a nation into something half pawn-shop, half brokers office. In the clean cattle country, on the other hand, one did not find many Poles or Huns or Russian Jews, because pioneering required particular Anglo- Saxon abilities. Jack London describes a Jewish character as yellow as a sick persimmon and laments Americas invasion by the dark-pigmented things, the half-castes, the mongrel-bloods. Frank Norris ridicules the halfbreed as an amorphous, formless mist and contrasts the kindness and delicacy of Anglo- Saxons with the hot, degenerated blood of the Spanish, Mexican, and Portuguese.5


Implicit or explicit in these descriptions is a new racial ideology through which newcomers from Europe could seem a fundamentally different order from what l were then called native Americans. The common nineteenth-century belief in three races-black, white, yellow--each linked to a specific continent, was reconstituted so that white came to mean only Nordic or Northern European, , while yellow applied not only to the Chinese, Japanese, and light-skinned , African-Americans but also to Jews, Poles, Hungarians, Italians, and even the Irish. Crusaders warned of yellow inundation. The California chapter of the Protestant white supremacist Junior Order of United American Mechanics teamed up with the Asiatic Exclusion League to proclaim that Southern Europeans were semi-Mongolian and should be excluded from immigration and citizenship on the same basis as the Chinese; Madison Grant declared Jews to be a Mongrel ad- mixture. ..of Slavs and of Asiatic invaders of Russia; and a member of Congress announced that the color of thousands of the new immigrants differs ) materially from that of the AngloSaxon. The greatest dangers were almost always traced back to Asia; in a dazzling conflation of enemies, for example, Grant warned that in the guise of Bolshevism with Semitic leadership and Chinese executioners, [Asia] is organizing an assault upon Western Europe. Lothrop Stoddard predicted that colored migration was yielding the very immediate danger that the white stocks may be swamped by Asiatic blood. Again and again, nativists announced that democracy simply will not work among Asiatics, that non-Aryans, especially Slavs, Italians, and Jews, were impossible to Americanize. The threat of Yellow Peril thus had racial implications much broader than anxiety about a takeover of Chinese or Japanese in every section, the Negro, the Oriental, and the Southern European appeared more and more in a common light.6 In such a cultural moment, yellow readily connoted inferiority, strangeness, cowardice, ugliness, and backwardness. Yellow-belly and yellow dog were common slurs, the former applied to groups as diverse as the Irish and the Mexicans. Associations of yellow with disease, cowardice, worthlessness, uncleanliness, and decay may also have become implicit associations of race and class.7


If The Yellow Wallpaper is read within this discourse of racial anxiety , certain of its tropes take on an obvious political charge. The very first sentence constructs the narrator in class terms, imagining an America in which, through democratic self-advancement, common (British) Americans can enjoy upper-class (British) privileges. Although the narrator and John are mere ordinary people and not the rightful heirs and coheirs, they have secureda colonial mansion, a hereditary estate, in whose queerness she takes pride (p. ); this house with its private wharf (p. 15) stands quite alone. ..well back from the road, quite three miles from the village like English places that you read about, for there are hedges and walls and gates that lock, and lots of separate little houses for the gardeners and people (p. 11). I am reminded by this description of another neglected gentlemans manor house that people read about-Thornfield-in which another merely ordinary woman little accustomed to grandeur comes to make her home. Charlotte Brontes Jane Eyre is given a room with gay blue chintz window curtains that resemble the pretty old-fashioned chintz hangings (p. 1) in the room Gilmans narrator wanted for herself; Jane is not banished to Thornfields third floor, where wide and heavy beds are surrounded by outlandish wall-hangings that portrayeffigies of strange flowers, and stranger birds, and strangest human beings,-all of which would have looked strange, indeed, by the pallid gleam of moonlight-and where, if Thornfield had ghosts, Jane tells us, these ghosts would haunt. Like Gilmans narrator, Jane longs for both the freedom to roam and the pleasures of human society, and her sole relief in those moments is to walk around the attic and look out at the vista of road and trees and rolling hills so much like the view the narrator describes from her nursery in the writing that is her own sole relief (pp. 10,1). It is from her attic perch that Jane feels so keenly that women, like men, need exercise for their faculties and suffer from too rigid a restraint,8 as in her attic Gilmans narrator lies on the great immovable bed (p. 1) and longs for company and exercise. But the permanent, imprisoned inhabitant of Thornfields attic is not Jane; she is a dark Creole woman who might well have been called yellow in Gilmans America. Is Gilmans narrator, who thought seriously of burning the house (p. ) imagining Bertha Masons fiery revenge? Does the figure in the paper with its foul, bad yellow color (p. 8), its strange, provoking, formless sort of figure (p. 18), its broken neck and bulbous eyes (p. 16), resemble Bertha with her bloated features and her discoloured face? Surely the narrators crawling about her room may recall Berthas running backwards and forwards. ..on all fours. And like Brontes mad lady, who would let herself out of her chamber at night and go roaming about the house to ambush Jane, the smouldering yellow menace in Gilmans story gets out at night and skulk[s] in the parlor, [hides] in the hall, and [lies] in wait for me (pp. 1,8-). When the narrator tells John that the key to her room is beneath a plantain leaf, is she evoking not only the North American species of that name but also the tropical plant ; of Berthas West Indies? When she imagines tying up the freed woman, is she repeating the fate of Bertha, brought in chains to foreign shores? Finally, does the 1 circulation of Brontes novel in Gilmans text explain the cryptic sentence at the ! end of the story-possibly a slip of Gilmans pen-in which the narrator cries to her husband that Ive got out at last. ..in spite of you and Jane (p. 6)? ~ Is the wallpaper, then, the political unconscious of a culture in which an Aryan womans madness, desire, and anger, repressed by the imperatives of reason, duty (p. 14), and proper self-control (p. 11), are projected onto the yellow woman who is, however, also the feared alien? When the narrator tries to liberate the woman from the wall, is she trying to purge her of her color, to peel her from the yellow paper, so that she can accept this woman as herself? If, as I suggested earlier, the wallpaper is at once the text of patriarchy and the womans text, then perhaps the narrator is both resisting and embracing the woman of color who is self and not-self, a woman who might need to be rescued from the text of patriarchy but cannot yet be allowed to go free. Might we explain the narrators pervasive horror of a yellow color and smell that threaten to take over the ancestral halls, stain[ing] everything it touched, as the British-American fear of a takeover byaliens? In a cultural moment when immigrant peoples and African Americans were being widely caricatured in the popular press through distorted facial and bodily images, might the interminable grotesques (p. 0) of The Yellow Wallpaper-with their lolling necks and bulbous eyes staring every- where, with their peculiar odor and yellow smell (p. ), their colors repellent, almost revolting, smouldering and unclean (p. 1), sickly and particularly irritating (p. 18), their new shades of yellow (p. 8) erupting constantly-figure the Asians and Jews, the Italians and Poles, the long list of aliens whom the narrator (and perhaps Gilman herself) might want at once to rescue and to flee?


For if anxieties about race, class, and ethnicity have inscribed themselves as a political unconscious upon the yellow wallpaper, they were conscious and in- deed obsessive problems for Gilman herself, as I discovered when, disturbed by my own reading of The Yellow Wallpaper, I turned to Gilmans later work.40 Despite her socialist values, her active participation in movements for reform, her strong theoretical commitment to racial harmony, her unconventional support of interracial marriages, and her frequent condemnation of Americas racist history ,41 Gilman upheld white Protestant supremacy; belonged for a time to eugenics and nationalist organizations; opposed open immigration; and inscribed racism, nationalism, and classism into her proposals for social change. In Concerning Chil- dren (100), she maintains that a sturdy English baby would be worth more than an equally vigorous young Fuegian. With the same training and care, you could develop higher faculties in the English specimen than in the Fuegian specimen, because it was better bred.4 In the same book, she argues that American children made better citizens than the more submissive races and in particular that the Chinese and the Hindu, where parents are fairly worshipped and blindly obeyed, were not races of free and progressive thought and healthy activity. Gilman advocated virtually compulsory enlistment of Blacks in a militaristic industrial corps, even as she opposed such regimentation for whites. In The Fore- runner, the journal she produced single-handedly for seven years, yellow groups are singled out frequently and gratuitously Gilman chides the lazy old Orientals who consider work a curse, singles out Chinatown forcriminal conditions, and uses China as an example of various unhealthy social practices. And she all but justifies anti-Semitism by arguing, both in her own voice and more boldly through her Herlandian mouthpiece Ellador, that Jews have not yetpassed the tribal stage of human development, that they practice an unethical and morally degrading religion of race egotism and concentrated pride, which has unfortunately found its way through the Bible into Western literature, and that in refusing to intermarry they artifically maintain characteristics which the whole world dislikes, and then complain of race prejudice. 4


Like many other nativist intellectuals, Gilman was especially disturbed by the influx of poor immigrants to American cities and argued on both race and class grounds that these undesirables would destroy America. Although she once theorized that immigrants could be healthier grafts upon our body politic, she wrote later that whateverspecial gifts each race had, when that race was transplanted, their gift is lost.44 While proclaiming support for the admission of certain peoples ofassimilable stock, she declared that even the best of Hindus ...would make another problem like the existing problem of African Americans, and that an inflow of Chinas oppressed would make it impossible to preserve the American national character . Thischaracter, it is clear, requires thatAmericans be primarily people of native born parentage, who should have a majority vote in their own country.45 Surprisingly perhaps for a socialist, but less surprisingly for a woman whose autobiography opens with a claim of kinship with Queen Victoria,46 Gilman seems to equate class status with readiness for democracy .Repeatedly she claims to favor immigration so long as the immigrants are of better stock. In her futurist utopia, Moving the Mountain, for instance, a character remembers the old days when we got all the worst and lowest people; in the imaginary new America, immigrants may not enter the country until they come up to a certain standard by passing a microscopicphysical exam and completing an education in American ways. It is surely no accident that the list of receiving gates Gilman imagines for her Immigrant groups stops with Western Europe Theres the German Gate, and the Spanish Gate, the English Gate, and the Italian Gate-and so on. 47


Classism, racism, and nationalism converge with particular virulence when Ellador, having established her antiracist credentials by championing the rights of Black Americans, observes thatthe poor and oppressed were not necessarily good stuff for a democracyand declares, in an extraordinary reversal of victim and victimizer to which even her American partner Van protests, that it is the poor and oppressed who make monarchy and despotism. Ellador's triumph is sealed with the graphic insistence that you cannotput a little of every- thing into a meltingpot and produce a good metal,not if you are mixing, gold, silver, copper and iron, lead, radium, pipe, clay, coal dust, and plain dirt.Making clear the racial boundaries of the melting pot, Ellador challenges Van,, And how about the yellow? Do they melt? Do you want them to melt? Isnt your exclusion of them an admission that you think some kinds of people unassimilable? That democracy must pick and choose a little ?Elladors rationale--and Gilmans-is that the human race is in different stages of development, and only some of the races-or some individuals in a given race--have reached the democratic stage.Yet she begs the question and changes the subject when Van asks,But how could we discriminate? 4


The aesthetic and sensory quality of this horror .1t a polluted America creates a compelling resemblance between the narrators graphic descriptions of the yellow wallpaper and Gilmans graphic descriptions of the cities and their swarms of jostling aliens. She fears that America has become bloated and verminous, a dump for Europes social refuse, a ceaseless offense to eye and ear and nose,51 creating multiforeign cities that are abnormally enlarged and swollen, foul, ugly and dangerous, their conditions offensive to every sense assailing the eye with ugliness, the ear with noise, the nose with foul smells.5 And when she complains that America has stuffed itself with uncongenial material with an overwhelming flood of unassimilable characteristics with such a stream of non-assimilable stuff as shall dilute and drown out the current of our life, indeed with the most ill-assorted and unassimilable mass of human material that was ever held together by artificial meansGilman might be describing the patterns and pieces of the wallpaper as well. Her poem The City of Death (11) depicts a diseased prison piped with poison, room by room,


Whose weltering rush of swarming human forms, Forced hurtling through foul subterranean tubes Kills more than bodies, coarsens mind and soul.


And steadily degrades our humanness…54


Such a city is not so different from the claustrophobic nursery which finally degrades the humanness of The Yellow Wallpapers protagonist. The text of Gilmans imagining, then, is the text of an America made as uninhabitable as the narrators chamber, and her declaration that children ought to grow up in the country , all of them, recalls the narrators relief that her baby does not have to live in the unhappy prison at the top of the house. Clearly Gilman was recognizing serious social problems in her concern over the ghettos and tenements of New York and Chicago-she herself worked for a time at Hull House, although she detested Chicagos noisome neighborhoods. But her conflation of the city with its immigrant peoples repeats her own racism even as her nostalgia about the country harks back to a New England in the hands of the New English themselves.s6 Theselittle old New England townsand their new counterparts, the fresh young western ones, says Ellador, have more of America in them than is possible-could ever be possible--in such a political menagerie as New York, whose people really belong in Berlin, in Dublin, in Jerusalem. It is no accident that some of the most extreme of Gilmans anti-immigrant statements come from the radical feminist Ellador, for race and gender are not separate issues in Gilmans cosmology, and it is in their intersection that a fuller immigrant invasion thus becomes a direct threat to Gilmans program for feminist reform. II As a particular historical product, then, The Yellow Wallpaper is no more ! the story that all literary women would tell than the entirely white canon of The ! Madwoman in the Attic is the story of all womens writing or the only story those (white) texts can tell. The Yellow Wallpaper has been able to pass for a universal text only insofar as white, Western literatures and perspectives continue to dominate academic American feminist practices even when the most urgent literary and political events are happening in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and I. among the new and old cultures of Color in the United States. We might expand r our theories of censorship, for example, if we read The Yellow Wallpaper in 1 the context of womens prison writings from around the world-writings like r Ding Links memoirs and Alicia Partnoys The Little School Tales of Disappearance and Survival in Argentina and some of the stories of Bessie Head. We might havesomething to learn about interpretation if we examined the moment in Partnoys narrative when her husband is tortured because he gives the wrong reading of m his wifes poems.64 We might better understand contemporary feminist racial politics if we studied the complex but historically distanced discourses of feminists a century ago. Perhaps, like the narrator of Gilmans story, white, American academic feminist criticism has sought in literature the mirror of its own identity , ii erasing the literary equivalent of strange sights and smells and colors so that we ti can have the comfort of reproducing, on a bare stage, that triumphant moment ; when a woman recognizes her self. Perhaps white, American feminist practice too readily resembles that of Gilman, who deplores that historically we have cheated the Indian, oppressed the African, robbed the Mexican,66 and whose utopian impulses continue to insist that there is only one race, the human race,67 but for whom particular, present conditions of race and class continue to be blindnesses justified on other-aesthetic, political pragmatic-grounds.


The Yellow Wallpaper also calls upon us to recognize that the white, female, intellectual-class subjectivity which Gilmans narrator attempts to construct and to which many feminists have also been committed perhaps unwittingly, is a subjectivity whose illusory unity, like the unity imposed on the paper, is built on the repression of difference. This also means that the conscious biographical experience which Gilman claims as the authenticating source of the story is but one contributing element.68 And if we are going to read this text in relation to its author, we may have to realize that there are dangers as well as pleasures in a ; feminist reading based on a merging of consciousnesses.6 Once we recognize Gilman as a subject constituted in and by the contradictions of ideology , we might also remember that she acknowledges having been subjected to the narrators circumstances but denies any relationship to the wallpaper itself-that is, to what I am reading as the site of a political unconscious in which questions of race permeate questions of sex. A recent essay by Ellen Messer-Davidow in New Literary History argues that literary criticism and feminist criticism should be recognized as fundamentally different activities, that feminist criticism is part of a larger interdisciplinary project whose main focus is the exploration of ideas about sex ! and gender, that disciplinary variations are fairly insignificant differences of medium, and therefore that feminist literary critics need to change their subject from literature to ideas about sex and gender as these happen to be expressed in literature. I suggest that one of the messages of The Yellow Wallpaper is that textuality, like culture, is more complex, shifting, and polyvalent than any of the ideas we can abstract from it, that the narrators reductive gesture is precisely to isolate and essentialize one idea about sex and gender from a more complex textual field.


Deconstructing our own reading of the wallpaper, then, means acknowledging that Adrienne Rich still speaks to feminist critics when she calls on us to [enter] an old text from a new critical direction, to take the work first of all as a clue to how we live. ..how we have been led to imagine ourselves, how our language has trapped as well as liberated us. ..and how we can begin to see and name--and therefore live--afresh,1I so that we do not simply pass on a tradition but. ..break its hold over us. Feminist critical theory offers the Reconstructive principles for this continuing revision, so long as we require ourselves, as we have required our non-feminist colleagues, to look anew at what have become old texts and old critical premises. Still, the revision I am proposing here would have been impossible without the first revision of The Yellow Wallpaper that liberated the imprisoned woman from the text. Adrienne Rich has addressed the poem Heroines to nineteenth-century white feminists who reflected racism and class privilege in their crusades for change. It is both to Gilman herself and to all of us whose readings of The Yellow Wallpaper have been both transformative and limiting, that, in closing, I address the final lines of Richs poem


How can I fail to love


your clarity and fury how can I give you all your due


take courage from your courage honor your exact legacy as it is recognizing


as well that it is not enough?


Please note that this sample paper on Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America, we are here to assist you.Your persuasive essay on Feminist Criticism, "The Yellow Wallpaper," And the Politics of Color in America will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.


Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!