lsed by it. "I never saw a worse paper in my life,"(l214) writes the woman. Whereas she is a sweet, dutiful wife to her husband, and her behavior carefully conforms to what society expects of her, she is disgusted by the paper's poor condition, its faded, soured color, and its pattern, "One of those sprawling flamboyant patterns committing every artistic sin"(1214). Her mild-mannered behavior carefully conforms with what society expects of her. Therefore, this vague description of the pattern of the wallpaper seems to be an inversion of the woman's personality. However, a closer look proves that her reasons for hating the wallpaper are illogical, irrational and reveal hypocrisy in the way she views society. The idea of an artistic "sin," implies that artists are supposed to follow a specific set of rules. This is not true. There are many schools of artistic thought, but artists are continually challenging those traditions and developing new ones. An artistic sin, then, would be an original technique, but to call originality in art sinful goes against the nature of art. Similarly, the woman feels that she is required to capitulate to her husbands wishes: If a physician of high standing, and one's own husband, assures friends and relatives that there is really nothing the matter with one but temporary nervous depression--a slight hysterical tendency--what is one to do? (1213). But for society to expect the woman to give in to her husband's wishes regardless makes no sense. She is a complete person, an should be allowed to function as one, just like the artist should be allowed to experiment. Unfortunately, the woman feels that pressure from "friends and relatives" as well as her husband is equal to law, and therefore, her opinions do not matter. Her respect for the traditional idea of a well-ordered society is hypocritical because it does not allow she herself to thrive; instead, she becomes ill from the constant oppression. She further d...
