Discussion Questions Week 2

3. One of the questions in your text that follows “Rose . . .” asks whether it’s possible for a mentally ill/disturbed person to be “in love”, that is, to believe, feel, and act in accordance with traditional and normative definitions of being in love. Is it? Answer the question using “Rose . . .” as the basis of your ideas.
I think that anyone that would disagree with this question and say no would be a bit ridiculous. Anyone who has the capability of comprehending thought and feeling feelings is capable of love. The dictionary describes love as, "a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person." So, why should anyone be not capable of it? Even as babies we are capable of love, and we can't even comprehend love in our tiny baby minds. As with "normal" feelings of love, what is "normal" love? Emily's definition of love may have been a sick one, but it's what love was to her, and I don't think that anyone can say one person does not love another. We can love our significant others, our dogs, our possessions, our family all in the same. While reading this story, the thing that came to mind for me was the movie "Psycho." In it, Norman Bates keeps the body of his mother, and dresses up as her and kills a young woman staying in his hotel, and although a somewhat sick expression of it, could that be interpreted as a deep love for his mother? In our society, we're just afraid of things that question what we're used to, and I think Emily just didn't want to be alone, and she trusted those close to her, so she kept a corpse, and of course, she had to know that people would look down upon that, and that's why she kept it a secret.



4. Considering the time period and well-documented constraints on and expectations of women, what do you make of Chopin’s portrayal of a woman’s presumably guilt-free indiscretion? What do you think Chopin was hoping to convey, thematically, regarding romantic love and/or sex, marriage, trust, self-awareness, female pleasure?
Let me start off with saying that I really liked this story, and in accordance with another question we were assigned, I think the ending was a perfect and apt description of what a brief, passionate sexual encounter could do for two people. Given the time period, I think any woman, when presented with the opportunity to be sexually expressive and with the advent of no one finding out, would take advantage of the situation. Imagine, to be a woman during that time and being able to feel feelings of sexual freedom and passion like you never have before and nobody is going to find out. And even so, if the man in the story had spoken about it, he would've been just as looked down upon because he had a wife and children. This kind of judgment still goes on today. If a man has sex with six women, he's a "playa" and "pimp", and praised. But if a woman has sex with six men, she is a "slut." I think Chopin was trying to say that sex is a universal language, and so is passion. Everyone longs for it, man or woman, and she probably experienced something like this encounter in her lifetime. Aren't these type of stories what make for a good a movie? The kind of thing we all like to watch? It's what everyone longs for and wishes to experience once in their life, and while adultery or cheating is looked down upon by our society, I think it goes on a lot more than we'd like to admit.