The Interchange in Anderson's class was held after the interclass newsgroup exchange had concluded. Blake's first comment was "I don't know about anyone else, but I was less than impressed by the comments we read regarding this story last Thursday from Nick Evans['] class. They all sounded exactly the same." Anderson quickly tried to focus the energy of the conflict into specific criticisms, challenging Blake to clarify his/her position: "Blake, what would you have said differently?" Blake responded
As Amber called for research into unipolar depression in the newsgroup thread, Blake calls for more psychological analysis and questions the reading centered on men's domination of women. That is, Blake's position in the InterChange reintroduces yet also transforms Amber's and Finn's emphasis on psychological analysis in the newsgroup. In both cases, an interpretation focusing on views toward insanity is opposed to an alternative perspective: Amber and Finn set psychological interpretation over/against biographical reading, while Blake opposes the psychological interpretation to a new enemy, "male-bashing." While the use of pseudonyms makes conflating Blake's perspective with Amber's impossible, it may be that the original complaint was not so much an objection to biography as a mode of reading, but an objection to the anti-male attitudes that reading "The Yellow Wall-Paper" biographically seems to encourage.Whatever the motivation behind the two calls for readings based on turn-of-the-century attitudes toward insanity, we think that Blake's message favoring psychological analysis underwent a more constructive process of critique and development in the InterChange. In the newsgroup, Finn's argument for psychological interpretation went for the most part unchallenged by Finn's classmates. Attacks on Finn's position came from Evans' class and other members of the university community. Despite--or perhaps because of--these responses, Finn never modulated his position in the newsgroup. Finn's second message there only called for more research, revealing no effort to acknowledge the validity of other perspectives. However, in the InterChange within Anderson's class, Finn's and Amber's newsgroup position, as represented by Blake, was critiqued more openly. One class member, using the pseudonym Qwaz, questioned one of the underlying assumptions of Blake's argument:
Note how Quaz challenges Blake's position constructively, first acknowledging the thought that went into the stance and then phrasing a critique in the form of a question, which is less threatening and prompts Blake to provide another round of clarification. Essentially, Quaz reintroduces the possibility of and provides new support for an interpretation focusing on oppression by authority figures--the one that Blake initially rejected. Anderson had responded similarly earlier, asking "so would you say the story is more of an investigation of the medical community, than the male community? Can the two be so easily separated?"In a final response, Blake reclarifies his/her position, this time accepting at least the feasibility of an interpretation highlighting patriarchal domination:
While unwilling to give up the idea that depression at the time was misunderstood, Blake now seems willing to accept that some aspects of society at the time of the writing of the story were male dominated and that this interpretation has at least a partial role in a reading of the story. It wouldn't be fair to say that Blake has been won over to the other side, but through the challenges that came from within Anderson's class he/she eventually modified his/her position.Linear link: Message Forums