As she opened the window, the narrator sensed that the city, London, “was wholly indifferent”(95), and all the individuals “seemed separate, self-absorbed, on business of their own”(96). But the sight of a couple getting into a cab, which has been mentioned back and forth, suddenly lit up the hope to reconnect this separation.
She went into deep meditation about the maintaining of the continuity of mind, which sets brain in a normal, comfortable state. The sight, again, reminded her of the possibility of cooperation of 2 sexes in the human mind, “in order to get complete satisfaction and happiness”(98). She agreed with what Coleridge said, “a great mind is androgynous”(98) and held the opinion that, to write greats work that could be resonant, impediment-free, creative and undivided, the writer had to respect both the masculine side and female side in his/her mind. However just like women writers through history had unfortunately filled a lot of their fiction with bias and bitterness, she found that modern men were doing the same. She took down a novel by Mr.A , which was well thought by the views. However, the excessive appearance of “I” to assert the writer purely as a man, exactly represented how sex-conscious their age was at that moment. While women in history feared their inferiority, modern men were afraid of loss of their superiority because of suffrage. She felt bored about the novel, because “there seemed to be some obstacles, some impediment of Mr.A’s mind”(100). For if everyone’s mind is at peace and continuity towards different sexes and allow them to be either man or woman, they wouldn’t feel offended by maleness or femaleness, and they wouldn’t need to write books explaining or even denigrating women. As a result, she regarded women’s reading works of this kind in their age as a mistake, since women couldn’t find what resonated with their mind and “the emotion with which these books are permeated is to a woman incomprehensible”(102).
She denied to present the comparative values of the sexes of the writers, because she thought that putting values on human beings is quite impossible and unfeasible. Further more, she thought that it was wrong for any writer to give their way to judgments, reviews, subject values put over their head and encouraged writers to write naturally what was in their mind. As she said, “praise and blame alike mean nothing” and for writers “to submit to the to the decrees of the measures the most servile of attitudes”(106). So as long as one is writing what he/she wants, and “whether it matters for ages or only for hours, nobody can say”(106).
Similar to the first 3 chapters, she emphasized the importance of material things in the life of a writer again. She insisted that “it was necessary to have five hundred pounds a year and a room with a lock if you are to write fiction or poetry”(105), because “intellectual freedom depends upon material things”. The reason why women had less intellectual freedom was that women had always been poor from the beginning of time. Again, she mentioned the sister of Shakespeare, as the tragedy of intellectual genius of women, who still “lives in you and in me, and in many other women who are not here tonight, for they are washing up the dishes and putting the children to bed”(113). But this time, she was encouraging women to strive for a chance of life for the sister of Shakespeare, or even all of the forgotten women by getting educated and “going about the businesses in life”(112) without excuse. It means that women, to prove their necessity in the society, shouldn’t simply stick to taking care of children and doing chores, curtaining themselves behind men, but should discover any sort of importance. A kind of importance, like a play by Shakespeare, like shaking an empire or leading an army in a battle, can help them to write themselves back into history.