More handpicked essays just for you.
Representation Of Women In Literature
Representation Of Women In Literature
Term paper : a jury of her peers
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
An Analysis of “A Jury of Her Peers”
In Susan Glaspell’s 1917 short story “A Jury of Her Peers,”
two women accompany their husbands and a county attorney to an
isolated house where a farmer named John Wright has been choked
to death in his bed with a rope. The chief suspect is Wright’s wife,
Minnie, who is in jail awaiting trial. The sheriff’s wife, Mrs. Peters,
has come along to gather some personal items for Minnie, and Mrs.
Hale has joined her. Early in the story, Mrs. Hale sympathizes with
Minnie and objects to the way the male investigators are “snoopin’
round and criticizin’” her kitchen (200). In contrast, Mrs. Peters
shows respect for the law, saying that the men are doing “no more
than their duty” (201). By the end of the story, however,
…show more content…
Mrs. Peters has joined Mrs. Hale in a conspiracy of silence, lied to the men, and committed a crime—hiding key evidence. What causes this dramatic change? One critic, Leonard Mustazza, argues that Mrs. Hale recruits Mrs. Peters “as a fellow ‘juror’ in the case, moving the sheriff’s wife away from her sympathy for her husband’s position and towards identification with the accused woman” (494). While this is true, Mrs. Peters also reaches insights on her own. Her observations in the kitchen lead her to understand Minnie’s grim and lonely plight as the wife of an abusive farmer, and her identification with both Source: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006). Minnie and Mrs. Hale is strengthened as the men conducting the investigation trivialize the lives of women. The first evidence that Mrs. Peters reaches understanding on her own surfaces in the following passage: The sheriff’s wife had looked from the stove to the sink— to the pail of water which had been carried in from outside. . . . That look of seeing into things, of seeing through a thing to something else, was in the eyes of the sheriff’s wife now. (203) Something about the stove, the sink, and the pail of water connects with her own experience, giving Mrs. Peters a glimpse into the life of Minnie Wright. The details resonate with meaning. Social historian Elaine Hedges argues that such details, which evoke the drudgery of a farm woman’s work, would not have been lost upon Glaspell’s readers in 1917. Hedges tells us what the pail and the stove, along with another detail from the story—a dirty towel on a roller—would have meant to women of the time. Laundry was a dreaded all-day affair. Water had to be pumped, hauled, and boiled; then the wash was rubbed, rinsed, wrung through a wringer, carried outside, and hung on a line to dry. “What the women see, beyond the pail and the stove,” writes Hedges, “are the hours of work it took Minnie to produce that one clean towel” (56). On her own, Mrs. Peters discovers clues about the motive for the murder. Her curiosity leads her to pick up a sewing basket filled with quilt pieces and then to notice something strange: a sudden row of badly sewn stitches. “What do you ource: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006). suppose she was so—nervous about?” asks Mrs. Peters (204). A short time later, Mrs. Peters spots another clue, an empty birdcage. Again she observes details on her own, in this case a broken door and hinge, suggesting that the cage has been roughly handled. In addition to noticing details, both women draw conclusions from them and speculate on their significance. When Mrs. Hale finds the dead canary beneath a quilt patch, for example, the women conclude that its neck has been wrung and understand who must have wrung it. As the women speculate on the significance of the dead canary, each connects the bird with her own experience. Mrs. Hale knows that Minnie once sang in the church choir, an activity that Mr. Wright put a stop to, just as he put a stop to the bird’s singing. Also, as a farmer’s wife, Mrs. Hale understands the desolation and loneliness of life on the prairie. She sees that the bird was both a thing of beauty and a companion. “If there had been years and years of—nothing, then a bird to sing to you,” says Mrs. Hale, “it would be awful—still—after the bird was still” (208). To Mrs. Peters, the stillness of the canary evokes memories of the time when she and her husband homesteaded in the northern plains. “I know what stillness is,” she says, as she recalls the death of her first child, with no one around to console her (208). Elaine Hedges has written movingly of the isolation that women experienced on late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth century farms of the West and Midwest: Women themselves reported that it was not unusual to spend five months in a log cabin without seeing another woman . . . or to spend one and a half years after arriving before being able to take a trip to town. . . . (54) To combat loneliness and monotony, says Hedges, many women bought canaries and hung the cages outside their sod huts. The canaries provided music and color, a spot of beauty that “might spell the difference between sanity and madness” (60). Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale understand—and Glaspell’s readers in 1917 would have understood—what the killing of the bird means to Minnie.
For Mrs. Peters, in fact, the act has a special
significance. When she was a child, a boy axed her kitten to death
and, as she says, “If they hadn’t held me back I would have . . .
hurt him” (207). She has little difficulty comprehending Minnie’s
murderous rage, for she has felt it herself.
Although Mrs. Peters’s growing empathy for Minnie stems
largely from her observations, it is also prompted by her negative
reaction to the patronizing comments of the male investigators. At
several points in the story, her body language reveals her feelings.
For example, when Mr. Hale remarks that “women are used to
worrying over trifles,” both women move closer together and remain
silent. When the county attorney asks, “for all their worries, what
would we do without the ladies?” the women do not speak, nor do
they “unbend” (199). The fact that the women respond in exactly
the same way reveals the extent to which they are bonding.
Both women are annoyed at the way in which the men
criticize and trivialize the world of women. The men question the
difficulty of women’s work. For example, when the county attorney points to the dirty towel on the rack as evidence that
…show more content…
Minnie wasn’t much of a housekeeper, Mrs. Hale replies, “There’s a great deal of work to be done on a farm” (199).
Even the importance of
women’s work is questioned. The men kid the women for trying to
decide if Minnie was going to quilt or knot patches together for a
quilt and laugh about such trivial concerns. Those very quilts, of
course, kept the men warm at night and cost them nothing beyond
the price of thread.
The men also question the women’s wisdom and intelligence.
For example, when the county attorney tells the women to keep
their eyes out for clues, Mr. Hale replies, “But would the women
know a clue if they did come upon it?” (200). The women’s
response is to stand motionless and silent. The irony is that the
men don’t see the household clues that are right in front of them.
By the end of the story, Mrs. Peters has been so transformed
that she risks lying to the men. When the district attorney walks
into the kitchen and notices the birdcage the women have found,
he asks about the whereabouts of the bird. Mrs. Hale replies, “We
think the cat got it,” even though she knows from Mrs. Peters
that Minnie was afraid of cats and would not have owned one.
Instead of correcting the lie, Mrs. Peters elaborates on it, saying
of cats, “They’re superstitious, you know; they leave”
(207). Clearly Mrs. Hale is willing to risk lying because she is confident that Mrs. Peters won’t contradict her. The Mrs. Peters character may have been based on a real sheriff’s wife. Seventeen years before writing “A Jury of Her Peers,” Susan Glaspell covered a murder case for the Des Moines Daily News A farmer’s wife, Margaret Hossack, was accused of murdering her sleeping husband with two axe blows to the head. In one of her newspaper reports, Glaspell wrote that the sheriff’s wife sat next to Mrs. Hossack and “frequently applied her handkerchief to her eyes” (qtd. in Ben-Zvi 30). We do not know from the short story the ultimate fate of Minnie Wright, but Margaret Hossack, whose case inspired the story, was found guilty, though the case was later thrown out by the Iowa Supreme Court. However, as Linda Ben-Zvi points out, the women’s guilt or innocence is not the issue: Whether Margaret Hossack or Minnie Wright committed murder is moot; what is incontrovertible is the brutality of their lives, the lack of options they had to redress grievances or to escape abusive husbands, and the complete disregard of their plight by the courts and by society. (38) These are the issues that Susan Glaspell wished to stress in “A Jury of Her Peers.” These are also the issues that Mrs. Peters comes to understand as the story unfolds, with her understanding deepening as she identifies with Minnie and Mrs. Hale and is repulsed by male attitudes. Her transformation becomes complete when the men joke that she is “married to the law” and she responds by violating the law: hiding key evidence, the dead canary (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,2006).
Susan Glaspell was an American playwright, novelist, journalist, and actress. She married in 1903 to a novelist, poet, and playwright George Cram Cook. In 1915 with other actors, writers, and artists they founded Provincetown Players a group that had six seasons in New York City between 1916-1923. She is known to have composed nine novels, fifteen plays, over fifty short stories, and one biography. She was a pioneering feminist writer and America’s first import and modern female playwright. She wrote the one act play “Trifles” for the Provincetown Players was later adapted into the short shorty “A Jury of Her Peers” in 1917. A comparison in Susan Glaspell’s “Trifles” and “A Jury of Her Peers” changes the titles, unfinished worked, and
Seymour Wishman was a former defense lawyer and prosecutor, and the author of "Anatomy of a Jury," the novel "Nothing Personal" and a memoir "Confessions of a Criminal Lawyer." "Anatomy of a Jury" is Seymour Wishman's third book about the criminal justice system and those who participate in it. He is a known writer and very highly respected "person of the law." Many believe that the purpose of this book is to put you in the shoes of not only the defendant but into the shoes of the prosecutor, the judge, the defense lawyer and above all the jury. He did not want to prove a point to anyone or set out a specific message. He simply wanted to show and explain to his readers how the jury system really works. Instead of writing a book solely on the facts on how a jury system works, Wishman decides to include a story so it is easier and more interesting for his readers to follow along with.
A story of murder, fear, and the temptation of betrayal is one that easily snatches up the attention of audiences. In “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell, the author uses her southern female characters to emphasize the direct relationship between friendship and connection. Her plot circles around the disastrous discovery of their fellow housewife’s marital murder, and the events that unfolded causing their ultimate decision in prosecuting or shielding her from the men in the story. The author implements revealing dialogue with subtle detailing and glaring symbolism to display the coveted friendships among women above other relationships and that the paths they take to secure them stem from inveterate personal connections.
In A Jury of Peers by Susan Glaspell, the story revolves around the sudden death of John Wright. There are five characters that participate in the investigation of this tragedy. Their job is to find a clue to the motive that will link Mrs. Wright, the primary suspect, to the murder. Ironically, the ladies, whose duties did not include solving the mystery, were the ones who found the clue to the motive. Even more ironic, Mrs. Hale, whose presence is solely in favor of keeping the sheriff s wife company, could be contributed the most to her secret discovery. In this short story, Mrs. Hale s character plays a significant role to Mrs. Wright s nemesis in that she has slight feelings of accountability and also her discovery of the clue to the motive.
Symbolism is a literary device in which words, phrases or actions allude to something more than their literal meanings. In the short story “A Jury of Her Peers”, a major example of symbolism is the quilt. The quilt is perhaps the biggest example because it can be tied to many other examples of symbolism within the story, and can also be interpreted in different ways.
The central theme in “A Jury of Her Peers” is the place of women in society and especially the isolation this results in. We see this through the character, Minnie Foster and her isolation from love, happiness, companionship and from society as a whole. Not only does the story describe this isolation but it allows the reader to feel the impact of this isolation and recognize the tragedy of the situation.
Glaspell spent more than forty years working as a journalist, fiction writer, playwright and promoter of various artistic. She is a woman who lived in a male dominated society. She is the author of a short story titled A Jury of Her Peers. She was inspired to write this story when she investigated in the homicide of John Hossack, a prosperous county warren who had been killed in his sleep(1).Such experience in Glaspell’s life stimulated inspiration. The fact that she was the first reporter on scene, explains that she must have found everything still in place, that makes an incredible impression. She feels what Margaret (who is Minnie Wright in the story) had gone through, that is, she has sympathy for her. What will she say about Margaret? Will she portray Margaret as the criminal or the woman who’s life has been taken away? In the short story Minnie Wright was the victim. Based on evidence at the crime scene, it is clear that Minnie has killed her husband; however, the women have several reasons for finding her “not guilty” of the murder of John Wright.
The courthouse was crowded, all seats were taken and many were standing in the back. It was silent, no one spoke, not even a baby cried out. There was the Judge sitting in the front of the room, the defendant, the solicitor, and the jury. I was a member of the jury that day. Everyone knew the truth, the defendant was innocent, and the evidence that was established was supportive and clear. The jury’s decision however, was not based on evidence, but on race. A jury is supposed to put their beliefs aside and make a decision based on the information given during the trial. Jury members must do their duty and do what is right. I tried to do what was right, but all the other members of the jury were blind. They chose to convict because of skin color than actual evidence from the case. I wanted to avoid this disease, but it is easily spread from one person to another. It made me angry that an innocent man was convicted for something he did not even do. He was convicted because of his skin color and nothing else. When the judge asked us to leave the courtroom to make a decision, we stayed o...
Mrs. Hale feels a natural responsibility to defend and protect Minnie Foster Wright through her connection as a fellow woman and housewife. Upon her introduction to Minnie through her home, Mrs. Hale finds an immediate connection. She understands Minnie’s life as a homemaker and a farmer’s wife and is quick to defend her when her skills as a wife and woman come into question. When the men recognize Minnie’s lackluster cleaning of kitchen towels Mrs. Hale retorts “[m]en’s hands aren’t as clean as they might be” (Glaspell 160). She asserts her loyalty to Minnie and notes that men are not always perfect or without blame, without “clean hands”. As a woman, Mrs. Hale easily sees herself in Minnie’s place and comes to her defense as if she were defending herself. It is easier to share her loyalty with a woman so much like her than it is to be loyal to men that act superior and do not understand the challenges of being a housewife. The men find a woman’s chores as petty, nothing but “trifles” (Glaspell 160).Scholar Karen Stein argues that it is these commonalities that create the responsibility of everywoman to defend one another (Ortiz 165). Mrs. Hale sees herself in every...
In the story “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell, Mr. Lewis Hale arrived at the Wright house to find that his neighbor, John Wright, had been strangled in his sleep. Hale asked John’s wife, Millie Wright, a few questions about what had happened. Suspiciously, Mrs. Wright’s dry answers didn’t add up. Now the sheriff, the county attorney, Mr. and Mrs. Hale, and Mrs. Peters the sheriff’s wife, are investigating the house. Although Mrs. Wright claims to be asleep during her husband’s murder, the women conclude that she strangled her husband as evidenced by the broken bird cage, the slaughtered canary, and the errant quilt patch.
In “ A Jury of Her Peers”, when the county sheriff and attorney go to the Wright house to investigate a murder. They search for clues to incriminate Mrs. Wright but find nothing. They discover Mr. Wright strangled in his bedroom and saw Mrs. Wright completely unaffected. Although Mrs. Wright claims to have been asleep while the murder occurred, the women conclude she choked her husband, Mr. Wright, as evidenced by the broken bird cage, the strangled canary, and the errant quilt patch.
Throughout history, a plethora of different classes of people, cultures, and races have undergone some form of prejudice. Partiality against women has occurred, and continues to occur, in America. Susan Glaspell, author of "A Jury of her Peers," depicts a story of a close-knit community in the process of solving the mystery of a man's death, thought to be caused by his wife. In the investigation of Mr. Wright’s death, the women helping to search through the Wright farm for clues pointing to evidence of Minnie Wright’s murder of her husband were thought of as useless, when in reality, the women were solely responsible for finding and understanding Mrs. Wright's motives for murdering her husband. Glaspell uses imagery and a woman's point of view to depict how a woman may feel bound by limits set by society--- a feeling most easily understood by women who share the same perception of life.
The film A Jury of her Peers, is similar to the play, Trifles because it highlights similar points that are referenced in the text and is clear it was used as a basis for the foundation of the film. The names of Mr. and Mrs. Wright are changed to Mr. and Mrs. Burke. The use of facts to outline the climax, are the same as used in the play. Such as the building of suspense of the discovering of the bird and its strangulation and whether Mrs. Burke or Mr. Burke is to place blame. However, as an adaptation, opinions are added into the original framework of the play to add a touch of personalization. The film interprets the drama as a murder mystery, as the attorney and the sheriff search the household to find evidence to place blame on Mrs. Burke. A jury of her Peers, works to portray the emotions of Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, as they discover items that would, (if found by the men) possibly prove her guilty (Bourne, 2013).
Men's hands aren't always as clean as they might be. COUNTY ATTORNEY: Ah, loyal to your sex, I see. But you and Mrs Wright were neighbors. I suppose you were friends, too.”
These women are constantly patronized by the men, who condescendingly taunt them for their domestic role. At one point, Mrs. Hale attempts to stand up for Minnie’s lack of cleanliness, saying, “Those towels get dirty awful quick. Men’s hands aren’t always as clean as they might be” (Glaspell 1158). The county attorney disregards her comment, saying, “Ah, loyal to your sex, I see” (1158). In light of this treatment, it is not surprising that the women hide their discoveries at the end of the play.