Character Analysis: “A Jury of Her Peers”
“A Jury of Her Peers” was written by Susan Glaspell in 1917. She wrote this short story based on the murder of John Hossack which Susan Glaspell covered while working as a journalist. In “A Jury of Her Peers” John Wright is murdered. That being said, Minnie Wright, his wife, is the accused killer. Within the story the two women, Mrs. Peters and Martha Hale, friends of Minnie are finding the small minute details that would convict Minnie as the murderer of her husband. The men of the story, Sheriff Peters and Lewis Hale, are trying to find evidence in Minnie’s home but keep overlooking the small details. However, Mrs. Peters and Martha Hale do not want their friend to be proven guilty for the murder
She went to unimaginable lengths to extinguish her dreams being crushed and the anger she had inside of her became a wild fire that was a blaze which was not going to be extinguished until she got revenge of her dreams and aspirations being crushed. Minnie Wright had a mental breakdown and breakthrough throughout the story. The breakthrough was not a bad breakthrough, however she may feel remorse for her husband’s death but she does not have any regret. She feels a sort of relief or, ultimately, a feeling of justice. She feels she can finally have her dreams back and will have the burden of her unhappy marriage and having to be this obedient and unrelenting housewife lifted. “A Jury of Her Peers” had many characters that had alter egos and even perceptions other then what was on the surface. Through Minnie’s behavior, background, emotions, and her reactions to her environment I was able to feel a deep connection with this character. Putting yourself in her shoes you are able to feel how she feels. The influences and actions that occurred throughout the story really shaped Minnie Wright as a character and unintentionally caused her to have a breakthrough within
I. Article Summary: Suzy Clarkson Holstein's article, “Silent Justice in a Different Key: Glaspell's 'Trifles'” evaluates the play Trifles and how the difference between the men in the play mirror how a woman's perspective is very different from a man's. Trifles is about two women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, who show up at a house with their husbands and the county attorney to investigate a murder. The entire time the men are looking for evidence to implicate the accused wife, Minnie Wright, of killing her husband. Meanwhile, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are there to gather up some items to bring Minnie Wright in jail. While doing so, the women uncover evidence that would prove the wife is culpable but decide to hide it from the men in the last moments of the play. Trifles is evaluated on how the women are able to come up with the evidence unlike the men because they didn't approach it like a crime scene but rather a home, “By contrast, the women arrive at a home. Although neither they or the men realize it, they too are conducting an investigation” (Holstein 283). Holstein also notes they are able to find evidence because they use their own life experiences to relate to the accused murderer, Minnie Wright as shown here; “But the women do not simply remember and sympathize with Minnie. They identify with her, quite literally” (285). Holstein finishes the article by noting the women decide to hide the evidence because of the solidarity they feel towards Minnie Wright; “From Mrs. Hale's perspective, people are linked together through fragile, sometimes imperceptible strands. The tiny trifles of life –a neighbor's visit, a bird's song, the sewing of a quilt –have profound reverberations” (287).
Hale states “Well, women are used to worrying over trifles” (561). The same trifles he states women are worried over, are the trifles that if men paid attention to they would have plenty of evidence against Minnie Wright. In “A Jury of Her Peers” Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peter basically decided the fate of Minnie. In “A Jury of Her Peers” Glaspell shows how there is criticism of a legal system that denied women the change of a fair trial by an all-man jury. They found evidence that the men could not find and decided “not to turn it in. All of this held a significant role in the story, but they are the ones that solved the case. In the play the sheriff mocks Mrs. Hale “They Wonder if she was going to quilt it or just knot it” (563). He also said something in “A Jury of Her Peers” on page 575 line 159. There are not many changes between the play and the short story. Most of the changes happen in the opening of the story when it is more detailed, as to where the play is all about action. If you are watching the play it is much better than the story because you can see all the action and
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.
On a cold northern morning the body of a man lay still in his bed. His blood did not flow, his heart did not beat, and his chest didn’t fall with breath. His wife sits still downstairs in the gloomy house that she views as a cage. Her stare is blank and her hands move slowly as if she is in some trance that shows absolutely no remorse. Minne Foster is guilty of murdering her husband which becomes apparent through the evidence and details given by Susan Glaspell in “A Jury of Her Peers”. Glaspell gives evidence and shows the realization that both women in the story also know that Mrs. Foster is guilty. Minnie Foster is guilty of murdering her husband, but a defense could be made to protect her.
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
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.
“All oppressed people seize whatever weapons they can to fight oppression.” This statement,by John Lowe, proves to be an important aspect of the theme in the short story, A Jury of Her Peers. In this case, the weapon that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters seize is silence. By keeping their silence, they are withholding what the men want most, which is to find evidence that leads them to know that Mrs. Wright was the murderer. The motives for the murder of Mr. Wright in the short story, A Jury of her Peers, are elaborated throughout the use of flashbacks, an oppressive tone, and omniscient third-person point of view.
Doaker- A forty seven year old, tall, patient man that has a lot of respect for others. Even though he caves into people he is still a respectable figure.
The crowded courtroom was absolutely silent as the 12 all white and all men took their seats at the jury box. Chief Justice Albert Mason, one of the presiding judges in the murder case, asked Charles I. Richards, the foreman, to rise. Mr. Richards was asked to read the verdict. “Not guilty”, replied the foreman. Even though the circumstantial and physical evidence pointed to Lizzie Borden guilty of killing her step-mother and father, the all-male jury, men of some financial means, could not fathom that a woman who is well bred and a Sunday school teacher could possibly commit such a heinous crime (Linder 7).
Through the crime committed by Minnie Wright, three women grow together and establish that justice for all is deeper than finding the culprit. Justice occurs in all things, in hiding the clues by Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, in the quiet dignity they both have by helping their friend, and by proving that women are capable of anything they are determined to accomplish.
Susan Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers” was wrote in the early nineteenth century. This was also the era that women found it very difficult to stand out and become recognized for being a successful and intelligent individual. Women were mere objects being banished to the kitchen and forced to serve their husbands and families with a smile on their face. “A Jury of Her Peers” distinctively points out how the clues of a murder mystery is solved through the eyes of a woman. The sources listed below are helpful in relating the story to the era it was wrote in and how poorly women were treated.
Although most society today view women to be more than just housewife, however, the lack of opportunity and the existing of sexism shows that not much of the past has changed. The short story of " A Jury of Her Peers" by Susan Glaspell greatly highlights the inequality between male and female in a male dominated era, isolate the women from any involvement in society other than domestic house works. Not only so, the story also indicate the consequences of abusive relationships, physical and/or psychological damage causes individuals to withdrawn and isolate themselves from the rest of the world. The variety of these indications can be found through the detail descriptions of contexts and settings.
Point of view can have a tremendous impact on reading a passage, novel, and any other pieces of literature. Such characteristics of literature include the amount of visual aid, perspective as well as perception, even the amount of bias that is included. These comparisons can be observed in the two texts “Trifles” and A Jury of Her Peers written by Susan Glaspell. The two texts differ in overall format: play and short story; so as they have differences such as this, they also have similarities to note in the end.
An individual’s personality traits are characteristics and qualities that distinguishes one as distinctive. From the time we are in the womb, we already begin to develop a sense of individuality and achieving what we want to be seen as. An infant who kicks their mother’s stomach since young develop a personality that wants attention, while one who does not may be seen as considerate and calm. However, our personality in nature is not always intact throughout our life. As we grow, we are challenged by our society’s limits and often influenced by our surroundings. Therefore, the way an individual is nurtured will differ from their originally inherent character positively or negatively, and start to act the way they are more comfortable with. Such an example applies to a thirteen year old girl named Bonny. Even though she has some flaws in her character, Bonny is a well- rounded individual that is independent, imaginative, and reliable. Those are some positive traits that she developed as she matured.
The jury system has in the past been described as ‘the jewel in the crown” or “the cornerstone” of the British criminal justice system by Lord Justice Auld in his book ‘Review of the Criminal Courts of England and Wales’. Trial by jury is an ancient and democratic institution (Jury Under Attack). It will be seen later that it is a declining one, particularly DUE TO CONTEMPT OF COURT, A … Peter Carey, in his book, Media Law (2010) defines contempt of court refers to the courts ability to publish any person who interferes, in any way, with the proper functioning of the court system.