When America branched out from England, we continued the mindset of men being the dominant and women being lesser. Slowly over the years, women have been fighting for a higher role in societies eyes. Susan Glaspell expressed how she felt about societies mindset on women in a short story “A Jury of Her Peers”. This story is about a woman, Minnie, who is accused of murdering her husband. A group of officials, a witness and their wives went to the crime scene to find evidence. While they are trying to piece together what had happened, Glaspell shows many different ways women were looked down upon, whether it was disguised in jokes, blatant statements, or just the men’s carelessness.
First of all, they have the mindset that even though they didn’t
…show more content…
have a reason for the crime committed, since the suspect was a woman, the jury would see how she was guilty. This is evident when the county attorney states, “it's all perfectly clear, except the reason for doing it. But you know juries when it comes to women” (Glaspell). The men don’t even worry about figuring out the motives, they trust in the societies mindset on women. It interesting to see that the men are more interesting in finding evidence, while the women want to know why Minnie would commit such a terrible crime. In today’s courts, figuring out the motive is a huge deal, because the defense can say that the defendant had absolutely no reason to commit the crime, and the prosecution would have nothing to rebuttal. Another thing the story shows is how the men don’t even think the women are competent enough to know a clue when they see them. This is evident when Mr. Hale states his view as “But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?” (Glaspell). He blatantly insulted all women, in front of 2 women and one being his wife. It ends up that the women do find some things, like the bird and birdcage, that could be considered a clue or evidence, but would the men even listen to what they had to say? They hid the bird, the men discovered the birdcage, but they could not see what the women saw. In society today, we have female police officers and detectives, therefor they are very capable of finding evidence and can contribute to the case. The women noticed things around the house that the men were unable to see.
They saw the broken birdcage and dead bird as a sign of anger, but Minnie would’ve loved the bird, so who killed it? They also noticed that some of the stitching on the quilt was sloppy, which made them believe that Minnie was stressed about something, why was she stressed? While looking through the kitchen they realized how unorganized it was, and some of the food was going bad, what women would leave her kitchen like this? When the men saw these things they just made comments like “have you decided whether she was going to quilt it or knot it?” “There was a laugh for the ways of women”, and “Dirty towels! Not much of a housekeeper, would you say, ladies?". While the men look for “real evidence”, the ladies try to figure out what had happened. They come to the conclusion that the reason all these things were the way that they are because of the husband mistreating Minnie. She use to sing, be happy, and then she married Mr. Wright and it all changed. Mrs. Hale blames herself for not checking up on Minnie, but she thinks Minnie is justified in whatever …show more content…
happened. The men never took the women seriously, and had the “women were inferior” mindset; which caused a tension and distance between the men and their wives. The women didn’t trust the men and were “loyal to your sex” as the attorney stated, so they didn’t tell them about their discoveries. The women could’ve helped if the men were only willing to listen. Today, any information can help a case. Even if the person just has an idea of the motive behind the crime, it could help get the detectives in the right direction. With the information we are given in the short story, we can look at the evidence presented, and put it in a court today.
In the past the jury of a court was all men, who looked upon women as inferior, so the women were pretty much set up to fail in court. In courts today, women are held at an equal standard and respect as men. The jury would be co-ed; therefor Minnie would have a more fair chance of winning the case. Suspect wise, Minnie would be the first suspect, because of her being at the crime scene and seemingly having no care about what had happen to her husband. Defense wise, they might plead insanity, for she was undisturbed and seemed to have a past of abuse. The ideas that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters thought of about Minnie’s stressful, terrible life would have been used for an emotional appeal from the jury. The defense could use the dead bird as evidence that Mr. Wright was an angry and harmful person. The main thing that wouldn’t be used in today’s courts is the mindset that women are inferior and the bias that goes with that. Overall, Mrs. Wright probably would’ve been sent to get help at a rehab/psychologist
place. Today is definitely different in the way women are treated in court and in society. Women are given more respect and their voice actually means something. They can be a part of a jury or they can be a lawyer or a judge, making the trial fairer. Although there will always be some bias towards women, and even men, in this world, we have come far with the way women are respected and their voices are heard.
Minnie Wright, John’s wife, is the main suspect. This time, Sheriff Peters asked to bring his wife Mrs. Peters, the county attorney George Henderson, and his neighbors Martha and Lewis Hale to the crime scene. He intended for Lewis Hale, Mr. Henderson and him to solve the case. While Lewis Hale tells the group the details of how John Wright was found, Mrs. Peters and Martha Hale begin looking around the house to judge the state of the crime scene. Before even looking for evidence, Lewis Hale says “Oh, well, women are used to worrying over trifles” (160) to the dismay of Martha Hale and Mrs. Peters. Martha Hale notices that the Wrights’ house was unkempt and sad-looking, which was strange because Minnie Wright used to be a cheerful and meticulous homemaker. Again, Lewis Hale dismisses this as an inconsequential detail, stating that Minnie was just not a good homemaker, even though his wife Martha already told Mr. Henderson that “farmers’ wives have their hands full” (160). A few moments later, the men explore the house, but not before Mr. Hale ironically questions “But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?” (161). The women began to
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.
Mr. Hale describes Mrs. Foster as being “queer” or strange. It is know that people in highly stressful situations can behave in a manner that is considered inappropriate such as laughing at a funeral and perhaps Minnie Foster is in such a situation that mental she is struggling to believe what has happened. She may also be in a state of shock causing peculiar behavior and a lack of judgement. Furthermore, the possible motive that Minnie Foster killed her husband over him killing her bird is weak. Mrs. Hale remembers Mrs. Foster as being a normal girl who people adored and yet how could such a normal person commit murder over the death of a bird. Perhaps the bird had died and she simply had not had time to bury the bird. Minnie Foster’s behavior suggest she was in shock over the death of her husband causing her to act strange not because she killed her husband and further the weakness of the suggested motive that she killed Mr. Foster because he killed her bird jumps to a conclusion without clear
Hale and Mrs. Peters reflect on their past experiences with Mrs. Wright, saying she wasn’t a very cheerful person. Mrs. Wright’s house was very gloomy and lonely. The ladies believed her unhappiness with her marriage was due to not having any children to fill her home. Also, the bird symbolized joy in Minnie’s world. The ladies believed that the bird lightened up not only her home, but her spirits. “Mrs. Hale says, I wish you'd seen Minnie Foster when she wore a white dress with blue ribbons and stood up in the choir and sang. [A look around the room.] Oh, I wish I'd come over here once in a while! That was a crime! That was a crime! Who's going to punish that?” (976.) Mrs. Hale feels guilty for not visiting Minnie as much as she should have, and wondering if it would have changed things. Mrs. Hale knew women are better joining forces, than being left to fend for
A Jury of Her Peers by Susan Glaspell is a story that reveals how women were subjected to prejudice in the early part of the 1900s. The story revolves around Minnie Wright, who was at the center of a murder investigation, and two other women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, who decide their own verdict and fate of Mrs. Wright. Even though the women were at the height of sexual discrimination, Susan Glaspell shows how a woman’s bond and intuition far surpass that of any man. The struggle the women faced throughout the story shows how hard it was for women to live in a male dominate world.
On one side, she is married to the law, and on the other side, she understands what Minnie has been through. Her husband used to mentally abuse her to the point where she is now basically secluded from everyone and everything in the world. Mr. Hale even makes the comment, “Though I said at the same time that I didn’t know what his wife wanted made much difference to John” (260). The reader feels sympathy for Minnie throughout the story and gets a feeling of justification for her killing her husband and getting revenge. Mrs. Peters seems to have a hard time deciding whether to side with her inner feelings and cover for Minnie or to side with the law.
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.
In "A Jury of Her Peers," Susan Glaspell illustrates many social standards women experienced at the turn of the century. She allows the reader to see how a woman's life was completely ruled by social laws, and thus by her husband. Glaspell also reveals the ignorance of the men in the story, in particular the sheriff and the county attorney. I think some examples are rather extreme, but in Glaspell's day, they would have probably been common.
Mr. Hale found his neighbor, John Wright, strangled upstairs in the Wrights’ house with Minnie Wright, John’s wife, sitting calmly downstairs. With John Wright dead and his wife in jail, Mr. Hale, the sheriff, their wives, and the county attorney all crowded into the Wright’s house to try to find clues about the murder. While the men go upstairs, they leave the women downstairs “.worrying over trifles.” (“A Jury of Her Peers” 264) Unbeknownst to the men, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters find clue after clue that would convict Minnie Wright of the murder. Instead of telling the men about the clues, the women hide the clues and the men have no idea what the women have found.
In Susan Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers”, female characters face inequality in a society dominated by the opinions of their husbands. The women struggle to decide where their loyalty rests and the fate of a fellow woman. Aided by memories and their own lifestyles the women realize their ties to a woman held for murder, Minnie Foster Wright. Through a sympathetic connection these women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters have greater loyalty to a fellow woman than to their husbands and even the law; this greater loyalty ultimately shows the inequality between genders.
Twentieth century society places few stereotypical roles on men and women. The men are not the sole breadwinners, as they once were, and the women are no longer the sole homemakers. The roles are often reversed, or, in the case of both parents working, the old roles are totally inconsequential. Many works of literature deal with gendered roles and their effect on society as a whole or on an individual as a person. "A Jury Of Her Peers" and Trifles, both written by Susan Glaspell, are works of literature that deal with socially gendered roles during the early nineteenth century. The two works are almost exactly alike in that the dialogue from "A Jury Of Her Peers" becomes the actor's lines in Trifles. The gendered roles in the early 1900s place the woman in the kitchen, serving meals, baking bread, and canning fruits and jellies. She was also expected to be a mother to her children and a caretaker to her husband. The man, on the other hand, was expected to take care of his family, providing the home and the food that the wife would prepare. Often when gender plays too much a part in a household, communication is lost. The husband can not see a person when he looks at his wife. This was the case in "A Jury Of Her Peers" and Trifles. The men totally ignored their wives' thoughts and roles, and, therefore, they missed the entire point of the real motive behind Mr. Wright's murder. The social gap between men and women in the early 1800s provided the basis for Glaspell's story, "A Jury Of her Peers" and her play, Trifles.
Men always have the tendency to judge too quickly. In “A Jury of Her Peers”, by Susan Glaspell, Mrs. Hale, Mrs. Peters, and Minnie Foster and Mr. Henderson are attempting to look for the motive of Minnie killing her husband. The story starts by Mr. Peters informing the group, except for Minnie, while she waits in jail, that when he stopped by the day before to give Mr. Wright a telephone because the couple lived really removed from the rest of the town, he asked Minnie where Mr. Wright was and she calmly answered that he had been hung the night before. Then, the men head upstairs to look at the crime scene, while the women sit around the kitchen to talk. Accidentally, the women figure out the motive of the murder by talking about kitchen supplies, “trifles” as the men call it. They decided not to inform the men to keep Minnie from being convicted because her husband was equally guilty as her. In the short story, “A Jury of Her Peers”, Glaspell employs strong details and details devices to argue that the purpose of the story is how Glaspell portrays men, that a person must not be judged based on off of the external appearance and that the little details in life always are important.
The fight for equality for minorities dates back to the beginning of mankind. Women, in particular, fight for fairness even in today’s society. This ever-lasting battle can be seen in both “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman and “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell. Gilman’s story revolves around a woman who has postpartum depression. Her husband, who is also her physician, uses isolation to try and heal his wife’s “nervous disease.” Glaspell’s story, on the other hand, describes the murder of a man, with his wife being the prime suspect. This story is clearly about a battle of the sexes, where women ultimately win. Although these stories have many differences, both authors examine deep themes by using various literary
Mrs. Hale describes Minnie as formerly singing “real pretty herself” (Glaspell p666). The connection between Minnie and the canary is established here, and in the bird’s physical death parallels Minnie’s emotional death (Russell). Mrs. Hale’s keen wit and patience contributes to her embodiment of The Fate sister named Clotho the Spinner, which even more evident in her correcting of Minnie Wright’s improper stitching (Russell). Mrs. Peters begins the process of investigation deeply devoted to keeping the law. She doesn 't want any disruption in the house saying, “I don 't think we ought to touch things” (Glaspell p 666) when Mrs. Hale began searching for clues. Upon finding the dead canary, Mrs. Peters view on the situation changes drastically, and she decides with Mrs. Hale to hide the tiny dead bird from the men. They both figure that if the dead canary was discovered, Mrs. Wright would be thought to be a mad woman, though it was likely Mr. Wright who killed it. Mrs. Peters sympathizes with Minnie remembering back to an old memory of her childhood, where a menacing boy killed her small kitten with a hatchet (Russell). Mrs. Peters then realizes that the justice to be served is to conceal evidence and find the answers for themselves. These