How Does Susan Glaspell Use Irony In A Jury Of Her Peers

Having studied the time period myself, I concur with her real time assessment of these stark separations. However, I strongly disagree with the statement she makes in her conclusion of the story. By having the women forgo their responsibility to uphold justice in the eyes of the law, or, at a bear minimum, not to obstruct it, Glaspell leads the reader to believe that murder, perhaps the worst crime that can be committed by man, or woman, is to be forgiven without reproach because of purported mental abuse! I find the idea sickening. That there are evil people in the world who take the life of others is bad enough, but to consider that some rationalize such activities because of a certain social persuasion is intolerable.

     The other view that Glaspell shows in this play is a sympathy that the reader grows for the women. How they are forced to follow the men. Like when they are asked to get close to the fire, they do it even though Mrs. Peters

In spite of the generation, Susan Glaspell refused concede into its way of life. She advocated for feminism during this time period. Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers” should be included in Penn Manor’s American Literature curriculum because of her capability to express feminism at a time where it was discouraged. It is important to realize that the time of the short story, “A Jury of Her Peers” was created, it was not the most understanding age. Majority of the people had a mindset of thinking situations were black and white. They would only see the circumstances that occurred in world in extremes, and they would not consider the other side. Explained in this section:

In Susan Glaspell’s, “A Jury of her Peers”, it is the women who take center stage and captivate the reader’s emotions. Throughout the feministic short story, which was written in 1917, several repeating patterns and symbols help the audience to gain a deeper understanding of the difficulty of prairie life for women and of the bond that women share. The incredible cunning the women in the story demonstrate provides insight into the innate independence that women had even during days of deep sexual discrimination. In “A Jury of her Peers”, the hardships women of the early twentieth century must endure and the sisterhood that they can still manage to maintain are manifested as a mysterious, small-town murder unfolds.

While each proses a serve of justice and determination to do the right thing; the men approach the crime scene emotionless, indifferent and determined to go in and get to the bottom of the mystery as quick as possible, and push aside the little details. Little do they know that the things they are putting off could be very essential to their case? For example, in a conversation between the attorney and Mr. Hale who remarks, “..I said to Harry that I didn’t know as what his wife wanted made such a difference to John..” who was interrupted by the attorney in mid conversation and interjects, “Let’s talk about that later, Mr. Hale. I do want to talk about that, but tell now just what happened when you got to the house.” (1127) Meanwhile, while the men are out on their hunt for clues, the women stay in the kitchen to look through Mrs. Wright’s things and discuss a motive for why she killed her husband. Glaspell proposes a plan that by looking deeper into circumstances, you may in turn fully understand its true meaning; leaving no stone left unturned.

Susan Glaspell’s one-act play covers issues regarding female oppression and patriarchal domination. The play still exists as a fascinating hybrid of murder mystery and social commentary on the oppression of women. When Margaret Hossack was charged with the murder of her sixty year old husband John, the man she had been married to for thirty three years. Killed by two blows to his head with an ax, John Hossack was thought to be a cold mannered and difficult man to be married to, but he didn’t deserve his

“A Jury of Her Peers” is a short story written by Susan Glaspell in 1917 illustrates early feminist literature. The two female characters, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, is able to solve the mystery of who the murderer of John Wright while their male counterparts could not. This short story had been adapted from Glaspell’s one-act play Trifles written the previous year. The play consists of the same characters and plotline as the story. In both works, Glaspell depicts how the men, Sheriff Peters and Mr. Hale, disregard the most important area in the house, the kitchen, when it comes to their investigation. In the end, the women are the ones who find clues that lead to the conclusion of Minnie Wright, John Wright’s wife, is the one who murdered him. Both of Glaspell’s female characters illustrate the ability to step into a male dominated profession by taking on the role of detective. According to Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide, written by Lois Tyson, a reader-response critique “focuses on readers’ response to literary texts” and it’s a diverse area (169). Through a reader-response criticism from a feminist lens, we are able to analyze how “A Jury of Her Peers” and Trifles depict how a patriarchal society oppresses women in the early twentieth century, gender stereotypes confined both men and women and the emergence of the New Woman is illustrated.

From beginning to end, Susan Glaspell’s 1917 short story “A Jury of Her Peers,” has several repetitive patterns and symbols that help the reader gain a profound understanding of how hard life is for women at the turn-of-the-century, as well as the bonds women share. In the story two women go with their husbands and county attorney to a remote house where Mr. Wright has been killed in his bed with a rope and he suspect is Minnie, his wife. Early in the story, Mrs. Hale sympathizes with Minnie and objects to the way the male investigators are “snoopin’ round and criticizin’ ” her kitchen. In contrast, Mrs. Peters, the Sheriffs wife, shows respect for the law, saying that the men are doing “no more than their duty”. However, by the end of the story Mrs. Peters unites with Mrs. Hale in a conspiracy of silence and concealing evidence. What causes this dramatic transformation?

Susan Glaspell's short story, A Jury of Her Peers, was written long before the modern women's movement began, yet her story reveals, through Glaspell's use of symbolism, the role that women are expected to play in society. Glaspell illustrates how this highly stereotypical role can create oppression for women and also bring harm to men as well.

The two women are collecting items to bring to Mrs. Wright. It is Mrs. Wright’s house that is being probed through. She is the suspected murderer. There are also three men investigating in the house at the same time. To give credit to the men, one did say, “What would we do without the ladies?” However, he did it in the same breath as accusing Mrs. Wright of being a bad housekeeper. The men leave the women in the kitchen and stop though a couple of times. During one of the passing’s the men laugh at the women. The women were wondering if Mrs. Wright was going to knot or quilt a quilt she was piecing. The men mock this query. Shortly after that, the women piece together the events that likely caused the murder. Incidentally, the women do not reveal the probable narrative to the men. Did they keep it a secret to protect Mrs. Wright? Did they keep quiet because they didn’t think that the men would believe them? Or did the women keep it to themselves for fear of being

They don’t realize that the little things do matter in solving a case like this. By “worrying over trifles” (655), as Mr. Hale puts it, the women end up finding out a lot more about the murder than the men do.

In “A Jury of Her Peers,” Susan Glaspell uses the men’s belittlement and the women’s responses to show their differences. For example, when the men laugh about the women’s question of the quilt, Mrs. Hale responds with “our taking up our time with little things while we’re waiting for them to get the evidence. I don’t see as it’s anything to laugh about” (Glaspell 8). Seeing these differences bring the two women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, closer together. At one point in the story, “the two women moved a little closer together” in response when the men trivialize what trifles women go through (Glaspell 5). The women see things in the house that the men cannot due to the men never having to experience being in the place of a housewife. The men failed to see the little details that women could see. “Belittling the women, the condescending men exclude them from the legal investigation, doubting the women could recognize a forensic clue”, the men doing this causes their view of the crime to be incomplete, and they fail to recognize that the women were the men’s greatest investigators of this case (Kamir). Mr. Hale even completely ridicules the intelligence of the women altogether by saying “But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?” (Glaspell 6).

Susan Glaspell uses a variety of symbols in her play to demonstrate the stereotypical view and treatment of women by men during the start of the twentieth century. She intricately portrays the female characters in her story as intelligent, but passive due to the fact that males dismiss their ideas and conversations as unimportant. The play, Trifles, uses multiple symbols to show how men fail to recognize the intelligence of women, and oppress the feminists’ way of thinking throughout society.

Finally, the reader is introduced to the character around whom the story is centered, the accursed murderess, Mrs. Wright. She is depicted to be a person of great life and vitality in her younger years, yet her life as Mrs. Wright is portrayed as one of grim sameness, maintaining a humorless daily grind, devoid of life as one regards it in a normal social sense. Although it is clear to the reader that Mrs. Wright is indeed the culprit, she is portrayed sympathetically because of that very lack of normalcy in her daily routine. Where she was once a girl of fun and laughter, it is clear that over the years she has been forced into a reclusive shell by a marriage to a man who has been singularly oppressive. It is equally clear that she finally was brought to her personal breaking point, dealing with her situation in a manner that was at once final and yet inconclusive, depending on the outcome of the legal investigation. It is notable that regardless of the outcome, Mrs. Wright had finally realized a state of peace within herself, a state which had been denied her for the duration of her relationship with the deceased.

Glaspell develops the theme of gender roles by what Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters fret about at the crime scene. For instance, the first concern that Mrs. Peters voices revolves around Mrs. Wright’s fruit preserves and implies that the women are housekeepers. Both the Sheriff and Mr. Hale remark about how the women are “worryin’ about her preserves” and “worrying over trifles” (Glaspell 3). Later, when the men go upstairs to look for evidence, the women decide to bring Mrs. Wright’s apron, fruit, shawl, and quilt for her in prison. To further establish Mrs. Wright as a domesticated housewife, Mrs. Peters suggests that Mrs. Wright wants her apron “to make her feel more natural” (Glaspell 5). Because of what Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters discuss at the crime scene, Glaspell verifies that the women play the role of housekeeper and cook.