A Jury Of Her Peers Rhetorical Analysis
English 102-010
22 October 2013
The Right Perspective Men and women do not always see things the same way, and often time’s, men consider themselves as superior to women because of their way of thinking. In “Jury of Her Peers”, the men, Mr. Peters, Mr. Hale, and Dr. Lloyd, are trying to solve the murder case and leave the women to their “trifles” in the kitchen while they work on the case. The men in the story seem to think that they are the only ones who are smart enough to solve the case or to know what evidence is, and in the end it is this misconception that allows the women to hide the evidence they find from the men. Susan Glaspell uses these gender …show more content…
issues to demonstrate the difference in how men and women treat investigations, consider evidence, and define justice. In the beginning of “Jury of Her Peers”, Glaspell demonstrates the differences in gender by showing their different views on what is important in a case and how to handle an investigation. The men think that they are the only ones who know what evidence is and that the women only came for one another’s company. The irony in this is that while the men are wasting time searching the house and barn for evidence of who killed Mr. Wright and where the murder weapon came from; the women notice important details while sitting and working around in the kitchen. These details not only lead to who murdered Mr. Wright, but also to the motive behind the murder. While the men are out “solving the crime”, the women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, are left to their “trifles” in the kitchen. At first the women try to carry small talk until the point when Mrs. Hale cannot take the messy state of the kitchen any longer and she begins to clean up the half finished projects left by Minnie. It is this cleaning process that brings Mrs. Hale to find the bird cage which motivates her to more closely examine the messes around her. The women find Minnie’s quilt while cleaning and begin to admire it. They notice a disturbing change in the stitching pattern and decide to fix it for her. It is when they go into the closet to find scissors that they find the box containing the bird wrapped in silk cloth prepped for burial. When they un-wrap the bird, they find that its neck is wrung. With the bird in hand, the women are able to piece together the series of events that lead to the murder and the motive behind it. They realize that Minnie identified with her bird and that her husband’s murder was symbolic of how he, in many ways, murdered her. Minnie snapped after years of being abused by her husband and killed him the same way he killed her bird, she wrung his neck. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are able to know all of this by finding the bird and relating to how Minnie must have felt when her husband killed it. The men were so distracted by the investigation they overlooked the small details that explained the whole crime which the women noticed in their trifles.
People often see crime as black and white, as in if you commit a crime you should be punished, but crime is not always that easy. In “Jury of Her Peers”, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are forced to reevaluate their views of right and wrong and to redefine justice. The women go from seeing things as black and white, as is commonly accepted, and begin looking at the situation from a new prospective. The main question that the ladies faced in the story was, was Minnie Foster truly guilty of murder or was she merely delivering justice to her husband for his many forms of abuse? Mary M. Bendel-Simso’s description of Minnie Foster is “[r]ather than being innocent, she is justified like the hangman, she cannot be guilty, for she is merely the arm of justice.” Mary is basically saying that the women came to the conclusion that Minnie murdered her husband based off of the evidence they found in the kitchen, but instead of using it to condemn her, they use it to justify her actions. The women look beyond the facts of murder and approach the situation from Minnie’s prospective. They try to imagine life through her eyes and how she must have felt when her husband killed the bird; they understand that Minnie identified herself with the bird and that when her husband killed the bird he also killed her spirit. It is this understanding of how Minnie felt that leads the women to believe that she was justified in her actions. They believe that in a way, she was like a judge delivering justice for a crime; instead of condemning her for murder, they justify her actions based on the circumstances surrounding the crime. In the end the women decide that it is best to take the case into their own hands and to hide the evidence because in their hearts they understand why she did what she did and they do not believe that she deserves to be punished further for her actions. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters believed that had their husbands treated them like Mr. Wright treated Minnie, they would have killed them just like Minnie did. It is believed that the greater crime was not Minnie murdering her husband, but that he cut her off from society and the communication and understanding that come with it. Karen Alkalay-Gut, the author of “Jury of Her Peers: The Importance of Trifles”, says in her article that “[t]he decision of the women is motivated, then, not by sexism, but by the realization that the gap between the sexes extends to a concept of law which negates the possibility of a ‘fair trial’ for Minnie Foster.” The women know that if they gave the evidence they found over to the men, Minnie would be charged with murder without a fair trial because the facts say that she murdered her husband and the men would not find the motive behind the murder important enough to throw out the case. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters found circumstantial evidence and without the men knowing how Minnie had identified with the bird or how her husband killing the bird had affected her, the men would not even know the symbolism of the bird or that it was evidence and that is why it was okay for the women to hide the evidence. Men and women have very different ways of viewing things and processing information especially when it comes to things like murder investigations and the law. Susan Glaspell demonstrates this throughout her story “Jury of Her Peers” by bringing to light the different ways the men and women investigate the scene of the crime and how they handle the evidence that is found. It is because men and women think differently that while the men were out searching for facts and trying to piece what they already knew together, the women were able to solve the crime by cleaning and relating to Minnie by seeing things through her eyes.
Bibliography
"A Jury of Her Peers." Library Journal 121.3 (1996): 176. ProQuest. Web. 26 Sep. 2013
"A JURY OF HER PEERS." Kirkus Reviews.1 (2009)ProQuest.
Web. 26 Sep. 2013.
Kehe, Marjorie. "A Jury of Her Peers." The Christian Science Monitor: 25. Mar 31 2009. ProQuest. Web. 26 Sep. 2013 .
Mustazza, Leonard. "Generic Translation And Thematic Shift In Susan Glaspell 's "Trifles" And "A Jury Of Her Peers." Studies In Short Fiction 26.4 (1989): 489-496. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Bendel-Simso, Mary M. "Twelve Good Men Or Two Good Women: Concepts Of Law And Justice In Susan Glaspell 's 'A Jury Of Her Peers. '." Studies In Short Fiction 36.3 (1999): 291. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Hedges, Elaine. "Small Things Reconsidered: Susan Glaspell 's ' 'A Jury Of Her Peers '." Women 's Studies 12.1 (1986): 89. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Alkalay-Gut, Karen. "Jury Of Her Peers: The Importance Of Trifles." Studies In Short Fiction 21.1 (1984): 1. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Lutes, Jean Marie. "A Jury Of Her Peers: American Women Writers From Anne Bradstreet To Annie Proulx/Owning Up: Privacy, Property, And Belonging In US Women 's Life Writing." American Literature 84.2 (2012): 461-463. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept.
2013.
22 October 2013
The Right Perspective Men and women do not always see things the same way, and often time’s, men consider themselves as superior to women because of their way of thinking. In “Jury of Her Peers”, the men, Mr. Peters, Mr. Hale, and Dr. Lloyd, are trying to solve the murder case and leave the women to their “trifles” in the kitchen while they work on the case. The men in the story seem to think that they are the only ones who are smart enough to solve the case or to know what evidence is, and in the end it is this misconception that allows the women to hide the evidence they find from the men. Susan Glaspell uses these gender …show more content…
issues to demonstrate the difference in how men and women treat investigations, consider evidence, and define justice. In the beginning of “Jury of Her Peers”, Glaspell demonstrates the differences in gender by showing their different views on what is important in a case and how to handle an investigation. The men think that they are the only ones who know what evidence is and that the women only came for one another’s company. The irony in this is that while the men are wasting time searching the house and barn for evidence of who killed Mr. Wright and where the murder weapon came from; the women notice important details while sitting and working around in the kitchen. These details not only lead to who murdered Mr. Wright, but also to the motive behind the murder. While the men are out “solving the crime”, the women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, are left to their “trifles” in the kitchen. At first the women try to carry small talk until the point when Mrs. Hale cannot take the messy state of the kitchen any longer and she begins to clean up the half finished projects left by Minnie. It is this cleaning process that brings Mrs. Hale to find the bird cage which motivates her to more closely examine the messes around her. The women find Minnie’s quilt while cleaning and begin to admire it. They notice a disturbing change in the stitching pattern and decide to fix it for her. It is when they go into the closet to find scissors that they find the box containing the bird wrapped in silk cloth prepped for burial. When they un-wrap the bird, they find that its neck is wrung. With the bird in hand, the women are able to piece together the series of events that lead to the murder and the motive behind it. They realize that Minnie identified with her bird and that her husband’s murder was symbolic of how he, in many ways, murdered her. Minnie snapped after years of being abused by her husband and killed him the same way he killed her bird, she wrung his neck. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are able to know all of this by finding the bird and relating to how Minnie must have felt when her husband killed it. The men were so distracted by the investigation they overlooked the small details that explained the whole crime which the women noticed in their trifles.
People often see crime as black and white, as in if you commit a crime you should be punished, but crime is not always that easy. In “Jury of Her Peers”, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are forced to reevaluate their views of right and wrong and to redefine justice. The women go from seeing things as black and white, as is commonly accepted, and begin looking at the situation from a new prospective. The main question that the ladies faced in the story was, was Minnie Foster truly guilty of murder or was she merely delivering justice to her husband for his many forms of abuse? Mary M. Bendel-Simso’s description of Minnie Foster is “[r]ather than being innocent, she is justified like the hangman, she cannot be guilty, for she is merely the arm of justice.” Mary is basically saying that the women came to the conclusion that Minnie murdered her husband based off of the evidence they found in the kitchen, but instead of using it to condemn her, they use it to justify her actions. The women look beyond the facts of murder and approach the situation from Minnie’s prospective. They try to imagine life through her eyes and how she must have felt when her husband killed the bird; they understand that Minnie identified herself with the bird and that when her husband killed the bird he also killed her spirit. It is this understanding of how Minnie felt that leads the women to believe that she was justified in her actions. They believe that in a way, she was like a judge delivering justice for a crime; instead of condemning her for murder, they justify her actions based on the circumstances surrounding the crime. In the end the women decide that it is best to take the case into their own hands and to hide the evidence because in their hearts they understand why she did what she did and they do not believe that she deserves to be punished further for her actions. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters believed that had their husbands treated them like Mr. Wright treated Minnie, they would have killed them just like Minnie did. It is believed that the greater crime was not Minnie murdering her husband, but that he cut her off from society and the communication and understanding that come with it. Karen Alkalay-Gut, the author of “Jury of Her Peers: The Importance of Trifles”, says in her article that “[t]he decision of the women is motivated, then, not by sexism, but by the realization that the gap between the sexes extends to a concept of law which negates the possibility of a ‘fair trial’ for Minnie Foster.” The women know that if they gave the evidence they found over to the men, Minnie would be charged with murder without a fair trial because the facts say that she murdered her husband and the men would not find the motive behind the murder important enough to throw out the case. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters found circumstantial evidence and without the men knowing how Minnie had identified with the bird or how her husband killing the bird had affected her, the men would not even know the symbolism of the bird or that it was evidence and that is why it was okay for the women to hide the evidence. Men and women have very different ways of viewing things and processing information especially when it comes to things like murder investigations and the law. Susan Glaspell demonstrates this throughout her story “Jury of Her Peers” by bringing to light the different ways the men and women investigate the scene of the crime and how they handle the evidence that is found. It is because men and women think differently that while the men were out searching for facts and trying to piece what they already knew together, the women were able to solve the crime by cleaning and relating to Minnie by seeing things through her eyes.
Bibliography
"A Jury of Her Peers." Library Journal 121.3 (1996): 176. ProQuest. Web. 26 Sep. 2013
"A JURY OF HER PEERS." Kirkus Reviews.1 (2009)ProQuest.
Web. 26 Sep. 2013.
Kehe, Marjorie. "A Jury of Her Peers." The Christian Science Monitor: 25. Mar 31 2009. ProQuest. Web. 26 Sep. 2013 .
Mustazza, Leonard. "Generic Translation And Thematic Shift In Susan Glaspell 's "Trifles" And "A Jury Of Her Peers." Studies In Short Fiction 26.4 (1989): 489-496. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Bendel-Simso, Mary M. "Twelve Good Men Or Two Good Women: Concepts Of Law And Justice In Susan Glaspell 's 'A Jury Of Her Peers. '." Studies In Short Fiction 36.3 (1999): 291. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Hedges, Elaine. "Small Things Reconsidered: Susan Glaspell 's ' 'A Jury Of Her Peers '." Women 's Studies 12.1 (1986): 89. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Alkalay-Gut, Karen. "Jury Of Her Peers: The Importance Of Trifles." Studies In Short Fiction 21.1 (1984): 1. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2013.
Lutes, Jean Marie. "A Jury Of Her Peers: American Women Writers From Anne Bradstreet To Annie Proulx/Owning Up: Privacy, Property, And Belonging In US Women 's Life Writing." American Literature 84.2 (2012): 461-463. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept.
2013.