AUDIO 

We associate early drama with heroic male figures who come to see their lack of insight, mighty kings who fall because of pride. Though Greek playwrights dealt admirably at times with the relations between men and women. (See "Medea" or "The Trojan Women"), Renaissance drama showed us few strong women characters and women, in any event,  were not allowed to portray them on stage.  In the 19^th century Henrick Ibsen wrote what were called  “problem plays” directly addressing the issues women faced by middle class European women and created some fine women characters such as Nora in “A Doll House” and Hedda Gabler.  Susan Glaspell’s play"Trifles" is almost a hundred years old, and while many things about the status of women have changed, much remains the same. There are still couples like the Wrights, where one person holds power and the other is kept in a subservient state until the "last straw" engenders violence.

Still, the time of the play is obviously different from ours.  This is a time when women could not serve on juries, and there is not much chance for sympathy for Mrs. Wright at the upcoming trial if a motive for murder can be discovered. If not, there is little chance for a conviction, since the jury ("You know juries when it comes to women!"), not willing to believe that an angelic being like a woman might commit murder (and perhaps afraid of facing that knowledge), might be disposed to be gallant.  This over-idealization of women -- though it would help Mrs. Wright in her trial -- was as demeaning in its way as denigrating "the ladies" ("what would we ever do without them?") by ignoring their concerns. But the case is, in a way, decided before the trial by "a jury of her peers," which was also the title Glaspell chose for the short story version of the play.

The fact that Minnie Wright murdered her husband is obvious from the beginning. The mystery is her motivation.   We never see Mr. or Mrs. Wright. One is dead; the other is in jail.  They are only talked of.  The well-constructed plot focuses on the two women who accompany their husbands to the Wright house, showing us not only Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters’ gradual discovery of the motive for murder, but also their growing desire to cover up the evidence.

The whole thing starts to unravel with the first disparaging remark about the way poor Mrs. Wright keeps house.  From the beginning of the play where Mrs. Hale “stiffly” replies to  the men’s   remark about Mrs. Wright’s kitchen, “there’s a great deal to be done on a farm,"  both women come to identify increasingly with Mrs. Wright. They notice the trivializing of their concerns by the men early on, and, ironically, it is this failure of the men to take their "trifles" seriously that makes the cover-up possible. The gulf between men and women’s worlds drives this play. A single thing, a kitchen, evokes widely disparate responses. To Mr. Hale, Mrs. Wright is a poor housekeeper who lacks the homemaking instinct. To Mrs. Hale, Mrs. Wright‘s kitchen and its lack of cheerfulness is a sign of deep unhappiness. The two women enter the kitchen with their primary identify as their husbands’ wives. Indeed that is why they are there. They leave with a newfound sympathy and closeness, deciding against the harsh rationality of manmade law.

The  woman changing most in the play is Mrs. Peters, the sheriff’s wife, who at first stands by the "rational" concept that "the law is the law," is throughout frightened by the thought of  having an opinion of her own, but gradually sees that there is more to life than strict adherence to legalities. That she is a sheriff’s wife is important – like many wives of powerful elected officials (think Governor’s Wife), she is viewed as an extension of her husband, “married to the law.”

When the dead canary is found, Mrs. Peters is reminded of episodes from her own life. A boy killed the kitten she loved as a child, and she wanted to kill him in turn.  She recalls the stillness following the death of her firstborn baby. Mrs. Hale is particularly remorseful that she did not offer Mrs. Wright more support, but she was put off by the dreariness of the Wright’s home and hesitated to get involved – as many of us still do when we know someone is in trouble. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters’ growing empathy for Minnie Wright, juxtaposed against the lack of understanding and judgmental attitudes of the men, suggests that women must help  each other.

 Minnie Wright’s situation goes beyond her and is reflected in the lives of all the women who had to give up their freedom for marriage and  were then isolated, ignored by those who could help them: "I might have known she needed help!" Mrs. Hale says. "I know how things can be -- for women. . . . We live close together and we live far apart. We all go through the same things--it's all just a different kind of the same thing."

The difference between male and female perceptions is evident in the play.  The men are interested in the big picture while the women are good at ferreting out details and dealing with feelings rather than generalities. The contrasting reactions to Mr. Wright are a good example of this. Other than Dr. Flint, Mr. Wright is the most villainous man we have encountered so far. He is oppressive in the extreme, life-denying to the extent that he murders his wife’s pet. Jane’s husband  Dr. John would not have done this: he would have simply moved the cage downstairs so that Jane would not be overly excited by the canary’s singing. Both Bobinot and Alcee would have showered Calixta with canaries to make her happy. Though men like Hale and Peters might be decent enough to their wives, secure in their conviction of their innate superiority as men, the system allows for the tyranny that Mrs. Wright endured from a man who killed all her joy. Hale admits that Mr. Wright is not exactly someone he’d want to be friends with, he knows that “what his wife thought wouldn’t make any difference to him,” but fails to see this as the direly abusive situation it was –or as a possible motive for murder.  But Mrs. Hale understands Mr. Wright’s vast coldness and cruelty, describing vividly his effect on her: he is  "[l]ike a raw wind that gets to the bone.”

 At a time  when women stayed home and did hard work for which there was no reward but  condescension from their husbands for their “trifles” even if they did a good job and criticism if they weren’t good homemakers,  no wonder they began to rebel.  As the history of  liberation movements shows,  people can’t be deprived of their rights forever.  They may be afraid of the oppressors and pretend to be subservient, but inside they are angry and on the lookout for revenge, whether repaying brutality with murder, or self-satisfied but good-humored put-downs with subversion.

The women conceal evidence. Are they right (no pun intended) to do so? Sometimes it’s necessary to break unjust laws on behalf of a greater good. Should Minnie Wright be hanged or spend her life in prison for having struck out against her oppression? Today the courts are sometimes friendlier to plights like hers.

 [continue to part 2 of this lecture, "Force"]