Jerz: Am Lit II (EL 267) (Draft): Glaspell, ''A Jury of Her Peers''
I have to admit I don't quite understand what the point the author is trying to make is. Especially because I didn't read the author's entire name before reading the short story. I thought it was written by a man because of all the sexist comments. Now that I went back to see when it was written (which I apparently have missed as well) I saw that the writer was in fact FEMALE!
All through reading the story, I thought it was amusing that the women were taking the side of the accused (another woman), which is where we get the title of the story I assume.
There was a lot I didn't understand though. I don't get a feel for the time-period this was written about, I am assuming it was written at earliest 1915 (hence the title of our course) but the story itself seems to take place at an earlier date but it never says. So during the reading, I was picturing this happen in more of a modern day when my grandmother or mother would have lived and I know that women weren't treated as bad then, maybe back in the days of the 1800's and the prairie life but not after 1915.
I am glad that the women kept the secret of the dead canary from the men conducting the search only because I would have killed the bastard if he killed my pet too. So in my not so humble opinion he got what he deserved, he took a life so in turn he paid with his. I feel bad for Minnie because not only did her husband take the life of the only thing that brightened hers, we get the feeling that he took her life as well - figuratively of course. The women talk about how she used to be so lively, beautiful, friendly, and basically normal. But then after marrying her husband she became downtrodden and sullen.
I think the story could have been elaborated more so we actually find out what happens to Minnie. I don't like that fact that we are left to think she is going to be sentenced to death just because she is a woman since they cannot find any evidence to prove her innocent. That just doesn't seem right. Of course you can find evidence to prove someone guilty but rarely do you have evidence to prove someone innocent. Because of that, I can understand why the women hid the dead bird from the men because that would be the evidence they needed.
This story just left me with an unsettling feeling that Minnie would be put to death for killing her husband who appears to very much have deserved what he had coming.
Posted by LesleyTodoric at January 31, 2005 09:37 PM | TrackBackA good set of responses. Yes, the story was written just inside the time period of our course, but it seems to be set a little while earlier. There is a reference to putting a telephone line in, so it can't be too far in the past.
Take a look at the story again... I don't think she's at risk of execution just becuase they can't find evidence. Our legal system may not be perfect, but it doesn't work that way at all!
I choose this story because people tend to take strong opinions on it...
Turning the question aroudn a bit... What if Minnie had a child who killed her pet bird... would she have been justified in killing that child?
What if she had killed her husband's pet fish... would he have been justified in killing her?
What if, instead of killing a bird, Wright had killed Minnie's pet cricket? Or not even a living thing at all -- maybe he broke her prized china doll?
Posted by: Dennis G. Jerz at February 1, 2005 09:29 AMYou wrote: "So during the reading, I was picturing this happen in more of a modern day when my grandmother or mother would have lived and I know that women weren't treated as bad then, maybe back in the days of the 1800's and the prairie life but not after 1915."
I don't know if I can agree with you on that statement.. I mean, women only got the right to vote in the 1920's and change is generally slow in coming so I don't imagine things got better right away. Women still earn 73cents (or so) on the dollar that a man earns. Just a thought...
Also, from reading the story, I got the impression that Minnie wasn't in danger of the death penalty specifically because the men hadn't found any hard evidence giving a reason why she would have done it... remember, it's innocent until proven guilty (supposedly!)
and i have to agree with you that had somebody killed a pet of mine i woulda -wanted- to hurt them in revenge!
anyway.. hi! :c)
Posted by: moira at February 1, 2005 01:41 PM