Women In Susan Glaspell's A Jury Of Her Peers

1228 Words5 Pages

While Susan Glaspell’s 1917, “A Jury of her Peers” and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s 2014, “We Should All be Feminists” were written almost a century apart, both titles explore the idea that women’s role in society is inherently less important than men’s. Due to the nature of their sex, women’s voices are often trivialized, they have become stuck in roles molded just for them, and are brought up to think of marriage as an aspiration—rather than a choice. In the unjustly unbalanced scales of gender equality, men have been awarded an obvious advantage. Therefore, they can freely express their ideas, with little fear of reproach, while women’s voices are often unheard, overlooked, or trivialized. This is the case in “A Jury of Her Peers”, where Mr. Hale is depicted as a man who likes to run his mouth and spice up the truth by “saying unnecessary things that… would make trouble” (Glaspbell). An urge that was barely subsided by the fact that his words were being recorded as testimony, “Hale did speak guardedly, as if the pencil had affected him too “(Glaspbell). However, his statement isn’t questioned, and it actually serves a narrative device. Mrs. Hale, on the other hand, is portrayed …show more content…

The plot in “A Jury of Her Peers” revolves around an unhappy marriage, and the impact it had on the woman. Glaspell reveals that Foster’s marriage to John Wright killed her spirit. Thusly, she is presented as two separate entities: Minnie Foster (the true Self) and Mrs. Wright (the shadow):
“’I wish you'd seen Minnie Foster," was the answer, "when she wore a white dress with blue ribbons, and stood up there in the choir and sang.’
The picture of that girl, the fact that she had lived neighbour to that girl for twenty years, and had let her die for lack of life, was suddenly more than she could bear”