"Trifles" by Susan Glaspell

"Trifles" by Susan Glaspell reminds me of many of the shows that I watch on TruTv. You know the ones, where police search for evidence and someone or something hides the truth. Nowadays, much of these "hidden" things can be found simply through DNA evidence, but the police in "Trifles" did not have that luxury. They instead had to rely on their own intellect...and we can suppose that since they are men, that Glaspell is in fact asserting that the female is smarter (and in some ways, more cunning) than the male.

Certainly she demonstrates this by having the two women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, find the most important motive of Mrs. Wright's murder of her husband John, and then shows their wit in concealing said evidence. The evidence in question, the dead canary with the wrung neck, shows the women exactly why Mrs. Wright wrung the neck of her husband.

Of course, the men never notice this, but remain upstairs "gathering" evidence, or at least, what they think is evidence. The only thing they do know is that Mrs. Wright committed the murder, but even then, one needed evidence for a conviction.

What makes "Trifles" such a moving piece to me is the idea that Mrs. Wright's happiness was killed when her husband killed the canary, and how that parallels the oppression that men have over women, particularly during that time in history, when women did not have the jobs that they do today. Of course, that oppression is much more blatant. But what about the oppressions that we, as women, still face today.

I know that when I was in high school, I was told that my views on egalitarianism were not suitable for a god-fearing woman. I was to be submissive to the utmost, that even though I might know more than a man, I should always trust his judgment over mine. I am not like that, and I think that Mrs. Wright had had it (so to speak) in that department too. She probably isn't the sort of feminist that I am, but her actions certainly show a desire for escape from oppression. At least I think so, but you may disagree.

The last thing that I want to bring up about this story is the moral choice of the women to hide the condemning evidence. I do not think I could make a truly unbiased judgment in this matter because I understand Mrs. Wright's oppression, and not only that, but I was offended that the police thought that women only talk about "trifles". However, what the women did is obstruction of justice, and therefore wrong. But I am not sure if I could answer that they were completely moral or immoral in doing this. Situational ethics aren't my thing, usually, but for the sake of this blog and this story it is important.

Obviously, this brings me to my own case of situational ethics, which if you were in class, you heard about in brief detail, but here is not the place to discuss it. The feeling, though, is difficult and can sometimes tear you up. One thing I guess I would like to know of the women is if they were torn up by not giving the evidence. I would like to know how they feel about things, and maybe then I could make a better judgment.