The play ‘Trifles’ by Susan Glaspell is written in feminist spirit, in a spirit of aggressive revolt against androcentric domination; this tone probably dictates the distinctive features of its plot. The most notable aspect of the play is the emphasis on female personality traits, such as cunningness and strong logic, when it is necessary to notice and analyze ‘trifles’, or minor details. Human life is actually composed of trifles rather than global issues, and the underestimated women characters from the play are the greatest example of this life wisdom.
The beginning of the play is the first episode demonstrating the inferiority of the female gender: the women characters must stay behind their husbands’ backs – this symbolic scene actually represents the conditions, to which middle-class women are fated, more precisely – to the life of eternal housekeeper, mother and wife, but nothing more (Ben-Zvi, 1995). Thus, thus first reason for the limited revelation of the nature of crime is ‘female revenge’ or ‘female camouflage’. The men mock the women’s interests like quilting and knitting: “They wonder if she was going to quilt it or just knot it. (The men laugh, the women look abashed.)” (Glaspell, at www.vcu.edu, 2008). In addition, the men’s wives are left in the kitchen for only reason: the investigators are sure there is no evidence in this room: “nothing but kitchen things” (Glaspell, at www.vcu.edu, 2004). Kitchen, a typically ‘feminine’ symbol, is viewed by them as deserving no attention. As Ben-Zvi asserts, “the concerns of the women are considered little or silly and insignificant and this is the most important reason for the men’s comments about them. The Sheriff laughs when the women express that maybe the frozen preserves have some meaning” (Ben-Zvi, 1995, p. 319). Mr.Hale, one of the witnesses, says: “women are used to worrying over trifles” (Glaspell, at www.vcu.edu, 2004), so ‘small-minded’ wives decide to teach a lesson to their husbands.
Another significant reason for the stress on female reasoning that, as the author demonstrates, excels male logic, is the notion that males are not likely to listen to their wives’ arguments. Even though the women could have build a perfect logical chain of evidence, the Sheriff and the Attorney wouldn’t have believed the allegedly simplistic statements like: “(Mrs. Hale) I s’pose maybe the cat got it [the cage]. (Mrs.Peters) No, she didn’t have a cat. She’s got that feeling some people have about cats – being afraid of them. My cat got in her room, and she was real upset and asked me to take it out” (Glaspell, at www.vcu.edu, 2008). Thus, it is even possible to predict the Sheriff’s reaction to the women’s confession; he would probably have said something like: “Ladies, I’m sorry, but we are busy with searching for true details and evidence, not the trifles”. The time honored male attitude towards female as to a dumb creature thus plays its role, so that the investigators in skirts have a ‘silent agreement’ to avoid revelations.
In addition, it is highly important to note that the major characters of the play manage to capitalize on their perfectly attentive eyes, i.e. they have a high degree of self-awareness and know themselves up to the most insignificant personality traits and skills (which appear defining in the situation described by Glaspell) so that they can successfully help one another in adverse situations.
As for the legal and ethical evaluation of the conclusion the females draw – in my opinion, these two positions are diametrically opposed. From the ethical viewpoint, their secret can be justified, as the women “live lose together and […] far apart. We all go through the same things – it’s all just a different kind of the same thing” (Glaspell, at www.vcu.edu, 2008), i.e. Mrs.Peters and Mrs.Hale understand Mrs.Wright’s situation and the fact that she had been locked in the same house with the male tyrant, who had been gradually destroying her soul and her personality. From the legal viewpoint, however, the crime must be punished, as it is the responsibility of court to decide whether the person can be justified or is guilty (Ben-Zvi, 1995).
On the other hand, even the policy of conspiracy chosen by the three women can be justified, as their ability to see minor aspects of a larger issue allows them to conclude that Mrs.Wright, although her crime refers rather to self-defense than to purposeful manslaughter, is likely to be judged in the discriminatory way in this patriarchal society, so their considerations are not likely to be requested. Interestingly, whereas males probably fail to notice their “superiority behavior”, women remember each discriminatory or subjectively humiliating episode, each negative trifle in their relationships with men. Therefore, due to the lack of trust for the judicial and executive apparatuses, controlled by men, Mrs.Peters and Mrs.Hale prevent the full revelation of the vital details and evidence of the transgression.
To sum up, the way the author highlights the women’s investigation is determined by two main notions: females are extremely attentive and much more analytical in reasoning about the space that surrounds them, as compared to males. Although women are obviously discriminated by their male antagonists, the author depicts a situation in which such gender bias is beneficial to the three ladies involved. Even though the females act righteously from the position of ‘ethical justice’, the destruction of evidence is classified as a crime, so that for the purpose of female solidarity Mrs.Hale and Mrs.Peters involve into the severe deviance.
Works cited
Ben-Zvi, L. Susan Glaspell: Essays on Her Theater and Fiction. University of Michigan Press, 1995.
Glaspell, S. Trifles. 2008, Web.