In my mind, feminism carries such negative connotations; never, in a million years, would I identify myself as a feminist. However, after reading and rereading Alice Walker’s definition, I was forced to accept the fact that I possessed several characteristics of a womanist. Men and women are completely different in almost every way possible. Generally, we have such different bodies, and such different hearts. I got scolded in poetry class once because I refused to think of myself, and my gender as a whole, equal to men. Are we, as females, less than men? No, absolutely not. However, we are incomparable.
This difference is beautifully expressed in Susan Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers,” when Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are empathizing with Minnie Foster. Unlike the men, who are focused on the physical evidence, the women of this story are captivated by the lives defined by the walls of this sad house. Demonstrating the marvelous characteristics of compassion, of empathy, and of powerful emotion, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are examples of everyday women.
At first glance, the men in this story are the antagonists, especially John Wright. Mrs. Hale seemingly accuses John of ruining Minnie; therefore, blaming him for his own death. Yet, as the story progresses, Mrs. Hale begins to blame herself for Minnie’s possible psychotic break because she doesn’t believe she was the friend to Minnie that she should’ve been. This piece didn’t talk about the empowering imperialistic woman that is the stereotypical face of feminism, but really embraced the beautiful, raw woman that is full emotion and compassion, and who carries, secretly, the weight of the world. This story was a story of womanism, the women who loves struggle, who loves the spirit, who appreciates her emotional flexibility, and who has natural strength beyond the physical.
I really enjoyed reading "A Jury of Her Peers," it is reminiscent of Kate Chopin's work, another author that I adore. I also enjoyed how the story is based in fact, but is not married to the structure of reality—by means of the female “jury” of Mrs. Hale and Peters. I also noted that the character of Minnie, who never actually appears in the story, is intriguing. She is only seen through the descriptions of others, which gives a clear picture of her life, sad as it was. Although there is little dialogue, the "meat" of the story is in what is left unspoken. So little authors seem to take the time to use this effective device in furthering their stories, it seems to be unusual when one happens upon such a narrative. Perhaps I am wrong, but I am speaking from my own personal experience as a reader and writer of various genres. Glaspell does the story justice, by leaving certain details out, in the same way that Mrs. Hale and Ms. Peters do Minnie justice in leaving out their discovered details of her miserable life. It seems that Glaspell fully understands this concept, that one may not be judged fairly outside of their cultural or social arena. “A Jury of Her Peers” contributes to the discourse of women’s rights and place in society, noting that not all people are created equal—and sadly, must be heard by their peers for a fair trial.
"A Jury of Her Peers", is a strong and riveting read at best. You can't walk away from the story and not ponder, "What would I have done in this situation". The story of Minnie is a heartbreaking one, due to the few facts that we see about her in the story, she had once been a a beautiful, kind, and sweet woman. What would have driven her to the murder of her husband and why did she kill him? Those answers are somewhat simplified and exposed in some ways in the story but I wanted to know a bit more. Maybe it just my curiosity but I think that is what really makes readers wonder and that may be a good additive. We may never know all the details but what we do know is, her peers (Mrs. Hale and Peters) saved her through their feminine devotion and interventiong from a unjust death. Not that I want to justify her murdering her husband but I don't believe that Minnie would have gotten the time and trial today as she would have then. What the two ladies did on her behalf was one simple thing,"think". They asked the questions (to themselves) that their husbands weren't willing to despite the consequences better than any CSI detective I ever seen. They used the skills that women are blessed with to save Minnie's life:sympathy, compassion, and reasoning. I believe that was the key behind a "Jury of Her Peers", because her female peers were able to see what the men couldn't.
This story indeed to me was very interesting and kept me on my feet. As I had began to read it, I found myself trying to hurry up and read to see what would happen next. I liked the fact that the women kept the secret between only them and did not tell the men what was going on. However, through reading beginning I was wondering to myself why she killed her husband and when the ladies found the dead bird in the sewing box I figured that the husband had abused the bird and his wife took it out on him and killed him. This was indeed a spark of interest to me and I can honestly say that I could read this story over and over again because of mystery and as a fellow classmate mentioned it was something like CSI. It always had its reader guessing what was next and how the women could spot every piece of evidence and the men continued to go upstairs. This story also showed me how true friends will defend one and stay true to their words. For example, if I have a friend that may have committed a minor crime like stealing a pair of socks of something of course I would not tell because it was something petty for one thing and plus it's nothing to make a big deal about.Plus, they could have done it and I was not paying any attention to what they were doing and went on about my own business.
In my mind, feminism carries such negative connotations; never, in a million years, would I identify myself as a feminist. However, after reading and rereading Alice Walker’s definition, I was forced to accept the fact that I possessed several characteristics of a womanist. Men and women are completely different in almost every way possible. Generally, we have such different bodies, and such different hearts. I got scolded in poetry class once because I refused to think of myself, and my gender as a whole, equal to men. Are we, as females, less than men? No, absolutely not. However, we are incomparable.
ReplyDeleteThis difference is beautifully expressed in Susan Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers,” when Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are empathizing with Minnie Foster. Unlike the men, who are focused on the physical evidence, the women of this story are captivated by the lives defined by the walls of this sad house. Demonstrating the marvelous characteristics of compassion, of empathy, and of powerful emotion, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are examples of everyday women.
At first glance, the men in this story are the antagonists, especially John Wright. Mrs. Hale seemingly accuses John of ruining Minnie; therefore, blaming him for his own death. Yet, as the story progresses, Mrs. Hale begins to blame herself for Minnie’s possible psychotic break because she doesn’t believe she was the friend to Minnie that she should’ve been. This piece didn’t talk about the empowering imperialistic woman that is the stereotypical face of feminism, but really embraced the beautiful, raw woman that is full emotion and compassion, and who carries, secretly, the weight of the world. This story was a story of womanism, the women who loves struggle, who loves the spirit, who appreciates her emotional flexibility, and who has natural strength beyond the physical.
I really enjoyed reading "A Jury of Her Peers," it is reminiscent of Kate Chopin's work, another author that I adore. I also enjoyed how the story is based in fact, but is not married to the structure of reality—by means of the female “jury” of Mrs. Hale and Peters. I also noted that the character of Minnie, who never actually appears in the story, is intriguing. She is only seen through the descriptions of others, which gives a clear picture of her life, sad as it was. Although there is little dialogue, the "meat" of the story is in what is left unspoken. So little authors seem to take the time to use this effective device in furthering their stories, it seems to be unusual when one happens upon such a narrative. Perhaps I am wrong, but I am speaking from my own personal experience as a reader and writer of various genres. Glaspell does the story justice, by leaving certain details out, in the same way that Mrs. Hale and Ms. Peters do Minnie justice in leaving out their discovered details of her miserable life. It seems that Glaspell fully understands this concept, that one may not be judged fairly outside of their cultural or social arena. “A Jury of Her Peers” contributes to the discourse of women’s rights and place in society, noting that not all people are created equal—and sadly, must be heard by their peers for a fair trial.
ReplyDelete"A Jury of Her Peers", is a strong and riveting read at best. You can't walk away from the story and not ponder, "What would I have done in this situation". The story of Minnie is a heartbreaking one, due to the few facts that we see about her in the story, she had once been a a beautiful, kind, and sweet woman. What would have driven her to the murder of her husband and why did she kill him? Those answers are somewhat simplified and exposed in some ways in the story but I wanted to know a bit more. Maybe it just my curiosity but I think that is what really makes readers wonder and that may be a good additive. We may never know all the details but what we do know is, her peers (Mrs. Hale and Peters) saved her through their feminine devotion and interventiong from a unjust death. Not that I want to justify her murdering her husband but I don't believe that Minnie would have gotten the time and trial today as she would have then. What the two ladies did on her behalf was one simple thing,"think". They asked the questions (to themselves) that their husbands weren't willing to despite the consequences better than any CSI detective I ever seen. They used the skills that women are blessed with to save Minnie's life:sympathy, compassion, and reasoning. I believe that was the key behind a "Jury of Her Peers", because her female peers were able to see what the men couldn't.
ReplyDeleteThis story indeed to me was very interesting and kept me on my feet. As I had began to read it, I found myself trying to hurry up and read to see what would happen next. I liked the fact that the women kept the secret between only them and did not tell the men what was going on. However, through reading beginning I was wondering to myself why she killed her husband and when the ladies found the dead bird in the sewing box I figured that the husband had abused the bird and his wife took it out on him and killed him. This was indeed a spark of interest to me and I can honestly say that I could read this story over and over again because of mystery and as a fellow classmate mentioned it was something like CSI. It always had its reader guessing what was next and how the women could spot every piece of evidence and the men continued to go upstairs.
ReplyDeleteThis story also showed me how true friends will defend one and stay true to their words. For example, if I have a friend that may have committed a minor crime like stealing a pair of socks of something of course I would not tell because it was something petty for one thing and plus it's nothing to make a big deal about.Plus, they could have done it and I was not paying any attention to what they were doing and went on about my own business.