Here are the guidelines:
- Reading responses must be AT LEAST 350 words.
- Include your full name at the end of your comments. Unnamed comments will be deleted.
- From the "Comment As" drop-down menu, choose Anonymous, then click "Publish."
- Reading responses are due by 10pm on the day PRIOR to our discussion of the required reading.
I did not like “Trifles” as I it was a play that could have been written as nonfiction. I preferred the narrating style of “Sure Thing”, “Trying to Find Chinatown”, and “The Divine Fallacy” as they allow the director, actor, and/or reader to visualize the stage and interactions as they so see. Instead, “Trifles” dares to provide even the facial expressions of the actors to revelations such as “HALE: Well, my first thought was to get that rope off. It looked…[Stops, his face twitches].” Instead, other plays previously mentioned use quick lines that allow for the visualization of the reactions based on the theme and diction of the characters. Furthermore, the length of the dialogue in “Trifles” caused a pain to read especially at the beginning of the story when Hale is explaining the events that led to the discovery of Mr. Wright. After enough background has been laid down, the conversations become easier to follow along as they are radically shortened from statements of 10 plus lines to 1 to 5 lines. The other plays for the most part do not deviate from one line responses other than for monologues and other larger statements.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I need to be conscious of the reason behind these long exchanges between characters. “Trifles” was written in the late 19th century. Dialogue was completely different from today. The use of vocabulary showcases the intergenerational differences as Glaspell’s character Hale describes Mrs. Wright’ semi catatonic state as “queer.” Queer used to today would have been used to describe someone with sexual orientation that is not heteronormative.
The topic as well was controversial at the time as described by the words used by Hale when he said “well, women are used to worrying over trifles.” However, it is hinted that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters make an important discovery by looking glancing around. The bird with the head twisted alone would not have been a complication enough until it was paired with more character development on the part of Mrs. Peters who admits she would have hurt the boy who had killed her kitten. Furthermore there are similarities between the caged bird and Mrs. Wright. Ultimately, the caged bird is an objective correlative for anger and rage that could no longer be contained.
-Alejandro Sanchez
The number one thing that I’ve realized while reading different plays and pieces like this short one scene Act, is that it is harder to visualize without seeing it played live. I had to read through “Trifles” several times to get a full understanding of Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters connection over Mrs. Wrights situation and her downfall. Even the visualization and the symbolisms in the “strangulation” of Mrs. Wright with her seclusion and abuse, wasn’t fully grasped until my third read through of this piece. If I had seen this acted out in front of me it would most likely have been fully understood from the start. That is what is becoming a number one factor as I read more playwrights. It is important what is written so that it can be comprehended when performed. As I read I was able to see Glaspell’s ability to subtly make fools out of the men. Even though they make fun of the women and their daily work and chores and duty’s. Glaspell is able to make the men look silly in their constant inconsistency and moving around, from the upstairs to the outside they are sporadic. Even how Glaspell was able to tie in the terminology of the quilting with the women’s decision to protect Mrs. Wright and using “knot.” The ability to unite the women over their work being referred to as insignificant is another interesting tactic. I enjoy mystery pieces and this was very intriguing to read. Although It took me a few times to map out what it would look like live, I was able to grasp and fully comprehend what Glaspell was wanting to put across in this piece. Even with the title “Trifle” she ties in the view the men have of women; that women are insignificant and that their work is just little “Trifles” with no true meaning or help unlike men and their work. Glaspell engaged my attention and worked my brain to try and determine the verdict. As a viewer I wanted to solve the entire mystery as I read. Overall I enjoyed this piece and wouldn’t mind seeing it acted out as a completed play instead of just one scene.
ReplyDeleteClaria Buddle
Trifles was indeed one of the most interesting stories I have ever read. Throughout the entirety of the play the mood was very suspenseful and intense and that made the story a thousand times more captivating. At certain points in the play, reading became a little more challenging to read and although the most obvious way to enjoy the play would have been to simply reread the that section again, I found that reading a play with so much dialogue can be pretty exhausting. Although I greatly enjoyed the story I would not wish to read it again because of the amount of time it took to read the whole thing, which in all sincerity was not even that long, but rather the amount of dialogue and the switching of the characters became a little over whelming and it was hard to keep up with that while still trying to keep in mind the mystery that was occurring. It reminded me of William Faulkner’s short story, A Rose for Emily in the sense that the pace and fluidity felt similar to me. One discussed element of the play was the amount of space and how the writer doesn’t necessarily have to tell the actor what he or she must be doing rather they should have space and room to experiment and bring the characters to life. Trifles, I noticed was filled with an amazing amount of detail to the actions the characters had to be doing on the stage and I found that element helpful in the sense that it really helped to enhance the actors and the suspenseful conflict they were going through. I thought that something like that would not work out, that it would be too risky but ultimate it proved to be a helping element. Being new to this area of writing I found that writing a play is kind of difficult and thus a greater appreciation and interest in this writing would be very beneficial to writing creatively.
ReplyDeleteMayra Lopez
One of the first things that caught my attention about Trifles is the realness of it. Though the play is a work of fiction, the author is going for realism and the play reads as if it could be a snippet out of someone’s life. Indeed, we read in Evans’ Biographical Influences that Glaspell was a reporter and that she surely drew from her experience as such to compose the drama.
ReplyDeleteBut what is Glaspell going for? Let us think for a moment when this work was written: the early 20th century when the women’s suffrage movement was in full swing. In Wright’s farmhouse, the women are generally segregated from the men and treated poorly and trivially by the men as well. The women hold the key for the motive of the murder but never divulge it to the men so as to, perhaps, protect their fair sister from a certain doom, a fair sister who was pushed beyond her breaking point by John Wright’s male chauvinistic tendencies.
Mrs. Wright is everywoman and every woman in the audience, who via societal conventions necessarily sat politely, quietly, and prettily in the audience next to her husband, understood her plight. Yet surely all their finery could not keep them from noticing their husband’s squirms as it became clear that the women held the key to case and it was the women the audience came to sympathize with, to understand the hardship all women must endure when she is ground down, inch by inch, by a husband who refused to let his wife remain the beautiful creature she was when they were married.
It’s a call to action, a reason to say “Enough of this injustice!” It is a reason to cause the men to sit quietly by and nod their heads in quiet approval as women take to the streets demanding their rights in the world. It is the dawning of a new age, a new age of freedom, a new age of expression, a championship over the barbaric practices that held women down.
Yet murder? Did it necessarily come to that? Ahhh…. here we finally acquiesce in our understanding that this is a work of fiction. Yet it is all too real: the horrific nature of the deed we all agree is wicked is compared to the chronic destruction of a once beautiful creature now brought so low. As to whether or not this is a just comparison is left to the audience to decide and surely must have stoked many a conversation in those heady days of the women’s suffrage movement.
Elizabeth Barham
I had a couple of mixed feelings toward the play Trifles by Susan Glaspell. It was a very lengthy, I was not very fond when it came to this play even though there was so much dialogue. I was a bit lost unfornately when it came to the characters there was so much going on all at once, it side tracked my attention. I had to go back and reread this play a couple of times in order to figure out what was going on. It is a murder mystery story and one of my main focuses was on was why Mr. Wright was killed. I wanted to know more or see if the sheriffs and deputies could get to the bottom of this. In this play even though the two women were just talking it did not seem to go anywhere. In my opinion, from the beginning it seemed to portray as a detective novel but then it slowly transitioned more into a drama type of work. There was absolutely no life that was put in these characters, the story to me seemed to drag on. I can pretty much figure that writing a play isn’t all that simple, I feel like it takes a lot of hard work and dedication to create a piece. You have to give it a lot of thoughts and engage your audience. With Glaspell I feel like she wants to try to send out a message to when it came to men for some reason. Minnie’s sadness and loneliness in her marriage drove her across the edge by killing her husband. She couldn’t take it anymore but in a way the women supported her for that, they don’t see it as a crime. That’s how women are they support one another no matter the situation. Every women’s dream when they get married to live happily with their husband, they think everything will be peachy? No, it’s not like that at all. I couldn’t really visualize this play if it was acted out on stage maybe I could get a full grasp on this. Instead in this play I got a better image of what the characters were feeling. As a reader, it hit me due to the fact that the reason why she killed her husband was because he killed her spiritually. That’s the worst you can do to woman. Also, in this play the men were pretty much making stupid remarks about women, in other words they were being put down for no reason. Women are a lot stronger than they think. The death of the bird becomes a great symbol in this play since Minnie’s life and Mr.Wright are both taken. I hope to incorporate my piece in a great manner.
ReplyDeleteAndrea Espericueta
Trifles was interesting to read and entertaining in its own unique way. The title on its own made me curious of what the possibilities of what it could be about raced through my mind. I find that I quite enjoyed the realism of it all since there is many conversations going on at once with more than two characters at a time. Although, it displeases me that there was so much dialogue that I had to take a break from looking at the speaking lines. The playwright could try to tone it down a little by proving more details on what the characters are doing or what is happening in within the timelines that the play is in. I can see that it would be tiring since the dialogue seems old-fashioned which I like, but it was pretty overdone. I do appreciate the fact that the characters are speaking to one another and creating some sort of conversational flow to go with the setting. I believe a kind of crime happened since the sheriff and the attorney were present, but it made me wonder what happened. It felt like a detective novel, but just ended up being a drama. I did not like how the story seemed to drag on, not really going anywhere or explaining anything.
ReplyDeleteI did not like that there was any kind of connection to the characters. How is the audience supposed to sympathize with situation without any emotional bond with any character? I kept wondering why Mr. Wright was killed, but I felt that is was left out on purpose to give the reader the sense of anticipation. Unfortunately, it died since the play did go on and on with never ending dialogue from everyone in the story. The language was wonderful and very detailed, but too much is a bad thing. I did enjoy about Mrs. Wright's life as Minnie and how they referred to her as a bird. Mrs. Hale even said, "she was kind of like a bird herself--real sweet and pretty, but kind of timid and--fluttery..." which represents how Minnie used to be and Mrs. Hale said that she changed after her marriage as well. I love how they don't see the murder as a crime, they see it as an act of justice. It is such a great way to display friendship between women and display who truly holds the power within the play.
I have some mixed feelings about Trifles, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.
-Alexa Rodriguez
I really enjoyed this play. I thought that I was going to become confused but after reading it a couple of times I really did enjoy it. One main reason why I did enjoy it was because the theme of this whole piece was based upon women, feminism, violence, justice and also judgment. Since I am a feminist myself, this piece really did catch my attention. My favorite part of it was the way that it had been very mysterious and suspenseful. Anything that has to do with murder and shadowy ideas always intrigues. Before I started reading, I came to realize that even though murder is something very serious I saw the title, “Trifles” when given the definition I understand that it is something with little value, which was something, that had me a bit confused.
ReplyDeleteThe setting was something else I liked, since it was located at a farm, it is known to be out of the city. Which could have been more difficult to be absolute on clues these characters would find. The fact that there was a lot of suspense had me on my toes. I liked how every time the men would leave the area the women would unintentionally find clues, despite the fact that all they worried about was lousy things! Most importantly, the point was that you would think that the attorney and a sheriff would be the ones to find the clues but they ended up with nothing. Even Mr. Henderson wanted to continue on with the search. That is what made me like the story, I disliked how they continuously talked down on the women and the women were the ones to figure out the mystery. While reading the play, in the back of my mind I knew that they were the ones who were going to figure it out. My most favorite part of this play was the ending, the way the women hid their little secret from the men and Mrs. Hale’s response. Since Mr. Wright had been killed with a rope which was knotted at her neck, she connects that by saying that Mrs. Wright will finish up her quilt by knotting it as well rather than finishing her quilt. I just liked the last piece because it demonstrated symbolism for all women not just them.
Aliza Longoria
‘Trifles’ by Susan Glaspell is a play that seems to bring out issues that went on in society against women. In the play, it had men investigating the murder of a local farmer and his wife is the main suspect. The men are quick to think that it was the victim’s wife and try to find a motive to convict her. However, women that are helping with the investigation are receiving more evidence for a possible motive then the men searching.
ReplyDeleteThe women finding more evidence on the possible motive of the victim’s wife actually committing the murder give insight to how women are treated in society. While looking up more information on what this play is about, I discovered that this play was meant to bring a feminism message to audiences. There were comments on how symbolism was embedded in the play, such as the caged bird. The caged bird represents how women are trapped in their roles in society in the early twentieth century. Women were always seen as housewives that cooked, cleaned and took care of the children. They never really left their homes because that was where they were most needed. The home was the women’s cage. Then when the bird was killed, the trapped housewives spirit began to die and they felt that they could never leave their homes because they were trapped in their own roles and homes. Women would never be able to escape and do what they want to do.
In my opinion, the reason why, if the wife did kill her husband, I think she did it because of the bird’s death. She felt that the husband took away something that made her happy and see a light of hope. In the play, the wife didn’t have any children and her husband was constantly away. She had nobody and was alone. So the bird provided her company when she bought it. But when the bird was killed by her husband, according to the women that were in the wife’s home, she flet that her escape was taken from her. The wife then took action and killed her husband out of anger because her own escape her own freedom, despite it being small, was taken from her. She probably felt that bird was the only thing she had going for her.
- Andrea Serrano
There’s obvious influence in regards to Glaspell’s reasoning when it comes to Trifles. She, as the text so vividly accentuates, is trying to emulate or draw inspiration from, Kate Chopin among other female authors, in an attempt to help readers understand the female condition. I found the piece to be somewhat enjoyable, but what killed it for me were the constant dialogue breaks filled to the brim with directions for the actors portraying the characters. It really breaks the fluidity when I as a reader, casually examining this piece have to stop and see what it is the author actually wants their characters and the actors to be doing. I found myself reading around these things as they are not pertinent to me in any way shape or form. As you Professor Moriea have already stated, there needs to be room for the actors to make interpretations, and not every bit of dialogue needs to come tethered with actions. In real life, people are not constantly moving about as a form of expression, there is power in words and that needs to be exercised and vocalized. I did however appreciate the set up that led to the scene. To have something of a description to set the reader in place before the dialogue, that’s a very ingenious move. I think that at times it can even provide necessary insight into why the characters speak the way that they do, and whatnot.
ReplyDeleteLisa Crocker got it right when she said that, “the boundaries between the private and public spheres were beginning to break down.” This piece is a direct reflection of the times that these characters were living in and it shows.
But as a whole “Trifles” failed to maintain a steady level of interest. There was too much interchangeable dialogue, and perhaps it’s just my simple mindedness towards everything, but there should be boundaries that aren’t crossed in regards to that. Varying lines of text had the, “he said”, “she said” within a line of dialogue and those were the times in particular I had to stop and really focus on what I was reading as opposed to actually enjoying the story.
-Lucas Zamora
Trifles by Susan Glaspell is a dramatic play with hints of mystery involved throughout. It focuses on the mysterious death of Mr. Wright. The whole scene takes place in the kitchen and not much else. There is talk about going upstairs and to the farm but we are never taken there. There is a lot of questioning and dialogue throughout the whole play. It seems as if a play is a pre-draft to starting a story but never really getting there. It is harder to follow because you have to keep in mind who is who in the play and what they have said. There is no following as you would read in a short story. It is more like a story broken up and put together instead. The dialogue is what makes a play because it is supposed to be acted out and not read. It is like a song you can write a song but by reading it is just a bunch of words making sentences or phrases. So that will end up breaking the purpose of the song and in this case the play. It is not supposed to make much sense or sound good at all when being read because it’s a live piece. You just can’t be reading it in your head or out loud because it doesn’t convey the meaning that the playwright has for it. It needs to come to life through the actions of the actors. Even though the play didn’t give a full story to know exactly what might have happened and jut played with the suspense factor that they were eventually going to find a break into it, it is still a very good way to let out your creative imagination or your take on real life events that happen. In order to tell a story, you need to be the artist to give it interpretation and meaning. The tone and main plot is still a great attraction point that will bring out better performances because of the drama and mystery the play has involved. The play is just a script to let actors really submerge themselves in these characters to bring out the life of the play.
ReplyDelete-Victor Vasquez
I found the “Trifles” play somewhat confusing and uninteresting at first. The way the lines are set up with no colons after character names made it hard to keep track of who was saying what. I also found that the multiple characters made it slightly jumbled to read as well as the constant action that the characters were performing. While on a stage it made sense, it was difficult to read. The story however, picked up the pace once the focus was on the two women who were figuring out what happened and why. I felt this play had more of a movie vibe because of the multiple characters and all the action at the beginning. It definitely set the scene and was very different from the earlier plays we had read before, but more in the sense of the vibe it was giving off. I can’t quite put my finger on it. The characters at the beginning also seemed one dimensional and extra. As if the whole play could have revolved around both women without the need for the men to give the extra space. The multiple characters coming in and out at the beginning made me have to go back and try to understand who they were and why they were there. What did they have to do with what was going on. While I feel the play could have been left out, I suppose they were intentional to bring the realness of the situation and the times. How women were looked at, spoken to and treated did push the story forward into why things happened. While it isn’t my favorite play I thought it was very creative in getting its point across without directly bringing attention to it. Instead much of what we discussed in previous classes. What is not said is just as important as what is said.
ReplyDelete-Diana Zepeda
I personally liked that Trifles had a literary background and biographical influences before the actual play. They were very detailed and also helpful, but I would like to add that it really wasn’t needed to understand the play. Personally I did not like the play, not because I hate plays, I just don’t like reading them; because for me I would much rather see the play. The content of the play was good, just it is really easy to get lost because of the way it is formatted. Seeing this play would be very different than reading it because, I can see how other people use the langue given in another way besides the voice inside my head. I really do like how they have the action in the line EXAMPLE: [rubbing his hands] it does give you a general idea of how it is supposed to look like on stage. Plays are really nice to watch, I have only seen a few though, but being able to read the actual script is very interesting. The script is what the writer wrote, but the actors and director can modify while rehearsing, which to me is important because they can put their own ideas and make it better or more relatable.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the play though, it did seem to be picking on women saying that they are used to worrying, then again a woman did write this, so from that kind of feels like she’s trying to show how women have been treated and somewhat how they are treated now. I think it is strange that Hale calls her a “queer” which means either strange/odd or slightly ill, which to me seems to be like how the word “gay” means happy but over time people were using it to put down people. Overall this play was really long, and I would get lost throughout the play, but it is a good play, just would be very interesting to see in person. Of course I don’t know enough to tell whether or not the play was written well, because I am not too familiar with the format.
-Roberto I. Rodriguez
“Trifles” was a short enjoyable little piece. I liked the community between the women and the fact they could sympathize with Mrs. Wright. The men were quick to judge her and mock their duties (the knitting) but the women were more skeptical and willing to seek the truth with the possibility of her innocence in mind. I would like to see it performed and see how the director and actors interpret the action cues. It would also be interesting to see the suspense build up in the performance and how the actors would behave toward the actresses in order to convey that sense of superiority and condescension. I think in this particular case, the piece works very well in terms of dialogue. It flows very smoothly as the author doesn’t have to worry about varying the type of “said” or getting the reader confused as to who is speaking when omitting the “said” altogether. I do think I would be disappointed to see the play and find that the characters and setting aren’t quite what I pictured but that is to be expected, just like in films and television. I also find it interesting how this is a jab at women’s roles in the past. They were frequently underestimated and even thought of as simpletons who had to rely on men to do all the hard thinking yet in this play the women were the ones who figured out what happened in the house on the day the crime took place simply by doing ‘womanly’ things such as gathering things for Mrs. Wright. Why they chose not to disclose their discovery I don’t know, likely to give Mrs. Wright a hope at being free, despite her most likely being guilty, as they understand what it can be like to be subservient to a husband and not have anyone question it. I am curious as to how it all ended up, yet in my opinion it is still better to leave the opening open ended and up to the interpretation of the reader as it makes for a stronger reader involvement.
ReplyDeleteJessica Rodriguez
Trifles takes place in the early 1900’s meaning that at this point women were still considered “below the man”. The only thing women were good at was cooking in the kitchen, doing laundry, and raising children. In this era, the patriarchal figure was looked upon very highly. Men were in all aspects of life minus the home. Throughout the play the women were mocked, laughed at, and looked down upon by the men. Back in the early 1900’s women were only to be seen and not to be heard much like the character of Mrs. Peters. Mrs. Peters was the sheriff’s wife. Throughout the play she is a “goody two shoes”. “(nervously). I don’t think we ought to touch things.” Mrs. Peters is the woman who lets the man do what he needs to do. She doesn’t think any thought that her husband wouldn’t and it seems like she lets him do all the thinking for her. “No, Mrs. Peters doesn’t need supervising. For that matter, a sheriff’s wife is married to the law.” This is grounds for implying that men underestimate the power of a woman and her brain. Mrs. Peters can’t think on her own, she needs her husband to think for her. Mrs. Peters doesn’t seem to have an opinion about anything she just goes with the flow and likes to be more careful. She seems so ignorant to what is going on around her. , women are used to worrying over trifles” is what the county attorney uses to shame the women. He chides the women for “not having common sense” and that they don’t have the ability to pay attention to what seems important to the investigation. He then tries to make grounds to try and excuse the women by in a way stating that they have a small mind and cannot have the mental capacity to receive everything that has just happened. By stating that women are very concerned about their trifles that women can also be seen as trifles. Not knowing that the women don’t only rely on what they see but what they feel and see. Plainly, we can see that the women have come up with more of an investigation than the men. The women have gathered all this evidence and the "law" doesn’t have a clue. Overall great story!
ReplyDelete-Cassandra Martinez
Trifles is an interesting play surrounding the mysterious death of Mr. Wright. What is interesting about the play is how much it decides not to tell the audience; rather, it prefers to present large amounts of symbolism and hints for the audience to catch on so that they become aware of the events leading up to and surrounding his death. I think the play is well written, as there isn’t a moment where I felt like it was dragging on or what was being said as unimportant, though at first glance it seem like it as little details such as the quilt and proxemics which represent the theme of the play. The play itself makes public commentary, as it speaks of the loneliness and suffering a housewife endures that some people (namely, males) are not familiar with or dismiss. I especially liked the inclusion of the bird and an empty cage, as I feel that the allusion to Mrs. Wright herself was great (I love symbolism). It also portrays the men being haughty towards the women, laughing at their worries and concerns as they prowl about the house attempting to solve the mystery of the death. It is interesting to note that while the men are busy “doing their job”, they seem to be passing over little details that the women pick up on and enables them to solve the mystery of the murderer and the reason behind it. The ending of the play itself is also interesting, as it is implied that the women, having witnessed the suffering of Mrs. Wright, decide to play dumb and not to tell the men what they have concluded, deciding instead that she is “free” now and liberated from her own “cage” (alluding to the bird outside of the cage as well as the cage itself being left open). Reading the additional information over the play, I see now also how the quilt itself as well as the wordplay surrounding the word “knot” utilized are symbolic of the women deciding to “weave” together and not turn in Mrs. Wright for the sake of her happiness.
ReplyDelete-Pedro Conchas
In the drama “Trifles,” by Susan Glaspell, the reader is given an excellent example on a successful drama. Through the use of careful diction, descriptive actions, and symbols, Glaspell invites the reader into a dramatic story. Glaspell introduces a serious conflict since the beginning of the story when Mr. John Wright (the husband of Mrs. Wright) was found dead in his own house. When the wife was asked about her husband at the time of the murder, she said that “he died of a rope around his neck,” and she “just went on pleatin’ at her apron.” Thus, the sheriff, county attorney, and a neighbor decided to investigate the murder case in hopes of finding the truth.
ReplyDeleteSince “Trifles” is a one-act play, the entire drama takes place in one single location and unfolds as one continuous action. Clearly, at the time “Trifles” was written, women were limited in their social influence. This played such a huge role in the development of the play as it reaches its climactic scene.
The author creates the climax of the story carefully when the ladies have to decide whether or not to release the bird as physical evidence against Mrs. Wright, and the way she writes their actions is superb.
Perhaps, what I enjoyed most about the drama was how the author managed to develop a theme so swiftly and cleverly. The fact that Glaspell titled her drama “Trifles” is to indicate both an irony and a thematic approach revealing the opposing perspectives of genders in the 1900s. It so happened that the sheriff, county attorney, (both law officials) and Mr. Hale overlooked the evidence in the Wright’s kitchen as nothing important, just “trifles.” However, the cold kitchen and the incomplete quilts were crucial for Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale. Furthermore, they discovered how the “Wright” marriage was not right. The women in the drama came to a greater understanding that Minnie Foster changed from a young beautiful women with talents to an “encaged” women left with no children to care for, only a house and a husband. The stillness was excruciating to the point of leading Mrs. Wright to her husband’s murder. In the end, the “trifles” were metaphors of her very own life in her attempts to preserve the coldness of her marriage.
What became more intriguing to me was how the drama came to an end! Susan Glaspell leaves the drama in a suspenseful ending rather than a stable situation. The women decipher and judge the evidence and are overwhelmed by it. The reader does not know if she will be indeed found innocent or guilty of her charge. In the end, the attorney asks the sheriff “facetiously” if Mrs. Wright “was not going to quilt.” However, Little did he know that indeed Mrs. Wright had tied the “knot” around her husband’s neck.
- Julio C. Manzano
For me, Trifles was a difficult read. I'm not sure if it was the fact that there was a lot of dialogue or if it just seemed like a longer read because there was also stage direction and things mixed in with the script. I don't want to judge this too harshly because I obviously know that this wasn't necessarily meantbto be read through like a narrative but instead acted out on a stage. I think for me, the act of reading through a play kind of confused me because I am so used to reading straight through something and the description of a setting and characters are part of the story. What threw me off about reading a play was the fact that the description of characters and setting is given to you before hand and you have to keep that in mind while reading straight through dialogue. What this reading did do for me however, is give me an intense appreciation for playwrights because there is so much detail and thought that not only has to go in to the dialogue but the setting and scenery as well. I am still apprehensive about having to write a scene of a play myself but after reading this and having something to reference, I am willing to give it a try.
ReplyDelete-Erin Valdez
Reading the play Trifles was a little bit confusing because of the pauses and transitions between the characters. I was not sure who was talking when the men would speak because they all seemed to be joking around in the same way. When the woman would talk to one another it was easy to understand them because it was only two speakers. I noticed that the girls had more of a role in the play then the men. Glaspell went into detail with the woman characters compared to the men by having them tell stories about their pets getting killed and such. I am sure the Susan Glaspell wrote these woman characters as main roles on purpose since this play goes around feminism. I find it amazing that Glaspell was able to write this play since woman were not able to have the right to vote, it is a great achievement.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this play I noticed that the woman were trying to figure out why the husband was dead and the men were trying to figure who did it by looking for clues. I would have preferred to watch the play than read it because it has a lot of descriptions on the characters actions. I would catch myself skipping through the italics once and a while in order to concentrate on the words the characters were speaking. If I were to have seen this play it would have probably made more sense, since there is so much action in this play. Reading it seemed to be a drag because sometimes if I would just read the words I would not understand the situation because I skipped the italics. I had to read this reading twice in order to dissect was Glaspell was trying to create. Glaspell made the men being investigators look silly compared to the women because the women found the main key to the puzzle of the murder. I like how Glaspell included the woman’s childhood story about the dead pet because without that the audience would not have figured out the connection with the dead bird.
Bianca Salinas
Upon reading the literary background for Trifles, I recalled a short story I had read a while ago called The Yellow Wallpaper. I think that many of the themes and issues expressed are relevant to what the for mentioned short story was trying to convey. In The Yellow Wallpaper, a couple stay in a weekend home for a holiday and she starts to see a figure in the wallpaper move. She tries to tell her husband but he only dismisses her. Eventually reaches the conclusion she must tear off the paper in order to free her. I won’t spoil the end. Also, I recognized “A Story of An Hour” as something I had read in High School. I don’t remember exactly when but I do remember reading Trifles a while ago. This play made me really happy in so many ways. Although it didn’t translate as well as I had hoped for in the performance, I’m going to blame it on the mediocre acting, the play itself was marvelous. There is so much going on behind the conversation the women are having. I love so much the feeling of solidarity they show towards one another. Never have I seen the us v. them mentality behind the battle of the sexes being portrayed with such realness than in this play. The dialogue is rich in demonstrating who the characters are and what they believe. The symbolism behind the bird and the cage was a little in the nose but I had no problem with it because it was not the only thing holding the play together. I still can’t get over how terrible the acting was. The actors don’t do the play justice with their lazy interpretation. While reading the play I was somewhat upset because it made me think how in a certain light it could be seen a work that correctly demonstrate how men have treated women. It was really upsetting, them going into her kitchen and questioning her cleanliness. I mean, talk about jerks! Again, the thing that really impressed me about the play was the female solidarity. This play totally passes the Bechdel test.
ReplyDeleteMaria Fajardo
In this play, I noticed right away how the men treated the women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters and also Mrs. Wright, who was not present. It was very callous and dismissive, mocking. Mrs. Peters is married to the sheriff, but even she receives no respect. The men are supposed to be investigating a murder, but when they check out the kitchen first, instead of the scene of death, it isn't because they are looking for critical clues. Instead, they criticize Mrs. Wright's house keeping skills and how the fruits are left out. They mention how the women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, are sticking together simply because they are women. They act as if the wife is already guilty, even though the investigation has not been concluded and they have only just arrived. The women are more loyal to Ms. Wright, even if they don't know whether she killed her husband or not, they worry for her and even begin to tidy a little as they wait in the kitchen, talking about what a shame it is that her fruits will go bad. The men ignore all the signs of Mrs. Wright's life. This is because they are not actually interested in her story and deride the women for their interest in the kitchen and the sewing work. Because they do this, they miss the evidence that Mrs. Wright was abused and controlled by her husband. The discovery of the broken birdcage and the bird with a twisted neck mirrors the death of the husband who was strangled to death. The question the women struggle over is that the men are going to punish Mrs. Wright for a crime, but who would punish the crime that was commited against her? Mrs. Hale says it outright here: "That was a crime! That was a crime! Who's going to punish that? ...I know how things can be--for women, I tell you, it's queer, Mrs. Peters. We live close together and we live far apart. We all go through the same things--it's all just a different kind of the same thing."
ReplyDelete-Doris Tolar