Good morning/afternoon, Juniors!
I'm not sure if you're aware, but you've lucked out. Because junior year is when you take all of your admissions exams (ASVAB, Accuplacer, SmarterBalanced, ACT, etc.), your English year was heavily front-loaded; we tackled a lot during the first three quarters. So, our next few weeks will mostly be review: reviewing topics that you've covered sometime in the past four years but that also commonly show up on admissions exams. We will also be reading together. For the sake of everyone involved, we won't worry about taking our literature chronologically. Instead, we'll meander through the texts that are most interesting and that offer the best opportunities for online forum discussion. So, let's start in our first text: "Trifles" by Susan Glaspell. If you like murder mysteries, dark thrillers, or case-file-type documentaries, you're going to like "Trifles"--you'll probably like it even if you're not a big fan of those genres. This particular story actually comes in two forms: the original play, "Trifles," and the story story that Glaspell adapted it into, "A Jury of Her Peers." Personally, I find it easier and more enjoyable to read the play, but if you're feeling more like a short story, go ahead and Google the title "A Jury of Her Peers," and you'll easily find it. Either version will work fine for this week's assignment. SPOILERS AHEAD If you have not yet read the play or story, TURN BACK NOW! Once you've finished the reading, come on back here, and we'll continue together. Go ahead: I'll wait. Okay then: your assignment. As you have now discovered, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters lie at the end of our play, and it's a pretty big lie: because of the lie, the sheriff won't be able to establish motive and, therefore, the killer won't be brought to justice. Or will she? Justice: it's a weighty word. It's also a tough concept to nail down; that's why lawyers spend so much time in front of books and judges and juries, trying to determine what "justice" actually means in particular situations. You're going to give that challenge a shot yourself, now. Below in a comment (leave your own comment by filling in the boxes under "Leave a Reply;" you should not enter anything for "Website"), make your case as to whether or not justice is served at the end of the play. Did Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters do the right thing: was justice served? Your first sentence (your claim) will directly answer that question, and then--as always--you will support that claim with evidence and much, much reasoning. This first comment is due by 12:17pm on Thursday.
By Friday at 12:17pm, make sure to respond to at least one post that disagrees with your claim. Respectfully explain why you disagree--or, if they've changed your mind a bit, go ahead and admit that and explain why. Enjoy the debate! And feel free to defend yourself with as many replies as you like.
30 Comments
Brandon Matson
3/31/2020 09:26:35 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters didn't do the right thing but, justice was sort of served.
Reply
German Florez Lopez
4/1/2020 06:48:31 am
In the one-act play of Susan Glaspell, the incidences surrounding the murder of Mr. Wright are not clear. The women gang up to analyze the situation behind the man's death and end up acquitting Mrs. Wright of wrong doing. However, when the county attorney is asked whether he wants to see what the women have come up with, he says that it's his hope that they have not picked dangerous things. Therefore, it is clear that justice have not been served on Mrs. Wright.
Reply
Hannah Karst
4/1/2020 06:49:15 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not serve any justice towards the end. Towards the end of the play, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters found a bird cage with no bird. Later on, they find a box with something wrapped in silk. They soon find a dead bird that looks like it got "choked the life out of him." The two gals never told the sheriff nor the county attorney about what they found. "Mrs. Hale snatches the box and puts it in the pocket of her big coat." Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters should have been honest with the two men about what they found because it could unlock some questions or concerns about the murder. All evidence should be reported because no matter who is guilty there should always be punishment in people actions.
Reply
Alayna Benike
4/1/2020 06:50:07 pm
I agree that the two women lawfully should have reported their findings to the Sheriff and the County Attorney, but I disagree that their wasn't any justice served towards the end. There is too little information to declare whether or not justice was served because we don't know the ending for Mrs. Wright; whether she was proved guilty or not. When the County Attorney says "it's all perfectly clear except the reason for doing it," I believe that this could have possibly been answered if the two women would have came forward.
Reply
Chloe Carroll
4/2/2020 09:39:50 am
I have to disagree with you saying that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters didn't serve any justice. Because they didn't tell the sheriff and the county attorney, Mrs. Wright is able to get justice and escape from her husband's terrible treatment. If she goes unpunished, she will be able to become happy and free again, which will get her justice from Mr. Wright.
Reply
Carter Zubke
4/2/2020 01:18:59 pm
I disagree for one main thing, Mrs Wright was not being treated fairly. I think it was fair for them to hide the box, since it was only keeping it from getting solve. There are many cases and investigations in the world that haven't been solve. And, this is fair because they don't really have proof that she did it. The men were biased and should have looked into it more before blaming it all on her.
Reply
Darah DeKam
4/1/2020 08:17:19 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not do the right thing, but justice still might be served. While waiting for the men, the two women decide to look around the house. While searching her sewing box, they find a dead canary that looked like somebody "choked the life out of him." Both women decide not to tell the men who are investigating about the dead bird, which gives the murder motive. However, the County Attorney still believes it was the wife of the man who did the killing. He says, "No, Peters, it's all perfectly clear except a reason for doing it." This shows us that he believes the wife did it, but he has no evidence on why she would. The decision the women made about not telling him might set the wife free, or she could still be tried and, therefore, justice will be served.
Reply
Beau Schooley
4/2/2020 05:29:56 pm
I disagree with you that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters didn't do the right thing. I feel that they did the best that they could, but I do agree that they did the right thing as a person because their wasn't much else they could do without getting in trouble. I thought that they could've told their husbands what happened but they felt that they didn't need to which is just fine.
Reply
Aryanna Flisrand
4/3/2020 09:13:33 am
I agree that justice might still be served even without the evidence Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters found. But in this situation it is unlikely justice will be serves because if the police have no evidence to prove she did it then the argument won't hold up in court and she won't get convicted.
Reply
Chloe Carroll
4/1/2020 09:57:40 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not do the lawfully right thing but morally, justice was served for Mrs. Wright. Mrs.Hale and Mrs. Peters didn't do the lawfully right thing because they didn't show the Sheriff or the County Attorney the evidence they found. Because Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters didn't show them this evidence, they have no way to solve the murder. But because they can't solve the murder, Mrs. Wright will be able to go unpunished for her crime, allowing her to escape from the horrible treatment of her husband and letting herself become happy and free again.
Reply
German Florez Lopez
4/2/2020 06:57:31 am
I think justice was not served for Mrs. Wright, because when the county attorney is asked whether he wants to see what the women have come up with, he says that it's his hope that they have not picked dangerous things. And that is why I think justice was not served.
Reply
Alayna Benike
4/1/2020 10:18:29 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not do what they should have lawfully, but for Mrs. Wright, they did the right thing as people. The question as to whether or not justice is served is still to be determined. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters were searching around Mrs. Wright's sewing kit and found a dead canary that had "had the life choked out of him," but still didn't tell the Sheriff or the County Attorney which ultimately would have decided if justice was served or not. The evidence that the women chose not to share could have gave the Sheriff the "motive" and an answer to the reasoning behind killing Mr. Wright. Because we don't know whether or not Mrs. Wright gets freed or gets chosen guilty, is the reason that you could say justice is or isn't served.
Reply
Carter Larson
4/1/2020 01:10:00 pm
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, lawfully did the wrong thing, but for Mrs. Wright they did what is right as people. Now it comes down to whether or not justice will be served. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters were looking around the sewing kit when they found the canary. They lawfully were wrong because they should have reported this evidence to the sheriff. This evidence likely would have led to the case being solved. There is a chance that Mrs. Wright no longer will have to live along with her horrible husband and she will live happily. But because we never were told whether or not justice was served, she also could have been punished.
Reply
Beau Schooley
4/1/2020 01:14:51 pm
Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale did not follow the law, but I feel that they did the right things as a person. Like as in I would've done the same thing if I was that person. I feel like what we are still looking for is whether justice was served or not. The two women were waiting in the house and looking for a sewing kit they found a dead canary that supposedly "Had the life choked out of him." This statement had never been brought up in court though. If this was brought up in court the court could've seen this as motive or something that could've caused them to charge someone with muder.
Reply
Darah DeKam
4/2/2020 08:10:38 am
I agree with you on the statement that they did not follow the law, but I do not agree when you said they did the right thing as a person. Although Mrs. Wright's husband might have been cold and tough, she still had no right to kill him. He did kill her bird, but how is that anywhere near close to killing a human. I believe the women should have told the men so that they don't have to live with the guilt, and justice will be served.
Reply
Grace DeWall
4/2/2020 09:13:30 am
Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale start messing with the evidence in the house when they really shouldn't, like fixing stitches on a quilt and cleaning and organizing the kitchen after the men went upstairs. They also hide the bird and lie and say its been eaten by the cat that never existed. They expect that John was the one who killed the bird and maybe made Mrs. Wright snap in a way and ended up killing him. What the two women did was very unlawful because they lied and hid evidence the whole time they were at the house.
Reply
Anna Flisrand
4/2/2020 09:36:33 am
Mrs. Peter and Mrs. Hale did not follow the law. The women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, started to clean the kitchen and snoop through things they really should not have because it can tamper with the investigation. This lead to them finding the dead bird which they hide at the end of the play from the men believing that it would further incriminate Mrs. Wright. This all leads to the probable injustice of the murder getting away that follows this investigation and court trial. The actions that the women took were illegal and morally wrong.
Reply
Brandon Matson
4/2/2020 10:37:09 am
I agree that letting Mrs. Wright get away with the murder is unjust, however, in a way, justice was served in that Mr. Wright, from his description, wasn't the best person and he got what he deserved.
Reply
Garret Kerkvliet
4/2/2020 10:43:37 am
I agree with what you said about how Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale did not follow the law, however, I disagree with the injustice of the thing. I think that since we hear the County Attorney say that all they need is a motive, or a reason, then that would connect the story, then we can infer that they are disregarding evidence, and only worrying about the motive. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters hear this and understand why they must lie. They are doing it to protect Mrs. Wright because we don't know if she committed the crime or not. If farther down the road, they figure out that Mrs. Wright killed her husband based on sufficient evidence and motive, then Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters were wrong, however we know that they did what they thought was right in their heart, and justice would be served.
Reply
Nicholas
4/2/2020 09:47:44 am
Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale didn't follow the law, but they did the right things as a person. The Question was whether justice was served or not. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters were looking around when they found the canary. When they found the it they should have reported it. This would have likely led to the case being solved. Mrs. Wright might not have to live with her husband and she will be happy. But because there was not much evidence we will never know.
Reply
Garret Kerkvliet
4/2/2020 10:35:22 am
Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did no do justice in lying at the end, however, not telling the guys about the dead bird was the right thing to do. On page 11 of "Trifles" by Susan Glaspell, Mrs. Peters states, "Somebody wrung its neck." The girls did break they law by not telling the sheriff about the bird. However, by not telling them, the girls may have saved the life of Mrs. Wright, because there is still no clear evidence that Mrs. Wright killed her husband. On page 8, we read that the County Attorney says, "If there was some definite thing. Something to show—something to make a story about—a thing that would connect up with this strange way of doing it—" This shows that if all they had was some motive, not even evidence, then they would be able to find Mrs. Wright guilty. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale overhear this and realize that they need to keep the bird a secret, otherwise Mrs. Wright could be found guilty for the murder, even if she didn't do it. In the end, even though the girls lied about the bird, justice might still be served because they can look for more evidence and motives.
Reply
Zach Dufek
4/3/2020 11:42:36 am
While I agree that it was wrong to withhold the bird from the police, I believe that the evidence against Mrs. Wright is pretty clear. The bird was killed with a noose, and so was Mr. Wright. I believe that it is too much of a coincidence that both the bird and Mr. Wright were killed in the exact same manner. Also the lack of care that Mrs. Wright has towards the death of her husband makes her seem even more likely to be the killer.
Reply
Dylan
4/2/2020 10:36:57 am
Mrs.Peters and Mrs.Hale didn't follow the rules.Then the women started to clean and snoop through the things that they shouldn't of it's an investigation,and this leads them to find the bird and hide it in the end from the men. This would mak Mr.Wright look bad and his wife wouldn't have to live with him and she is fine with that. However there is not enough evidence to put him away so we will not know what happened.
Reply
Carter Zubke
4/2/2020 01:14:05 pm
I do believe that justice was serve in the right sense. You can see that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters both don't feel right about what is happening. Mrs Wight was sleeping in the same bed and didn't awake when this happened. This does not mean she did it though, the men are bias and don't think I man would take his life. Both the sheriff and lawyer said that men work hard, and that women have to work harder. It's almost like the men are not willing to look into anything else but what it looks like. Mrs. Wright was in shock, hence the sitting and looking off into the distance and being quiet. Honestly it all comes down to what your believe is right, but Mrs. Wright should not be punished until there is solid proof, and the women in this scene didn't want to give them proof.
Reply
Hannah Karst
4/3/2020 07:20:26 am
I would have to disagree with your idea of there being justice served. The two ladies should've told the men what they found. They shouldn't have hide anything from them, this situation is far too worse to be hiding anything. I do agree, however, that the men are not willing to look into this investigation deeper.
Reply
Nicholas Ries
4/3/2020 05:50:40 pm
I disagree with this because there is not enough evidence whether justice was served or not.
Reply
Zach Dufek
4/3/2020 11:38:52 am
(Sorry, I'm way late on this.) I believe that the two girls did obstruct justice. When the two girls find the the bird with the noose around its neck, instead of turning it in to the sheriff, they hide the bird in Mrs. Hale's coat pocket, as is narrated on page 14, "MRS HALE snatches the box and puts it in the pocket of her big coat." The two girls actively withheld evidence against Mrs. Wright from the police during an investigation. That in of itself is a crime. The reasoning behind the murder of John is also very extreme, in that he only killed a bird that Mrs. Wright was fond of. Mrs. Wright overreacted, and should've been punished for it.
Reply
Kendra Rowe
4/7/2020 11:18:19 am
I do not believe that justice was served. When Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale find the dead canary, they choose to hide it instead of reporting it to the police. Without this piece of evidence, they don't have a motive and the case cannot be solved. Without the case being solved, justice can't be properly served.
Reply
dominick
4/22/2020 08:04:49 am
I disagree with this because there is not enough evidence and justice was not served
Reply
Izaac
4/23/2020 07:43:33 am
Mr Peters and Mrs. Hale didn't follow the rules. Because they killed the bird Mrs. Wright isn't all guilty afterwards.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |