A Jury of Her Peers

A Jury of Her Peers, is a short story written by Susan Glaspell. This story describes the investigation of John Wright’s murder. The main characters are Mrs. Hale, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Wright. At the introduction of the story Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters with their respective husbands, after being informed of the death of Mr. Wright, go to his old house to investigate the murder. Mrs. Wright is the primary suspect of her husband’s death and has been detained. The other two women arrive at Mrs. Wright’s house to accompany their husband while they investigate. The conflict is when the women start to find evidence by paying attention to small details and by relating to Mrs. Wright as females and as wives. At the denouement of the story, both women arrive to the conclusion that Mrs. Wright is guilty of her husband’s death but decide against turning her in. 

This story is presented in a third person objective omniscient point of view. Mrs. Wrights home is the main setting. The mood appears tense between both women but as they get to know each other they seem to empathize and gain trust. As protagonist I would chose, Mrs. Hale, Mrs. Wright and Mrs. Peters. The antagonist would be the situation or female subjugation. The conflict seems to be a Man vs. Society struggle, as they are all females struggling against the ideas of that time. In this case I believe that the context is very important. This story seems to take place in a rural place, at a time when there wasn’t that much education for the lower classes and many females had to work hard to be taken seriously and to break away from stereotypes.
 

A Jury of Her Peers is an interesting story. I liked the feminist approach it has. I don’t know what I would have done if I had been in the same situation as Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters. Sometimes it is hard to decide between what society approves to be right and wrong, and what a person feels to be the correct thing. I also think that when you get to know a person, it gets very difficult to be objective and impartial. Everybody has motives and inclinations and who are we to decide if they are right or wrong?