Category: A Jury of Her Peers

In A Jury of Her Peers, the county attorney George Henderson is trying to solve the murder in the whole drama. He makes the sexist comment in the first clash between the male characters and the female ones. He thinks that women only worry about things that don’t matter. He thinks that the kitchen stuff like washing the dishes and making jam is only women things that are unimportant. He looks down women’s kitchen when he says, “Here’s a nice mess”. He also gets mad when there are dirty towels that he kicks Mrs. Wright’s pans and pot.

George Henderson only sees the women as housekeepers. He thinks that if the women are unable to do the unimportant things like housework, it is a failure as a human being. In the whole play, George makes one patronizing comment after another to Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale. He makes patronizing comments with Mrs. Peter and Mrs. Hale about the quilt and birdcage. It reflects that George is a misogynist. As George Henderson is a county attorney, his social status is higher than other characters. In fact, the law itself is also misogynist.

A Jury of Her Peers was written in the historical period in which political activists in the US were campaigning for women’s suffrage through all forms of social protest. At this time, women could not vote. Women had no right in the law. It shows the inequality of gender and represent the male-centric society. Since the playwright, Susan wanted to break the then prevalent bias about female gender, at the end of the play present a dramatic irony. At the end of the play, the women know how to make fun to men. George says that at least the women knew that Mrs. Wright was not going to quilt the quilt. He asks Mrs. Wale and Mrs. Peter to tell him how Mrs. Wright was going to do the quilt. Mrs. Hale put the dead bird in her pocket and says that Mrs. Wright was going to knot it.

This scene is dramatic irony. When George Henderson is finding out the evidence with the men, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peter have already figured out who is the murderer and what is the evidence. If the women do not concern about “the women stuff”, then they could not find the evidence and solve the mystery by finding the dead bird. It shows that the unimportant woman stuff is not just trifles after all. It represents that the women know something that men do not know and the sense of superiority of George is undercut. In A Doll House, Torvald Helmer is an overbearing character. His attitude toward women is also negative. He thinks that his wife, Nora Helmer need his guidance after the marriage because a helpless woman is needed to lead by a man in this complicated world. He needs to give instruction to Nora like her father did because he thinks it is men’s responsibility to take care of everything in the men-centric society.

Torvald regards himself as his wife’s protector and treats her like a child. He thinks that a woman is attractive if she is panic. Torvald Helmer always disrespects his wife. For instance, he calls Nora a silly name and scolds her for wasting money to eat macaroons. When he gives advice on Nora the proper way to dress up and dance the tarantella, he treats Nora less than a child. She is only a thing he can play with, a doll. It seems that Nora does not seem to mind the way her husband treats her. She wants her husband’s love and craves for the marriage in her life. She is willing to sacrifice her life to her husband. This makes Torvald become more self-center and disrespect women.

In Act 3, while Torvald and Nora are having conflict, Torvald even says that her wife is “doubly his own”. He thinks that Nora has become both wife and child in his mind. Torvald Helmer is conscious of others’ perceptions of him and his social status in the community. He even prioritized his own reputation over Nora’s desires. For instance, Nora request Torvald for keeping Krogstad at the office. He rejects it and saying that Krogstad would make him like a laughing stock in the company. He only cares about his standing in society. Moreover, Torvald only concern about the appearance of his family and his wife. He feels proud in presenting his wife to others. Therefore, he allowed Nora to remain in his house and raise their children in spite of ruining his own happiness.

The sense of superiority of Torvald Helmer is undercut in the play. There is a case of dramatic irony in the play. Torvald promises to Nora that he will sacrifice his happiness and dignity if there is some danger to threaten Nora. This is what he says in his promise. “Let what will happen, happen. When the real crisis comes, you will not find me lacking in strength or courage. I am man enough to bear the burden for us both.” However, when the threat happens, Torvald becomes coward and self-center who will not sacrifice himself for his wife. His response to his wife is ‘How could it help if you were gone from his world? It wouldn’t assist me… I may easily be suspected of having been an accomplice in your crime. People may think… We must appear to be living together… But the children shall be taken out of your hands. I dare no longer entrust them to you.’ It shows that only care about himself. Although Torvald treats his wife as a child, he is actually a childish character who is overprotected. When Dr. Rank, the close friend of the Helmer family explains that he does not want Torvald to get in his sickroom. He thinks that Torvald cannot face anything ugly. He is protected like a child. Moreover, the reason for his objection to working with Krogstad is his narrow-minded and petty. Krogstad does not give him proper respect. He feels offended by Krogstad and fires Krogstad.

During the 19th century, women were obligated to follow the wants of their husbands who had complete power of every little thing. They had a limited say in any decision and had to burden themselves with their thoughts as their opinions were never prioritized. Constantly in the world around us, people are influenced by the expectations put into place. Many times through understanding and acceptance people can acquire different perspectives of a situation. Martha Hale begins by feeling guilty after never visiting Minnie Wright once she realizes what living in a society that women have no control to follow their own desires creates. She changes her view on Minnie Wright as she begins to perceive what it is like to try and please the patriarchal rules of society. Looking through a feminist lens, in “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell, Martha Hale’s attitude toward Minnie Wright’s guilt shifts from fearful disengagement to compassionate understanding condemning the depth of the patriarchal mindset on women of the time period.

In “A Jury of Her Peers” Martha Hale’s attitude toward Minnie Wright’s guilt begins as being fearful disengagement. As Martha, Mrs. Peters, Mr.Peters, Mr. Hale and the sheriff are investigating, the sheriff begins to question Martha. He starts off asking “’But you and Mrs. Wright were neighbors. I suppose you were friends, too.’ ‘…And why was that? You didn’t like her?’ ‘I liked her well enough,’ she replied with spirit. ‘Farmers’ wives have their hands full, Mr. Henderson. And then–‘ She looked around the kitchen. ‘Yes?’ he encouraged. ‘It never seemed a very cheerful place,’ said she, more to herself than to him” (Glaspell 4). The attorney uses the word “friends” to describe the relationship between Martha and Minnie after being neighbors for 20 years. After living next to someone for years one would assume there is a bond of mutual affection, but Martha exclaims that she has only seen a little of her in the last years which is unusual since they are consistently around.

The sheriff concludes that since they have been living next to each other for years that they should be close, but Martha should have the ability to choose whom she wants to interact with. Furthermore, Martha is forced to justify her reasoning when asked the questions “And why was that? You didn’t like her?” by the county sheriff when in reality it does not relate to investigation in any way. Martha is busy fulfilling farming duties, portrays that she is prevented from exploring the world around her as her duties of laborious hours of work comes first. She does not have time to visit Minnie Wright causing her to be disengaged. The positive connotative diction of the word “cheerful” portrays something being full of spirit and happiness. Martha describing Minnie’s house as not being cheerful, additionally, adds to her unattachment toward her. Martha isn’t able to think for herself on whether she wants to go visit Minnie’s house but is rather influenced by the society around her. Even though she has never been inside Minnie’s house or have talked to Minnie in years she fears it which demonstrates an stereotype within women. Woman are seen as weak and often as being easily manipulated into believing anything society puts forth.

In “A Jury of Her Peers” Martha Hale’s attitude toward Minnie Wright’s guilt chances to compassionate understanding. After Martha and Mrs.Peters find out that Minnie Wright had been piecing a quilt before she had been placed in jail they realized a few of the stitches had not been done right. As Martha begins to fix the stitch, she proclaims “‘But I tell you what I do wish, Mrs. Peters. I wish I had come over sometimes when she was here. I wish–I had. I stayed away because it weren’t cheerful–and that’s why I ought to have come. I wish I had come over to see Minnie Foster sometimes. I can see now–’She did not put it into words” (Glaspell 8). Through the use of repetition of the words “I wish I had ” Glaspell is demonstrating that Martha is beginning to feel guilty about never visiting Minnie Wright’s house. She thinks that by re-stitching the quilt she is not afraid to interfere with Minnie’s possessions, and that she wishes she could help Minnie now that it is too late to do so. By repeating each sentence with the word “I” Glaspell is elucidating that Martha is constantly blaming herself for the wrongdoing. This creates an remorseful attitude in which she could have been able to prevent the actions Minnie potentially committed toward her husband. To furthermore emphasis Martha’s regret, Glaspell uses hyphens between sentences to illustrate that she having to think rapidly about what she wants to say next exemplifying how overwhelmed she is by the thought of the whole situation. Martha begins to feel sympathy causing her to conceal the evidence they have found showing that she is a performing an act of rebellion against men and the patriarchal society. She changes her perspective and relates to Minnie as reaches a realization that they both suffer under the power of their husbands. Martha recognizes that Minnie will never be understood by other, but since Martha is also a women, it allows Minnie’s actions to be judge in a practical way.

Through a feminist lense, Susan Glaspell amplifies Martha Hale’s attitude toward Minnie Wright’s guilt from being fearful disengagement to compassionate understanding in order to criticize the depth of the patriarchal mindset on women of the time period. As Martha begins by being disengaged from Minnie Wright she changes her view and begins to acknowledge her.

Susan Glaspell’s Jury of Her Peers illustrates how women’s moral judgment is influenced by the authority of men and how a shared female experience gives insight that is ultimately more important to women’s moral judgment. Women’s awakening, their feminine solidarity, and political advocacy are inseparable from their awareness of the gender discrimination and oppression embedded in the existing legal system, and their sensitive development of alternative, feminine justice, and judgment. The search for feminist consciousness and the foundation of an informed community of women imply the rejection of the legal order as a tool of patriarchal domination and exploration of feminine legal thought. Glaspell anticipates both legal feminist theory reflecting on domination, injustice, and resistance, as well as psychological feminist theory focusing on care ethics, female voice, and feminine networking. Further, her narrative offers a uniquely coherent, comprehensive worldview, combining the two perspectives, often perceived as contrasting.

Woman bonding is a central theme in Her Peers Jury, long praised by feminist writers. Conversing, Minnie’s neighbor and the wife of the sheriff understand how hard her work must have been on the bad stove, how shabby and miserable she must have looked in her washed-out shoes, and how she must have felt in her worn-out clothes, and how she must have longed for music. They must appreciate how desperately she must have missed other women’s company, social activity, warm conversation and the sense of friendship. Looking into Minnie’s life, they are horrified to discover that it reflects their own. Faced with this reflection of their mute lives, they share the painful process of seeing themselves, confronting the reality of their lives, admitting it, conveying it and acting as a community. Acknowledging Minnie’s life as a reflection of their own lives, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters recognize their distinct cultural perspective as women and fins their unique, communal voice. Using this newly discovered voice, they begin to articulate their story of Minnie’s and life of their own.

The women’s story is told with much compassion for the accused woman. Their quiet, hesitant narration focuses on emotional elements: her pain, hardships, and disappointment. Empathizing with the absent woman, the two neighbors notice the smallest details of Minnie’s life, respectfully acknowledging their significance. Intuitively, it came into Mrs. Hale’s mind that the rocker didn’t look the same. It was a dingy red rocker with wooden dungs up the back, and the middle rung was gone, and the chair sagged to one side. Minnie’s life is reflected in that chair. Similarly, the women apprehend the har labor that went into preparing the fruit preserves they find in her kitchen and feel for Minnie’s loss. They appreciate the sentimental value of Minnie’s little box, which she must have since childhood, and understand her deep attachment to the canary she buried it in. They notice the uneven stitches in Minnie’s quilt, expressive of her emotional turmoil, and carefully replace them with prettier ones.

In contrast to the women’s attitude with the men’s, Glaspell emphasizes the distinct nature of their different voices and point of view. Although Glaspell’s female protagonists speak in a different voice, the story they tell is one of patriarchal dominance and exploitation. The Minnie they reconstruct is an abused woman, confined and harassed by her oppressive husband. Witnessing the men’s legal investigation of Minnie’s crime, the women in the story perceive it as additional abuse of the unfortunate woman. Invading Minnie’s home, the men turn it against her. Blind to the tragic circumstances of her life, they read every piece of information as testifying to her guilt. Even the dirty towel is said by the men to attest to Minnie’s lack of home-making instinct. Further, Glaspell subjects Mr. Peters Mrs. Hale themselves to male oppression.

The men repeatedly belittle, patronize, and mock them. Trivializing their domestic work, doubting their intelligence and ridiculing their interest in the feminine craft. They refrain from presenting the dead canary to the investigating people, and they remove and repair Minnie’s imperfect stitches. Realizing their social position outside the legal arena as well as the law’s inability to see women’s lives to hear their stories recognize their pain or try justly, they refuse to cooperate and instead implement their justice system. In the face of a hostile, masculine legal system, the women find their distinct sense of justice and judgment. They apply their common sense, life experience, and point of view. Conducting an alternative legal process, they determine what is and is not relevant to the case, and what constitutes reasonable behavior. We establish the existence of a ‘fair woman,’ determine her distinctness from a ‘reasonable man,’ and consider that, in Minnie’s circumstance, the ‘reasonable woman’ could have acted as the accused did. In this, we consider Minnie ‘reasonable’ and exonerate her. Throughout their alternative legal proceeding, the woman claims that perhaps the killed canary is a critical piece. Within the men’s legal system, this testimony would have provided the excuse for Minnie’s crime to justify her wickedness, madness, and guilt. Within the women’s legal system, the dead bird is the evidence of John’s misconduct and Minnie’s reasonable.

Feminine legal culture, therefore, is a significant result of and reaction to masculine legal domination, yet it reflects a distinct ethic of compassion and care. Two feminists’ viewpoints that are often viewed as conflicting oppositional, the ethics of treatment and the ideology of power, appear to be completely consistent and mutually explanatory. The sexist rule is so highly oppressive to women that communal disobedience is their only reasonable means of resistance and survival. Therefore, women are represented as men, although not as unintelligent and unworthy as their husbands suggest. Their powers of observation allow them, for example, to realize how unfairly their men are treating them, but they still don’t think it’s their position to stand up to them. The men continue to ignore their wives, ‘leaving them among the kitchenware,’ as they embark on a search for valuable clues.

The County Attorney instructed them to ‘keep their eyes out for anything that might be of use,’ adding that ‘they might come up with such a hint as to the motive.’ Once her husband killed the light of hope and the only good thing in her life, the bird, her troubled spirit, done the same thing by strangling her husband. The men are so naive that they overlook the fact that the attacker is a woman, a housewife like their mothers, searching for more masculine signs, everywhere but in the kitchen. We, who are supposed to be the wiser group, wouldn’t, unfortunately, come across any indications as ever. People, though, are aware of their affairs, just as men tell them to do, and that’s how we learn the truth of the matter. What is even more impressive about how the women are represented is how they can interact with each other on such significant topics without making men suspicious. It is a combination of feminine instincts and concern for their gender that eventually resolves the situation. There was a moment when they embraced each other in a steady, burning look in which there was no deceptiveness or flinching.

Instead, Martha Hale’s eyes guided the way to the basket in which the thing that would make the other woman’s conviction certain was concealed. It is a mixture of feminine instincts and sympathy for their gender that ultimately solves the case. They stick together, supporting each other against the patriarchy of their existence, not obliging to the ways of men and law and are thus able to save their kindred spirit from jail.

In the article written by Catherine Lavender, a popular saying about women in the late 1800’s was “She does what she can, but she is conscious of her inferiority and therefore grateful for support” (Lavender 3). In “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspel was written in 1917 based in Dickson County, where the characters Mr. Hale, Mr. Peters, and the county attorney are seeking the motive of the murder of John Wright. Minnie Wright is the suspect and eventually Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters find the clues and figure out the motive of the murder. Throughout the story, women were seen as oppressed and the submissive figure. Glaspell represents women oppression through symbols. The use of trifles represented the role women played in society given by men. Minnie’s unorganized kitchen demonstrates the ridicule and inferiority women received by the men. Lastly, the use of the dead bird and the bird cage symbolizes the isolation faced by farm wives and the misery faced by Minnie Wright. Glaspell uses symbolism to demonstrate the oppression of women and the sufferings of Minnie Wright in a patriarchal society.

During the 19th century women were oppressed in a patriarchal society. Women lived in separate spheres with limited participation in society. Women had no say or influence in the justice system. Especially in Minnie Wright’s case of her murdering her husband, John Wright. Minnie Wright was abused and used self-defense, but in the law of this time period, it would “condemn her and would see John Wright as the only victim” (Keetley 5). In a case where the wife kills the husband, the women will always be blamed and have no defense because it was always seen as wrong. The society was patriarchal representing the man as dominant and the woman as submissive. The major problem was that abusing women was not a crime and was seen as normal. When there is evidence of abuse, it “disserves rather than serves the interest of the women”(West 5) causing the suffering of women. The law did not benefit nor have equal treatment for women. There wasn’t any justice for women or for Minnie Wright. Minnie is the perfect representation of Women oppression, especially in marriages. John Wright caused a multitude of anguish on her. John will not allow Minnie to have a telephone at home, he “denied his wife access to even the minimal contacts that town life might afford”(Hedges 2), leaving her in isolation. He has left his wife in loneliness away from human contact. This was not uncommon for wives who live on a farm to experience isolation. The husband controls every aspect of their wives life, thus shows the unfairness and trials wives faced from their husbands. This connects to the idea of male superiority over women and having total control. Glaspell demonstrates this idea of a male-dominated society through symbols.

Glaspell uses trifles to symbolize how women were perceived and affected in society. Women were viewed as incapable or not able to do the things a man can do. In “A Jury of Her Peers”, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters experience ridicule from the men in the story. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are worried about Minnie’s broken jars of fruit and Mr. Hale mockingly says that women are “used to worrying over trifles” (Glaspell 299). Since the men are trying to figure out the motive of John’s murder, they see the women worried about the fruit and think that they are incapable of focusing on the investigation. They say this because women were perceived as being good at “womanly” things such as cleaning, cooking, sewing, etc. The men think the women has it easy and they don’t understand the physical labor while working around the house. Especially in Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters case where they are worried about the fruit. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale understand the “physical labor involved in boiling fruit in Iowa heat”(Hedges 4), while the men do not. The work of a woman is a long and tiresome day filled with working with your hands. The trifle of the jars of fruit represent the hard work of women and never being appreciated for any of it. Many women were affected by this, especially Minnie Wright. Minnie expressed her anguish in the quilt that was seen by Mrs. Hale and Mrs.Peters in her home. The women saw the clues that showed Minnie’s “erratic stitching”(Aarons 7) of the quilt that reveals her emotional state and that she’s trying to keep it together. This trifle symbolizes the noose that killed John Wright. Most importantly the quilt symbolizes women’s teamwork and it proved the men wrong in thinking they are not capable of doing a man’s job. Trifles represents the place of women in society given by men and the effects on women.

Minnie’s unorganized kitchen plays a role in the oppression of women by ridicule from the men. Since the woman stays home to take care of the house and children, it is assumed that the house is spotless. In Minnie’s case, “the kitchen: all is amiss”(Bendel-Simso 2), everything is open and half used. The sugar is half full and used, dirty dish towels are sitting on the table. It’s obvious that Minnie’s house is unclean but that doesn’t affect Minnie’s character. The county attorney finds dirty towels, “not much of a housekeeper, would you say ladies?” (Glaspell 299), said as a degrading remark. The county attorney finds Minnie to be a bad housekeeper because of her dirty kitchen. He never wonders why her kitchen is dirty, only assumes that she is a bad housekeeper. The kitchen is a stereotypically place for women so it isn’t normal for a woman’s house to be unclean. In the late 1800’s, it was thought that a house should be kept by a woman and if otherwise is seen as crazy. A common 19th century house had “beautiful, ornate objects–elaborate patterns in cloth covering walls, ornate furniture, pianos, paintings..”(Lavender 4), but Minnie’s house was the total opposite. Minnie’s house was old, dirty and gloomy with scratched furniture. The contrast between kitchens is drastic and reveals information about Minnie’s life with her husband. Minnie’s dirty kitchen symbolizes her tragic life and reveals the attitudes of men. It goes to show how John Wright acted towards Minnie and his true nature of violence. Minnie was mocked by her dirty kitchen but was never put into consideration how her life was at home, thus reveals the hardships of farm wives in the 19th century.

The dead bird and the bird cage symbolizes the misery faced by Minnie in her marriage and farm wives in the 19th century. Minnie and Mr. Peters find the dead bird and notice that “Somebody wrung its neck” (Glaspell 302). The women realize that Mr. Wright ripped open the door and killed the bird. Minnie represents the dead bird being killed by her husband mentally. She was confined to her marriage which reveals the symbol of the bird cage. Also, It represents women as the bird and men as the cage. Women are being trapped in society by men, where they can only be what they are told. There’s a clear and evident contrast of Minnie before and after her marriage. Mrs. Hale remembers Minnie as “real sweet and pretty, but kind of timid and fluttery” (Glaspell 300) before her marriage to John Wright. Mrs. Hale remembers her as a beautiful young girl with spirit and after her marriage to John, she was isolated and confined to her home. The dead bird symbolizes the cruelty of John and Minnie’s death. This torment that John has given to Minnie can have many traumatic affects and “ should have triggered murderous behavior in Minnie Wright is therefore neither gratuitous nor melodramatic..” (Hedges 5). It’s expected for someone to go insane in these conditions. He killed the bird so Minnie could have nothing. He killed the only thing left that Minnie loved so she killed him. She not only murder’s her husband, but also she murders her old self, which was all caused by Johns cruelty.

In the late 1800’s, women were oppressed and seen as the submissive figure in a patriarchal society. In “A Jury of Her Peers” Minnie Wright represents how women were treated in this society. Glaspell uses symbols to reveal how women were oppressed. The symbols used were trifles, Minnie’s unorganized kitchen, and the dead bird and bird cage which all played a role in this patriarchal society. The symbols used in this short story portrayed how society was like for women dominated by men, especially Minnie Wright who was accused of killing her husband. It is obvious that women were oppressed and suffered greatly in society and in marriages.

Select one of the short stories and discuss how a particular social group is constructed eg race, gender, socio-economic status.

Particular social groups are often constructed in a negative light. In the short story “A Jury of Her Peers”, the author, Susan Glaspell constructs a patriarchal society in which females are tremendously disregarded. The author uses various narrative conventions to convey this theme. The story features two males trying to solve the murder of a husband, while their wives are collecting the dead husbands, wife’s belongings. The writer creates a dichotomy and tension between the men and the women in the story; the men are logical and deductive whereas, the women are emotional and intuitive. The men are investigating the physical evidence of the crime, and trying to find a motive. On the contrary the women are investigating the mental deterioration of the wife, and can empathise with her, because they can relate to her experiences. Furthermore, the author uses symbolism to display the harsh treatment towards the women in this story. The wives in the story find a quilt which was knitted by the suspect. This quilt represents the horrific life that the suspect suffered. It starts of nice and neat, but as it continues, it starts to become careless and sloppy, even unravelled much like her life.

Women are traditionally the victim in genre narrative. Discuss this with reference to one or more.

Women are often victimised in today’s society. The short story, “A Jury of Her Peers” represents this social atrocity successfully. The story, written by Susan Glaspell, features a common but disappointing aspect, a patriarchal society in which women are constantly bullied by their male counterparts. This is conveyed to the audience by the use of an array of narrative conventions. The story features two lawmen investigating a murder, their two wives have come along to the crime scene to gather belongings for the suspected murderer. The two wives start to piece together their own versions of the crime scene, but their husbands almost instantly discredit them and dismiss her efforts as a “trifle” because women are not capable of understanding the elements of a crime scene. The male lawmen use gender to deny the women their opinion and this happens frequently throughout the story. Another instance of women being victimised is during a short story, “The Whole Town Sleeping”. This story written by Ray Bradbury, features a group of women making their way to the cinemas to watch a movie, during a mysterious murderer is terrorising a small town. The women are seen as weak and defenceless by the males in this society, and are often told to go home and hide because of how weak and futile they appear to be. The women are the victims of violence inflicted by men, and constantly have to be alert and cautious. A dichotomy is created between the two genders of this town, the men are free to go out alone in the darkness because they can protect themselves and this is normal for men, while the women belong in their houses, locked away from any danger. These two stories represent the harsh reality majority of women face daily.

In A Jury of Her Peers, the county attorney George Henderson is trying to solve the murder in the whole drama. He makes the sexist comment in the first clash between the male characters and the female ones. He thinks that women only worry about things that don’t matter. He thinks that the kitchen stuff like washing the dishes and making jam is only women things that are unimportant. He looks down women’s kitchen when he says, “Here’s a nice mess”. He also gets mad when there are dirty towels that he kicks Mrs. Wright’s pans and pot.

George Henderson only sees the women as housekeepers. He thinks that if the women are unable to do the unimportant things like housework, it is a failure as a human being. In the whole play, George makes one patronizing comment after another to Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale. He makes patronizing comments with Mrs. Peter and Mrs. Hale about the quilt and birdcage. It reflects that George is a misogynist. As George Henderson is a county attorney, his social status is higher than other characters. In fact, the law itself is also misogynist.

A Jury of Her Peers was written in the historical period in which political activists in the US were campaigning for women’s suffrage through all forms of social protest. At this time, women could not vote. Women had no right in the law. It shows the inequality of gender and represent the male-centric society. Since the playwright, Susan wanted to break the then prevalent bias about female gender, at the end of the play present a dramatic irony. At the end of the play, the women know how to make fun to men. George says that at least the women knew that Mrs. Wright was not going to quilt the quilt. He asks Mrs. Wale and Mrs. Peter to tell him how Mrs. Wright was going to do the quilt. Mrs. Hale put the dead bird in her pocket and says that Mrs. Wright was going to knot it.

This scene is dramatic irony. When George Henderson is finding out the evidence with the men, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peter have already figured out who is the murderer and what is the evidence. If the women do not concern about “the women stuff”, then they could not find the evidence and solve the mystery by finding the dead bird. It shows that the unimportant woman stuff is not just trifles after all. It represents that the women know something that men do not know and the sense of superiority of George is undercut. In A Doll House, Torvald Helmer is an overbearing character. His attitude toward women is also negative. He thinks that his wife, Nora Helmer need his guidance after the marriage because a helpless woman is needed to lead by a man in this complicated world. He needs to give instruction to Nora like her father did because he thinks it is men’s responsibility to take care of everything in the men-centric society.

Torvald regards himself as his wife’s protector and treats her like a child. He thinks that a woman is attractive if she is panic. Torvald Helmer always disrespects his wife. For instance, he calls Nora a silly name and scolds her for wasting money to eat macaroons. When he gives advice on Nora the proper way to dress up and dance the tarantella, he treats Nora less than a child. She is only a thing he can play with, a doll. It seems that Nora does not seem to mind the way her husband treats her. She wants her husband’s love and craves for the marriage in her life. She is willing to sacrifice her life to her husband. This makes Torvald become more self-center and disrespect women.

In Act 3, while Torvald and Nora are having conflict, Torvald even says that her wife is “doubly his own”. He thinks that Nora has become both wife and child in his mind. Torvald Helmer is conscious of others’ perceptions of him and his social status in the community. He even prioritized his own reputation over Nora’s desires. For instance, Nora request Torvald for keeping Krogstad at the office. He rejects it and saying that Krogstad would make him like a laughing stock in the company. He only cares about his standing in society. Moreover, Torvald only concern about the appearance of his family and his wife. He feels proud in presenting his wife to others. Therefore, he allowed Nora to remain in his house and raise their children in spite of ruining his own happiness.

The sense of superiority of Torvald Helmer is undercut in the play. There is a case of dramatic irony in the play. Torvald promises to Nora that he will sacrifice his happiness and dignity if there is some danger to threaten Nora. This is what he says in his promise. “Let what will happen, happen. When the real crisis comes, you will not find me lacking in strength or courage. I am man enough to bear the burden for us both.” However, when the threat happens, Torvald becomes coward and self-center who will not sacrifice himself for his wife. His response to his wife is ‘How could it help if you were gone from his world? It wouldn’t assist me… I may easily be suspected of having been an accomplice in your crime. People may think… We must appear to be living together… But the children shall be taken out of your hands. I dare no longer entrust them to you.’ It shows that only care about himself. Although Torvald treats his wife as a child, he is actually a childish character who is overprotected. When Dr. Rank, the close friend of the Helmer family explains that he does not want Torvald to get in his sickroom. He thinks that Torvald cannot face anything ugly. He is protected like a child. Moreover, the reason for his objection to working with Krogstad is his narrow-minded and petty. Krogstad does not give him proper respect. He feels offended by Krogstad and fires Krogstad.