Susan Glaspell’s Trifles is an early feminist play emphasizing women’s necessity to come together into a community[1] to overcome the patriarchal social system. The play offers both a critique of gender role and a critical analysis of coverture[2].

Glaspell based the play off of a murder trial she covered as a reporter in Davenport, Iowa. In the original trial, the murder weapon was an ax struck against man’s head twice, but in Trifles Glaspell gives the ax to a young boy, who kills Mrs. Peter’s cat, “when [she] was a girl” (Glaspell: 360). Glaspell’s choice to move the act of using an ax to a male character—meeting social norms— shows her attempt to create a dichotomy between men and women larger than what was clearly displayed in how the women never left the kitchen, private-sphere of the home, and the men went all through the property, displaying themselves in the public-sphere.

As the men search for evidence of the murder around the house, the women discuss what the men would call ‘trifles’ and disclose a great amount of information to the audience on the farmer’s wife being held as a suspect. The woman being held, Minnie Foster Wright, a woman whose first “name is ‘derived from the German word for love’ (Alkalay-Gut 1995: 72)” (Ozieblo: 67); maiden name, Foster, “is resonant of care and nurture” (ibid.: 67); married name, “is an ironical pun on her rights under the law and on that old dream of finding a ‘Mr. Right” (ibid.: 67), is an objection to coverture and women’s right to be more than just a maternal fixture to be possessed by a man.

The women, Mrs. Hale, a farmer’s wife, and Mrs. Peters, who is “married to the law” (Op. cit. 361), slowly piece together Minnie’s case and “like quilters, patch together the scenario of her life and of her guilt” (Ben-Zvi: 34). As a pair the women become stronger than just one woman can be when dealing with the male dominant voice and the women move from Mrs. Hale’s “just pulling out a stitch or two that’s not sewed very good” (Glaspell: 358) to concealing evidence from the men in the end, as a pair—feeling the empowerment of community. Dr. Jenny Spencer, in conversation, said that she speculated that after the play the women would have formed a bond that would allow them to go to one another later because they have together seen that other women deal with the same struggle that they do, thus forming a relationship beyond that of to their husbands. The women see their value to one another and “not—just” (ibid.: 361) as possessions of men, as displayed by their few, demeaning interactions with the men who are not concerned with whether “[Minnie] was going to quilt it or just knot it!” (ibid.: 358).

Mrs. Hale tells Mr. Henderson, the county attorney in the public-sphere, in the last line of the play an important element of the play, that Minnie was going to “knot it” (ibid.: 361). The value of whether Minnie was going to knot it or quilt it did not initially appear to me and had to be developed through conversation with Dr. Ernest Gallo, professor of English and husband of an avid quilter, Dr. Alexandrina Deschamps, professor of Women Studies, and the previously stated Dr. Jenny Spencer. As Dr. Gallo said, “[Men] don’t give a damn about quilts,” and they do not concern themselves with the women beyond being possessions used to humor themselves. The men, Mr. Wright in particular, neglect of woman’s need to be more than just a housewife is shown in the certainty that Minnie was going to ‘knot it’ since her domesticated lifestyle did not allow her the relationship necessary to do any other. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters together are able to quilt the story of Minnie Foster and Mr. Wright into the story of a woman who is unable to quilt and must resort to knotting, since it can be done alone. Minnie’s necessity to knot it was as Dr. Deschamps said, “[she] seized to be [her] own person.”  Mr. Wright’s possession of Minnie is, as stated before, coverture, where she became a part of her husband and gave up her own voice. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters do not allow the same to happen to them and choose the “power that comes from choice—the choice of silence” (Ozieblo: 66). The women make “the choice of silence” (ibid.: 66), a choice that could not have been made by either of them if they had not come together to form a relationship. In Mrs. Hale and Peter’s formation of a community, they see their ability to be more than just a wife, and see the immediate benefit of empowerment: that as women they can see themselves as more than just “married to the law” (Glaspell: 361) or in Mrs. Hale’s case she can see herself as more than just a housewife who “doesn’t like [Minnie’s house] much” (ibid.: 359) because it is discomforting for her to leave her to venture outside of her own kitchen.

Women’s necessity to form a community to create feministic change is almost explicitly stated in Minnie’s inability to quilt, and also, in the first lines of the play where the women are hesitant to come into Mr. Wright’s home, where they may step over the boundaries of what is socially acceptable. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale do not have to explain their hesitance when Mrs. Peters “(after taking a step forward)” says, “I’m not—cold” (ibid.: 354), but it is not a stretch to say it is because they are not comfortable coming into another’s private-sphere, where women for the most part reside, and critiquing a woman’s character. At first, the women are separate women, only aware of the discomfort that comes with having overstepped their boundaries in coming to the Wright’s, but develop the ability to quilt as they develop the ability to bond. Not only do the two concepts, community and coverture, both appear in the story, but they come together into one idea: women must overcome the coverture, where they only belong in the private-sphere of their male’s life, and women must use the freedom of having overcome that boundary to come into the public-sphere to create a community, the most necessary boundary to be passed to reach the goal of choice, even if their only choice is that “of silence” (Ozieblo: 66).

Works Cited

Ben-Zvi, Linda, Ed. Susan Glaspell: Essays on Her Theater and Fiction. Ann Arbor:

The University of Michigan Press, 1995.

Glaspell, Susan. “Trifles.” American Drama: Colonial to Contemporary. Comp. and Ed.

Stephen Watt and Gary A Richardson. Mason: Cengage, 2003. 354-361

Humm, Maggie. The Dictionary of Feminist Theory. Columbus: Ohio State University

Press, 1990.

Ozieblo, Barbara, and Jerry Dickey. Susan Glaspell and Sophie Treadwell. London:           Routledge, 2008.

Waterman, Arthur E. Susan Glaspell. New York: Twayne, 1966.

[2] Dr. Alexandrina Deschamp defined coverture as being when women “seized to be [their] own person” and became property of their husband.

I haven’t written in here, or in general, in so long that it’s a nice feeling to try it out once again. I just finished this essay for my Modern American Drama class and thought, “Hey, throw it on there.”

Michael

People have always fascinated me, though recently I’ve become a sucker for the fictional character much more than the fellow being who i can stare in the eyes. I am wondering now why this is and hope to by the end of this entry to have a firm grasp on my own interaction with them and why I like this more. There’s a hunch in my mind that it’s because I like to be in control. In this “real” word, which I use sort of as slang for what we all share as a reality, everything is taking on different meanings and values due to this whole dynamic structure of everyone’s perspectives and experiences. While, I on the other hand, can read a book and every action and motion is directly a result of how perceived the moment before. One could argue that whether it’s in the world around me or in the book I’m reading it’s still my perception making all the value but I think there’s much more to this in the element of involving other persons’ realities.

My goal for the week: to discover the value that’s inside everyone else’s own realities and to embrace them as my own.

After having not written for a long time it feels good to come here and just put down a few words, even if they are poorly structured and lack an actual point.

Michael

I’ve lucked out. I only have one large essay and a few exams left, practically nothing compared to many students. Only one problem: the essay is 65% of a grade and I can’t even make a proper outline– I’m losing my mind over this. I’ve never failed so hard in my life. But, oh well, two more weeks to work on this.

I made a twitter… discontentment makes strange things happen. We’ll see if i can continually use it for long; hopefully it doesn’t end up like my blog and only written on like this. Once summer begins man, maybe I’ll be better but right now I suck.

By the way, I ended up publishing something in the undergraduate literary journal but I noticed a flaw to my piece after it had already been sent to the press. There’s my first publishing experience, sweet.

Michael

It has recently become clear to me that I’m very good at very little.

Exhibit A: As we speak I’m avoiding phonology and ignoring my physics homework. 

Exhibit B: The list on my blog of the months and how many posts I’ve done & number of views.

So, I’ve decided that this summer, once I’m done with finals, I shall begin a second blog. My second blog will be a blog discussing books and my review of them. I am in a no way a literary critic or even capable to judge literature with a solid opinion, but I do one thing that works for this idea: have the ability to form opinions and support them with validity. I may even just begin giving myself essay prompt questions which I will post then writing the essay. We shall see, but I am excited. I hope it’ll help me get more into reading consistently and also get something going that will get others discussing their ideas with me.

I know, I could just join a book club, and I just may, but for now I like the idea of this.

Michael

            With the first line of Shakespeare’s Othello, “Tush, never tell me!” begins the development of a major idea through to the end of Act V: the power of storytelling. Without a doubt, the largest and most powerful story told is done by Shakespeare, with his story of the tragedy of the moor of Venice. Though, inside Shakespeare’s Othello there are numerous other stories, that when told, combine powers and become able to take down the “valiant Moor,” Othello.

            From those lines, “Tush, never tell me,” “a gulled gentleman”, Roderigo, comes to show he would rather remain unknowing than hearing a story, a story which as far as I—and possibly Roderigo—know as only having validity in its being conceived as a story. Just the notion and possibility of what could be told is enough to make Roderigo tell Iago he does not want to be told, which may have been the last decent decision involved with a story to be made in the play.

            Before Othello’s story is told by Shakespeare, before it is the tragedy of the Moor of Venice, his story is accused of being “drugs and medicines of motion,” by Brabantio when the story “hast enchanted [his daughter]”, Desdemona. Even the Duke agrees that Othello’s story “would win [his] daughter too.” So, up to this point Othello’s tale of “suffer” and “redemption” has aided him in his relationships, to both: his new wife, Desdemona, and his Duke, who is willing to overlook Othello and Desdemona’s unlawful marriage.

            Othello’s aid in personal stature by the power of story finds its first antithesis in Act III, as Iago dangle’s above Othello’s head an untold story that is so well performed that Othello, the black magician of storytelling thus far, wishes to “by heaven… know thy thoughts!” It appears that Othello has met his match in telling a powerful story, but Othello “know[s] [Iago]’rt full of love and honesty”—bringing weight to Iago words before he gives them breath—which makes Iago’s quasi-mockery of a story impact Othello very heavily. These heavy words given breath by Iago, and those not given breath, bring Othello a fear of the untold and make him ask of himself, “Why did I marry?” —A question that would have never been thought of without such an unknown-abyss being arisen in his thoughts of Desdemona.

            After Othello has heard Iago’s “exceeding honesty” about Cassio, Desdemona, and her having “deceiv[ed] her father” in marrying, Othello brings a very symbolic story in the play. One which before his talking to Iago and his having found that Desdemona did not have the Handkerchief he gave her “about [her]” may have come out in a very different manner. He tells her how his mother had received the handkerchief from an Egyptian charmer, who told her a story that “while she kept it, / ‘Twould make her amiable and [able to] subdue [Othello’s] father/ Entirely to her love;” though, of how if she lost it, “his spirits should hunt/ After new fancies.” Whether this story is fiction or not, no other than Othello could know. Whether the handkerchief was “dyed in mummy which the skillful/ Conserved of maidens’ hearts”, is not to be told either; but how Desdemona responds to his tale of chastity and exotic heritage is to be seen by Othello.

            From the tale of the Handkerchief, and persuasive unpleasantries with Othello, Desdemona becomes very afraid to “displease him” and begins speaking of her death to Emilia, the wife of Iago. As Desdemona speaks of death, she brings a story of mother’s maid, Barbary. “She was in love; and he she loved proved mad/ And did forsake her.” As Barbary died she sang a song, “Willow”, which is now the song that “will not go from [Desdemona’s] mind.” Her story of Barbary, the song, and their duet with death tells a foreshadowing tale of how Desdemona will pay “a great price for a small vice”. Although Desdemona “in troth… wouldst not” “do such a deed for all the world”, she pays the “great price” for the “small vice”, and Othello ends her story.

            As the last lines are spoken by Lodovico, a “nobel Venetian”, to Iago, he speaks of the relationship of “heavy act with heavy heart”.  This relationship comes in how he must go back to Venice to tell the story of Othello, which has now taken a new appearance as Emilia tells the true story of her husband and ties together all ends to bring The Tragedy of Othello the Moor of Venice. A tale that is still full of “suffer” and “redemption”, though now is a story that will not be capable of receiving Desdemona’s pity.

I find it strange how I never go on my blog while at school, but I also don’t open Safari at school, which is the browser I use solely for blogging.

Well, obviously, I am home right now… procrastinating a paper about Othello… good times.

Thought I’d throw something in here and see what it does for me in my ability to actually sit down and get some work done.

I miss legit blogging, being creative, and writing in my free time. Lately my free time is filled with Physics, Philosophy, and reading Shakespeare (or about Shakespeare).

Or if I’m not doing work, usually, I’m making up my own “The Way I See It #” cups based off Starbuck’s winning team of quotes. Although, mine usually end in shenanigans and offensive remarks about everything in the world.

Good times

Michael

Putting together my thesis for my Philosophy of Art paper… and I’m finding trouble really making everything come together. If it gives you any more reason to help me, it is my 20th birthday today.

I’m hoping someone out here will please put some thought into this as well. I’m going to put on my bullets which I’ve come up to sort of show what I’m planning on writing about and what I plan to defend. I’m pretty much looking for any ideas people have though. I’ll surely be reading everything and valuing it at the same degree. 

Here’s what I have:

·         There is a family, a tradition of art. This tradition relies entirely on set conditions, some which are necessary, and together able to sufficient.

·         With the “right intentions”, some objects, artifacts, projections, and notions (generally speaking a device) become art through the same intentional processing.

·         The artistic “is” is the necessary condition for an object which is being advocated to be at the artistic “stature” necessary to be set with/against artistic sufficiency.

·         The second condition, which is the individuality of the object, comes with the artistic “is” to defend the claim, put it in a position to be “read” through its comparison to other pieces which have previously been accepted to meet the sufficiency, and to separate the object in question, along with its “is”, from the artist, claimer, or both if that be the case.

Also, I intend to be using T.S. Eliot and a man named “Danto” (I forget his first name) as my main two defenders, but if you have any ideas of people who discuss the same ideas I’ll read into them.

Anyone seen an objection? or a way to possibly better say what I’m trying to say?

Even E-mail if you wish not to comment: michaellucianojr@gmail.com

Thank you anyone who does take interest in this. If what you put together is worthy I’ll be quoting you and putting you as a source, that is if you’re not quoting someone else, but I’ll put you as some sort of medium as to how I got to that knowledge. I must stop writing this post now and get back to my paper!

Thanks for reading this far, if you didn’t just scroll down,

Michael

“Shylock      

      My Deeds upon my head! I crave the law,                  204

      The penalty and forfeit of my bond.                            205”

                                                      —Act IV.1, pg 79, 204-5

                  At Shylock’s pinnacle of quasi-control, in The Merchant of Venice, he has himself the opportunity to show Antonio, the court, and the Christian order mercy and salvation; but he instead comes to appear merciless and devilish with his craving for revenge.  His hunger for more than just an outcome of money, which does not hold the same value it once did, is apparent in every word he gets out with an inclination for vengeance.

      Thus far, Shylock has lost every valuable possession in his life, including his daughter, Jessica, and the wealth she took with her to her new husband, Lorenzo, and Lorenzo’s Christianity.  Her leaving Shylock and Judaism has broken his heart, since she, following Jewish tradition, was to be the heiress to all that he had made for himself in both possession and name.  Now without her, he is left to have no concern for money or tradition, as all that he has left now is the bitter aftertaste of pride, and his hatred for societal tradition and order which has to this point wronged him at every possibility.

      Shylock is now broken: the only aspect of life he has left, and the only power he holds in this world is “[his] bond,” which is a possessive way to showing Antonio, and all others present, that he is in power over Antonio, a Christian.  Antonio, who has wronged Shylock in the past, is not being shown mercy as Shylock “craves the law” for Antonio.  Also, in Shylock’s being so possessive in his statements, he is showing Portia and the Duke, who are to be the judges of the outcome of this legal bout, that he is the one directing this show and demands to be given the lead role which he deserves as this whole conflict is due to “[Shylock’s] bond.”

      One of the largest mistakes Shylock makes, aside from being a mere-Jew in a room of Christians, is that he begins his possessive short rant with, “My Deeds upon my head!” with deeds being uppercased, which makes me wonder, what “Deeds” are there?  He’s certainly speaking of something larger than just Portia’s asking him to show mercy to Antonio.  He is turning this, explicitly, into a case of spiteful frustration.  I see this discussion of his “Deeds” to be that Shylock is turning the scenario to be about his Judaism along with his upper-hand, allowing him to make this the time that the Jew had the upper-hand, and not just Shylock’s small victory over Antonio.

      Shylock’s search for ‘justice’ with Antonio has a large flaw. It is that he does not appear to be in the least bit interested in bringing ‘Shylock’s’ conflict to justice.  Shylock rather is searching for what he “craves,” which does not appear to be “the law” like he says, but rather it has become a craving for what he sees “the law” to be. He searches for “penalty” and “forfeit” for Antonio’s wrongdoing, which shouldn’t be confused with “the law” that comes to backfire on him later.

      Not only is Shylock “crav[ing] the law” to be merciless toward Antonio, but he is doing this on behalf of his Jewish inferiority, and for his ‘national,’ rather than his personal pride.  Though the situation appears to be between these two men, and their binding bond, there is a much larger layer of conflict which undermines Shylock’s inflated moxie.  There is a constant resentment from all Jews as they are always getting the not so desirable end of the stick every time, and now, in Shylock’s perspective, a Jew has the “opportunity” to set new precedent.

      With Shylock’s language, intentions, and position in mind, a major theme of the play, which is very visible in this passage, can be seen without difficulty. When the difference of power between the Christians and Jews, in this time and setting, seems to be flipped in this short passage, but in both lines around it, the difference in power is well and alive. Though the difference is alive in this passage as well, it seems forgotten by Shylock, and he comes across as being on top, if even for only sixteen words.

I wrote this a few weeks ago for my Shakespeare class, but I like the value to it. So, I’m putting it on here. Why not, right?

Michael

When I look back in the past year, or so, I see in all of my short fiction writing one story. Every separate piece seems to be around one character who needs to be developed and put together. I’m now beginning to realize that maybe it is just one man, one story? Could I be beginning to see the beginning of a novel in the works? 

I sure hope so. I love who this character is and want him to become more. I was just going through old writings and he is in at least five separate pieces. Is this how a novel happens? Or was I just unaware of my intentions through doing this? Or do I have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about?

I feel like everything I’ve written with him in it is really about me, which is just what makes me even more nervous.

What if I am just writing my own story? I used to believe all writers were doing this, but that’s not the case.

Anyways, the character is coming to life for me, and I am enjoying this. Hopefully over spring break I’ll get some time to myself, I mean when I’m not busy working on papers and a Linguistics Exam. 

Michael

I wanted to share with anyone who reads this one of my favorite poems. Maybe someday I’ll even break it down to say what it means to me.

I’ve developed a love for E. E. Cummings and here it is!

In the book of poetry I had it was just titled “315″

you shall above all things be glad and young.

For if you’re young, whatever life you wear

it will become you;and if you are glad
whatever’s living will yourself become.
Girlboys may nothing more than boygirls need:
i can entirely her only love

whose any mystery makes every man’s
flesh put space on;and his mind take off time

that you should ever think,may god forbid
and(in his mercy)your true lover spare:
for that way knowledge lies,the foetal grave
called progress,and negation’s dead undoom.

I’d rather learn from one bird how to sing
than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance

–ee cummings.

take care,

Michael