There is more authorial intrusion in the
short story "A Jury of Her Peer" than in the play
Trifles.
As such, Glaspell reveals many more of her characters' feelings in the
short story. She leaves the emotional subtext for the actors to reveal on
stage.
So says one
critic:
For
example, on page 275 the writer explains how Mrs. Hale first met Mrs. Peters, “the year
before at the county fair”. Mrs. Hale’s opinion of Mrs. Peters is brought to the surface
on page 276 when the writer reveals that she felt Mrs. Peters “didn’t seem like a
sheriff’s wife”. Whereas in the play Trifles, the reader is left with no insight of this
nature since the dialogue is so central (all you know is what you see and hear).
Feelings are left out of the play, and revealed in the short
story.
Another
obvious difference is the title. The play's title
Trifles is more subtle, whereas the short story's title "A Jury of
Her Peers" basically reveals two major themes from the start: feminist community ("her
Peers") and legalism ("Jury"). Trifles is wonderfully ironic: it
is what the men think of women's work. As such, its title better reveals the little
things (the clues and subtext), which drives this psychological
play.
The women are marginalized more in the
play. They are physically segregated from the men, and their presence on
stage keeps them--as a community--front and center. No one woman is more important than
the other. Even though it is titled Trifles and not "A Jury of Her
Peers," the play's grouping of the women allows them to be more of a physical jury.
This is more symbolic and
meaningful.
Audience participation, I feel,
is the biggest difference. Quite frankly, the short story gives too much
away. It's too easy, too seamless. The play, even if it is read and not seen, is much
more like a detective story. As a reader or viewer of the play, we have to use more
deductive reasoning and fill in the pieces to the mystery.
No comments:
Post a Comment