By Riley Dauber ’25

Major: English; Minors: Journalism, Editing and Publishing, Communication and Media Studies, and Gender Studies

Contributor Biography: Riley Dauber is a senior majoring in English with minors in Journalism, Editing, and Publishing; Communication and Media Studies; and Gender Studies. She believes “women’s stories matter” and loves writing about the male gaze and women’s bodies. When she isn’t at the Publications House as Editor-in-Chief of The Elm, she is working at the Writing Center or writing detailed movie reviews on Letterboxd.

Brief Description: This essay examines the themes of Susan Glaspell’s short story “A Jury of Her Peers” in relation to the two women in the story who are brought by their husbands to the house of a woman accused of murdering her husband. The women stay in the kitchen for the entirety of the story, which connects to the feminine expectations of their time period. 

The following was written for ENG 394: Feminist Modernism: Editing Sophie Kerr

Published in 1918, Susan Glaspell’s short story “A Jury Of Her Peers” was inspired by a real life murder case; Glaspell she focuses on a pair of housewives, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, instead of the murder itself. Mrs. Peters is the sheriff’s wife and Mrs. Hale is brought along with her husband to keep the former company. As Mr. Hale, Mr. Peters, and the male county attorney search the house and crime scene, the women stay downstairs in the kitchen. By placing the housewives in a traditionally feminine space, Glaspell introduces themes of gender expectations and female community. The men patronize Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters and overlook the kitchen, while the women are able to find evidence because they understand and sympathize with Minnie, the woman accused of the murder, due to their shared identities as housewives. 

Although the gender expectations during her time are not explicitly stated in the story, Glaspell is able to discuss them by placing Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters in a traditionally feminine space for the majority of the investigation. While the men are able to leave the kitchen and explore the crime scene, the women are stuck in the kitchen where their husbands believe they belong. Before Mrs. Hale and her husband leave for the Wrights’ house, she tidies up in her own kitchen. Glaspell writes, “But what her eyes took in was that her kitchen was in no shape for leaving: her bread all ready for mixing, half the flour sifted and half unsifted” (1). The reader is introduced to Mrs. Hale’s mannerisms and her role as a housewife; she dislikes leaving tasks unfinished, which shows the expectations placed on her. She must maintain a neat kitchen, and the failure to do so is shown later in the piece when the group investigates Minnie’s kitchen.  

The sheriff looks for a man’s voice to tell a woman’s story about the crime. When the Hales arrive at the house with the Peters and the county attorney, Mr. Hale is asked to tell his side of the story, even though Minnie was the one who committed the crime. After listening to Mr. Hale, the men look around the kitchen. Glaspell writes, “‘You’re convinced there was nothing important here?’ he asked the sheriff. ‘Nothing that would — point to any motive?’ The sheriff too looked all around, as if to re-convince himself. ‘Nothing here but kitchen things,’ he said, with a little laugh for the insignificance of kitchen things” (3). The sheriff and the other men overlook the kitchen because it is seemingly separate from the crime scene and believed to be a feminine space. They belittle the kitchen objects because of their connection to femininity. However, the space is necessary for the women due to their roles as housewives. In the opening scene, readers see how Mrs. Hale keeps her kitchen clean and finishes up her tasks; these responsibilities are expected of her.  

Even though the men overlook the kitchen as a potential place for evidence, they still hold Minnie Wright to these housewife standards. The county attorney says, “Here’s a nice mess,” implying that women are expected to keep the kitchen clean for their husbands (Glaspell 3). These beliefs trump the fact that Minnie was arrested and thus did not have time to clean up. Glaspell writes, “Her eye was caught by a dish-towel in the middle of the kitchen table. Slowly she moved toward the table. One half of it was wiped clean, the other half messy. Her eyes made a slow, almost unwilling turn to the bucket of sugar and the half empty bag beside it. Things begun — and not finished” (6). This moment references the beginning of the story when Mrs. Hale was preparing her kitchen and not leaving tasks half-finished before she and her husband left for the Wrights’ house. Only the women can investigate the kitchen and look for clues because it is a feminine space that they understand. The men do not view the kitchen as important; they overlook it because it is a woman’s space and could not possibly shed light on the murder case.  

While exploring the kitchen, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters learn more about Minnie and sympathize with her. The feminine space reveals details about Minnie and her life because it was the one place she existed in and was expected to maintain. Mrs. Hale says, “I’d hate to have men comin’ into my kitchen…snoopin’ round and criticizin’” (Glaspell 5). She establishes the kitchen as a feminine space and that she would “hate to have men comin’,” proving that women take care of the room, not men. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are familiar with running their own kitchens and are offended on Minnie’s behalf when the men criticize her “dirty” space. When the county attorney says, “Dirty towels! Not much of a housekeeper, would you say, ladies,” he looks to the wives for approval because he believes they will understand the importance of a clean kitchen (Glaspell 4). However, the women take offense to his comments and sympathize with Minnie due their shared gender identities and roles as housewives. 

Along with the disapproval of Minnie’s kitchen, the men also patronize Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, viewing them as unnecessary to the investigation. The county attorney says, “But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?” (Glaspell 4). He and the other men leave the women in the kitchen because they believe the wives will not be able to help. They also judge the wives’ intelligence, implying that they would not know a clue if they found it. Their mistake, however, leads to a moment of irony in the story: Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters find the key piece of evidence — a strangled bird — within Minnie’s quilting tools, which represent a traditionally feminine activity. The bird was killed by a wringing of the neck, which is the same way Mr. Wright was killed. This piece of evidence implies that Mr. Wright silenced the bird, Minnie’s one friend, the same way he silenced his own wife through their marriage. Minnie decided to exact revenge and kill her husband in the same way, hiding the evidence in a place no male investigator would find. However, the women view the quilting activity as important because they also quilt and understand the different techniques. They consider the tools a vital clue in the case because they belong to Minnie, who they can sympathize with and relate to.    

Even though it is evidence that would confirm Minnie did kill her husband, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters decide to keep the dead bird. Glaspell writes, “With a rush forward, she threw back the quilt pieces, got the box, tried to put it in her handbag. It was too big. Desperately she opened it, started to take the bird out…Martha Hale snatched the box from the sheriff’s wife, and got it in the pocket of her big coat” (11). Although Mrs. Peters is the one to grab the bird, which allows her to separate herself from her law-abiding husband, Mrs. Hale helps her and hides the evidence, showing the female community between the two women. They work together to protect Minnie, sympathizing with how her husband mistreated and silenced her. The three women are able to relate to one another because they experience the expectations placed on them as housewives.  

Even though Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are stuck in the kitchen for the majority of the story, they are still able to solve the case because of these gender expectations. The story concludes with both of the wives in the kitchen: “Again — for one final moment — the two women were alone in that kitchen” (Glaspell 10). Despite what they have uncovered about the murder case, they are trapped in the traditionally feminine space by their husbands and the county attorney. 

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. Wilhelm Leibl, Two Women in the Kitchen, 1895-1897, NGA 139239.jpg

Works Cited 

Glaspell, Susan. “A Jury Of Her Peers.” Every Week, The Crowell Publishing Company, 1918.