Male Character`s reactions leading to the failure of motive disclosure in Susan Glaspell`s trifles.

i

MALE CHARACTERS’ REACTIONS LEADING TO

THE FAILURE OF MOTIVE DISCLOSURE

IN SUSAN GLASPELL’S

TRIFLES

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of Requirements

for the Degree ofSarjana Sastra in English Letters

By

ELIZABET AYU ANGELIIA Student Number :114214114

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA 2016

ASQ1jana SastraUndergraduate Thesis

MALE CHARACTERS' REACTIONS LEADING TO THE FAILURE OF MOTIVE DISCLOSURE

IN SUSAN GLASPELL'S TRiFLES

By

ELIZABETA YUANGELlIA Student Number: 114214114

Approved by

Drs. Hinnawan Wijanarka, M. HlUll. Advisor

AdventiTIa PutrantL S.S., M.HlUn. Co Advisor

ii

January 15th, 2016

ASarjana SastraUndergraduate Thesis

MALE CHARACTERS' REACTIONS LEADING TO THE FAILURE OF MOTIVE DISCLOSURE

IN SUSAN GLASPELL'S TRIFLES

By

ELIZABET AYU ANGELIIA Student Number: 114214114

Defended before the Board of Examiners on

and Declared Acceptable

BOARD OF EXAMINERS

Name Signature

Chairperson : Dr. F. X. Siswadi, M.A.

Secretary : Dra. A. B.Sri Mulyani, M.A., P.hD. Member 1 : Dr. F. X. Siswadi, M.A.

Member 2 : Drs. Hirmawan Wijanarka, M. Hum. Member 3 : Adventina Putranti, S.S, M.Hum.

Yogyakarta, January 26th, 2016 Faculty of Letters Sanata Dharma University

Dean

~3

_{Dr. F. X. Siswadi M.A}

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Humans are social creatures. They cannot live without other humans. They need to get along with others in order to fulfill their needs. Both primary and secondary needs cannot be completed all alone. People make a family to fulfill the need of affection and procreation. It started with a small group of family. A family needs house to live in, clothes to wear, and also food to eat. The needs will become easier to get when some families gather and make a society. In a society they can divide the job and share what they have to complete their need. The people who are gathered then also make some rules and customs in order to make the life runs better. Smith stated as follows:

As populations began to grow, more and more people had to live together to maximize resource utilization and provide adequate safety. Just as biological entities adapt and evolve to survive better, the societies that people found themselves living in began changing with time. Rules and customs arose, which led to the formation of Freud's superego, that aspect of the mind that compares oneself to the ideal member of the society. (Brian: 2015)

Living in society also leads human to fit in. Humans will try to be accepted and have status in the society. They are also living in a group that rises because of the same personality. InTrifles,the play that is discussed in this thesis, we can see the characters are divided into two groups. The first one is the women and the second one is the men. The grouping exist because of different point of view and personalities that are carried by

each group. What make it important is that those different nature of each group finally lead to the failure of motive disclosure, the main purpose of Trifles. As stated by Spirkin:

Through the group a person rises to the level of a personality, a conscious subject of historical creativity. The group is the first shaper of the personality, and the group itself is shaped by society. (Spirkin: 2015) In the life with others in group, human will have something that is expected from. Furthermore, besides running their status in society they also have to play their role. Human are created differently one another. There are men and women. Men and women have role in society. The attitude and action that expected from men and women by the society are different. In the article “What do we mean by “sex” and “gender”?”:

"Gender" refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women. (apps.who.int, December 5th 2016)

In this study, the different nature of men and women is really important because it is actually the main cause which makes the disclosure of the motive in Susan Glaspell’s Trifles failed. The nature that is being a focus here is also influenced by the gender which is constructed by society where the characters live. Different perception toward something, different point of view, and different way of thinking make their ideas about motive are also different.

At the end of the play the men are still uninterested to what women do. They also do not care about the things that the women bring. That became a good thing for the women because they will not be considered to take or do something

important, although they did. The men did not expect the women to find the motive so anything done by the women seemed unimportant. This phenomenon is interesting, how the men act toward women, and what is expected from women also become a matter because by looking down something, an important thing that may lays behind it will be covered.

As Nicole Smith stated:

Because the men do not expect the women to make a contribution to the investigation, they are disinterested in the women’s astute impressions and valuable findings that solved the murder case. (Nicole:2011)

Trifles is a gilt edged play script because it riches of culture and message. Susan Glaspell, the author, is a journalist and the book she wrote which was based on true case play script is exactly the reflection of social condition at that time. This play is also well-known as a strong feminist play which has important role of feminist movement as supported by Jaworowski.

“Trifles,” written by Susan Glaspell and first performed in 1916, has become a staple of theater studies. Though the play is celebrated as an early feminist drama, it stands on its own as an engrossing story. In the tale, two women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, gradually uncover the motive for a murder, while their male counterparts are blinded by ignorance and insensitivity. (Jaworowski: 2015)

The message conveyed in this play script can be relevant to any era. Many failures in this world happen because of the ignorance of trifles. Those reasons make this play script worth analyzing.

There is a correlation between many cases happening today with Trifles. The background of the doer is an important things to be revealed. For example the

corruption case of Angelina Sondakh. The text she sent to her partner used the words Apel Malang and Apel Washington as symbol of money.

“_{Menurut Rosa, istilah "apel malang" berarti "uang rupiah", "apel} washington" berarti "dollar AS", "pelumas" berarti "uang", demikian juga dengan arti "semangka" yang menunjukkan "permintaan dana". "Apel malang, apel washington, pelumas, semangka," tutur Rosa saat bersaksi untuk terdakwa kasus dugaan suap wisma atlet, Muhammad Nazaruddin, Trans : According to Rosa, the term “Malang Apple” (Apple that grown in Malang, East Java) means “Rupiah”, “Washington Apple”, means “US Dollar”, ” lubricant” means “money”, and it is similar with the meaning of “watermelon” which means “money proposal”. “Malang Apple, Washington Apple, lubricant, watermelon” Rosa said in his statement as a witness for a defendant of Wisma Atlet bribe assumption case, Muhammad Nazarudin,”(Icha: 2012)

The symbol is so meaningful, if the symbol is ignored, the case will never be revealed. In trifles the man characters ignore simple thing and do not consider the background of the murderer in examining the motive.

The woman who is being the murderer in the play is being underestimated by the men. One important message that is conveyed in Trifles is we should not look down things that seem unimportant because anything can be valuable, and has possibility to reveal something. Another point is about the discrimination of women. Today, the discrimination of women still exists and that may result in bad things like what is happened in Trifles. Not to stand for the murdering action, but writer also think that no one is fair to be looked down. Everyone has his/her ability and uniqueness which is proper to be considered.

B. Problem Formulation

To proof that the natures of man characters in Glaspell’s Trifles influence the failure of motive disclosure, writer make these three questions. These questions will answer the problems that are disclosed orderly.

1. What are the natures of male characters in Susan Glaspell’sTrifles? 2. What happened in the each part of plot?

3. How do male characters’ reactions lead to the failure of motive disclosure?

C. Object of the Study

The aim of this study is to get the explanation of the failure of motif disclosure by examining first, the nature of man characters. After that, writer analyzed how the story is constructed. Finally, the relation of male characters and how the story flows disclosed the failure

D. Definition of Terms

There are several terms that are decent to be explained.. The first one is male. Male refers to sex of human. It is biologically built or naturally given from the birth.

Bluntly speaking, a male is a human who has penis & testicles that produce sperms that can fertilize a female’s ovum. But nowadays, not all male can fertilize an ovum, not that they are impotent or something, it’s just that some are more interested in seeing someone else’s penis & testicles. So for me, a male is a human with a testosterone and has interest on the opposite sex. (Guillermo: 2014)

Male is a sex of human in general. It refers to a biological aspect of human that carries some natural characteristic. Male has interest to Female. Male is a human with testosterone. Male does not always refer to man because man is given the expected role by the society while male is not. Male as a sex is naturally given instead of made by expected role from society.

The second one is Motive. Motive here related to law. This refers to the reason why Minnie foster kill her husband.

In Law, this is why one committed the crime, the inducement, reason, or willful desire and purpose behind the commission of an offense. Whether the purpose was good, like helping someone commit suicide, or bad, like committing murder, it is not a deciding factor in deciding guilt or innocence. But, intent is. In a libel case, it has importance. It may be used by a defending attorney in punishment mitigation or by a prosecuting attorney as circumstantial evidence to prove guilt. (http://thelawdictionary.org/motive/: 2016)

The motive can be a consideration of the Attorney in punishment mitigation. Motive is something that stimulate someone to do a crime. There are many reasons for someone to do a crime for example; to revenge the death of his father, a man killed his uncle, who had killed his father. The motive here is a triger of the criminal case.

The third one is Character. According to www.playwriting101.com character is any personified entity appearing in a film or a play. Character is the actor of the play which is made b the author to run the story. Character’s action, deeds, and attitude will create the plot of the story.

7 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE A. Review of Related Studies

A research of related study which is relevant to equip writer’s knowledge in doing this thesis research is very important. Writer uses “A Futile Attempt at Destroying Part of Existence: A New Criticism Study of Edgar Alan Poe’s The Fall of The House of Usher” by Tita Perwitasari and “Susan Glaspell View Toward Women’s Position in Her Age as Seen in Her Trifles” Female Character” by Ratna Kumalasari as references of related studies.

First, writer reviewed on Perwitasari’s. She takes the same approach as the writer, which is new criticism. In her work she analyze how the character, setting, plot, symbol, motive are described in the short story. Some of the aspects of fiction that are being analyzed are similar with the writer’s. Perwitasari also does further analysis and looks deeper to the significance of those elements interrelated to convey the meaning of the title.

The same thing is done by the writer. First the writer analyzes some aspect of the literary text and then correlates it to find the final message. As she uses new criticism as her approach, Perwitasari only refers to what stated in the text and does not go outside the text. The step that she take also set in order and relevant to get the aim of her study.

Perwitasari used the theory of symbol to disclose the symbols that may carry the meaning of the story. By using theory of setting Perwitasari can differ the symbols found in the story. The symbols that Perwitasari chooses are those

which have connection with setting and the character of Rodrick Usher. Then she uses theory of setting to know whether the setting has influence to the story or not. The theory of character and characterization is also used. It is really important to her to use the theory because there are three characters which are significant to comprehend the story. The theory of plot is used to construct the arrangement of the story so that she can disclose the events and the reaction of the character toward it. After all Perwitasari also reviews on Gothic romance. Gothic romance will help her to find out the motif of the story and finally the overall meaning of the story can be revealed.

The overall meaning of the story is about a futile effort of destroying a part of existence. This is how it becomes. Roderick Usher and Madeline are identical twins. Usher was also born with the same soul as Madeline. What is felt by Madeline is also felt by Usher. One day. Madeline felt sick and since she and Usher shared the same fate, Usher also felt sick. Usher could not bear it anymore. He buried Madeline in the lowest part of the house so that he could stay away from Madeline. Madeline was dying and so was Usher. Finally Usher gave up and let Madeline destroyed his struggle.

Madeline struggles to get back to the upper part of the house and avenges her anger to her brother. Usher notices it and react frantically. This time he does not struggle to get free from Madeline anymore, he gives up to the fate and lets his twin sister defeat all her effort. Madeline’s presence is the consequence of their destiny to be always together and proves that Usher cannot deny his destiny and an indication that a whole Roderick Usher’s self cannot separated from Madeline’s. (Perwitasari, 2003:48)

Another study that the writer takes is “Susan Glaspell View toward Women’s Position in Her Age as Seen in Her Trifles” by Ratna Kumalasari. She uses feminism but the object that is taken is similar with writer. Kumalasari analyzedTriflesthrough the women characters to get the knowledge about women position in Susan Glaspell age.

First, Kumalasari analyzed how the female characters are described in the play-script. Then, she reviewed about women position in Susan Glaspell’s age seen in female characters. At the end, Kumalasari concluded about Susan Glaspell’s view toward women’s position through her female characters inTrifles.

Kumalasari reviewed the female characters one by one and analyzed their characters. She used the theory of character and characterization and so did the writier. She got the characters of women characters by analyzing their act, utterances, and also by what was stated by the narrator.

After that in her study Kumalasari reviewed about women position in Glaspell’s era seen through her female characters. Mrs. Peters, Mrs. Wright, and Mrs. Hale reflected the position of women in the society.

“_{The writer sees that there is a relation between Susan Glaspell’s female} character in herTrifles and the women in Susan Glaspell’s age that is their position in the society (politics, economics, education, and a family) concerned to men’s.” (Kumalasari, 2008:35)

Women’s position in society depends on the men’s. Men became the leader to any aspect of life.

At the last part of her analysis, Kumalasari stated some views of Susan Glaspell toward women position in her age. The first one is that Susan Glaspell’s view about the inferior position of women in her age. This is happened in a marriage life and also in education field.

The second one is the truth about women’s strength and intelligence. Kumalasari stated that Glaspell through her Trifles shows the reader about the strength of women in her age. Women can overthrow men oppression although they are not as strong as men physically. Women are also brilliant and critical. It is proved by Mrs. Hale’s and Mrs. Peter’s success to find and hide the motive from the men (Kumalasari, 2008:48)

The third one is about Susan Glaspell’s view about the equality between men and women. The facts that women are strong, brilliant, and critical lead us to the equality between them.

“In the play, Susan Glaspell showed that female characters are lacked of freedom and chance to improve themselves. Mrs. Wright lost her right to develop her ability in singing. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are not given the opportunity to join into men’s investigation”(Kumalasari, 2008: 49)

The fourth is Susan Glaspell’s criticism toward her patriarchal society. Glaspell saw that society create obstacles towards women to improve their ability. Patriarchal society judge women do not have some abilities that finally made women stuck in that determination. (Kumalasari, 2008:49)

The fifth is Susan Glaspell’s view about women’s need of awareness of oppression and encouragement to fight against it. Women themselves felt inferior

and surrender to men oppression. They gave up on those thought that they were less intelligent, strong, and they also felt unworthy. The last one is Susan Glaspell’s view about the opportunity for women.

“As the result, women did not try to change the condition. Therefore, Susan Glaspell saw that women in her age should be made aware of the truth about women.”(Kumalasari, 2008:51)

Different to Kumalasari, writer focuses on the male characters failure to disclose the motive of the murder. Kumalasari work is also important to this study. It is really helpful to see the nature of women who successes to reveal motif of the murder. By seeing the nature of women, writer can seek for the contrasted natures belong to the men. Furthermore, writer can also analyze what background belongs to the women which do not belong to the men which influence the success of motive disclosure.

Besides those studies, writer also takes some articles about Susan Glaspell Trifles. They are “A Woman's Place: Literary Background for Glaspell's Trifles” by Mikes Maillakais and “Sometimes, It Takes a Woman to Solve a Murder”by Ken Jaworowski.

Mikes Maillakais in his article said that Glaspell is coming along with the message of inequality of sexes. Glaspell is just like two other her predecessor Kate Chopin and Fanny Fern. The topics they are talked about are the same. It is about how female defend in the patriarchal world.

In his article Maillakais also wrote that Glaspell started to write openly about her thought in 1915 when she and her husband started the Princetown

Player. In Princetown Player there are also Chopin and Fen that finally give much influence to Glaspell’s Trifles.

“Like many other women writers, Chopin and Fern wrote about the inequality of the sexes and the inability of women to live their own lives without reliance on men; in this way, they helped pave the way for female writers of the twentieth century. Glaspell, who struggled with similar themes and concerns, inherited a rich legacy from these women.(Maillakais: 2015)

Glaspell’s work was also influenced by her husband. She married to George cook who was also Princetown Player. Using Glaspell word “A New Vision”, an expression that she used in her second novelThe Visioning, Cook had given her a new idea about socialism, how women supposed to get in social life, and also the realistic view of a world around women.

“Her husband, George Cook, also a member of the players, introduced her to new ways of thinking: "she had met Cook and was pulled into the world of socialism, a concern with women's suffrage, and a more realistic apprehension of the world around her--a new vision--which was expressed in her second novel,The Visioning(1911)" Maillakais: 2015)

Another article is “Sometimes, It Takes a Woman to Solve a Murder” by Ken Jaworowski. Jaworowski said that Trifles is “The experimental troupe Theater of a Two-Headed Calf”. It means that this play showed contrast between foolishness and cleverness, weakness and strength, and tenderness and rudeness. It made the reader to see deeper to the story because what behold in surface can be so different from what the true meaning is.

“In the tale, two women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, gradually uncover the motive for a murder, while their male counterparts are blinded by ignorance and insensitivity. The women examine the details — the trifles — of the suspect’s life to discover a deeper meaning and in the end solve a mystery by exposing a tragedy.” (Jaworowski: 2010)

Jaworowski also stated that the women succeeded to uncover the motive while the men could not. The women who were looking for the trifles, which were considered as useful deeds by the men, on the other hand became the search of the detailed information of the murderer. Men in this play were so ignorance and insensitive that make them could not see the motive, or they were just too confident that they could not relate the murderer and the things which is related to it. With the sense of women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peter easily colud get the motive by following the clue step by step through the things they found in the kitchen. Kitchen is the place they knew well, and the murderer knew well too, but it was unseen by the men.

These two articles help the writer to gather the ideas which are relevant to this study. The ideas that are shared in the articles are also in line with this study. Writer uses the information from these two articles, which mostly looks closely to the role of women, to figure out the failure of men characters to disclose the motive of the murder.

B. Review of Related Theories

1. Character and Characterization

Character is an important element in the fiction. Roger B. Henkle (1997:88) stated that there are major and secondary characters. Henkle stated that using the term hero and heroine is not proper because in some work of literature the major character sometimes less heroic than other characters.

The major character is the most supported character in the novel. The other elements in the novel are created to support it existence while the secondary character is a character which is less prominent than the major character. (Henkle, 1977: 88)

The major character is the focus of the story. All of the elements in the story support the major character to reach the goal of the story. The secondary character is also important because it makes the story goes. Secondary character as a proponent acts to show how the major character is built.

In his book, Henkle also mention theory by E. M. Foster which stated about flat and round character.

In a famous definition of fictional characters, the early twentieth-century novelist E. M. Foster said that there are “flat” characters who are compelled by a set idea in their creator, and “round” characters who embody all the variations and complexities of human nature. (Henkle, 1977: 91)

Flat characters are characters which remains the same from beginning until the end of the story. Its character is brought by the creator. Usually secondary characters are flat characters. They carry the quality that support the major characters. Round characters are the characters which experience a change. They are livelier and show reaction toward event or other things by changing their characters. Round characters show the reader the nature of human that make the story more actual.

Here are the characteristics of major character found in Henkle’s book. The first one is that the major character built the value and encouraged the reader to expect from them.

As we noted in Chapter 3, the major character in a novel perform a key structural function: upon them we build expectations and desires, which, in modification, shift or establish our values. (Henkle, 1977: 92)

The creation of major character here is to make a convincing drama and to show human issues of the book by the amplitude and attention given to it.

As the writer turn to secondary character, however, we discover that they perform more limited functions. In order to understand the role of a secondary character, we must identify some of those functions.

The most obvious function of secondary characters is to populate the world of the novel. Since fiction presents human context, the secondary character establish that context. (Henkle, 1977:94)

In other word secondary character is made to support the real-like world in the novel. It also stands for the better understanding of the major character.

To give a certain character the author do what is called characterization. Characterization is the central to the fictional experience. Factors that enable author to communicate human qualities and guide us to understanding of human themes in the novel are complexity of the characterization. It is about the attention given certain figures and personal intensity that a character seems to transmit. (Henkle, 1977: 86,87)

Characterization is the way how the characters are made by the creator. The process of the characters maker, why do they have certain natures, how do impact of their nature to other characters, and also why do they have certain habits are some of the consideration that the author make to create a characters in a story.

Character is an extended verbal representation of a human being, the inner self that determines though, speech, and behavior. The characters can be shown in dialogue, action, and commentary. (Jacobs 1986: 119)

There are some clues of how the characters are disclosed. The first is from what they themselves say. The second one is from what other characters say about them. Then, it also stated implicitly in the action that they did. The last one is from the statements of the author of the story (Jacobs, 1986: 122-124)

Reader can disclose the nature of characters in fiction by analyzing what they themselves say. For example, in Glaspell’s Trifles the writer can conclude that the men underestimate women by their saying. The men said that women used to worry over trifles.

The second one is by what other say about them. From the utterances of other character reader can get the characteristic of a character. Sometimes in a daily life human also likely to judge other or just say that some people like this and that. That is also happened in the narrative story since it is a picturesque of the real life.

The third one is stated implicitly in the action that they do. In real life the character of human is often reflected by their deeds because it must be based on their way of thinking. An easy going person will not think too much to do something. That person will immediately say yes if asked to do something or go somewhere. That is also what we will find in the story.

Another one is by statement of author of the story. This one is like a easiness that the reader will get in reading a story. Sometime in the story the author gives some explanation or description about characters that are going to

play in a story. By reading that, the reader can gather information about the characters and what role they maybe play in the story.

2. Plot

A plot is a plan or groundwork for a story, based on conflicting human motivations, with the action resulting from believable and realistic human response. In a well-plotted story, nothing is irrelevant. Plot is in the other words the flow of the story. (Jacobs, 1986: 87).

Narrative text has plot in it. It can be simply understood as events which happened in the story. It is usually divided into three parts. The first part is in the beginning, then in the middle, and at the end of the story. According to quickbase.intuit.com In the beginning we will find what is called Exposition. Then it is followed by raising action, climax, falling action, and resolution.

This is a theory from Fretag which is usually called Fretag’s Pyramid. He develops the structure of plot by Aristotle and divides it into five major part as have mentioned in previous paragraph.

In the exposition reader usually find the general description of the story. It can be about where the setting is taken place, what the characters of the story are, and also when the story did happened. By reading this part reader can have the picture about how the story is going to be. Then there will be inciting incident, a moment which happened to begin the story as a step before the raising action. It is

usually a clue of something which stimulates the reader to questioning or to grab something which is not right.

Raising action is the part when the conflict starts rising. In this part, reader can see how characters react against the conflict. This is made the story live and real because here, the writer brings conflict which reflects one that really happened in the real life.

Climax is the point when the conflict in the story raises its top. It is usually marked by the change of some characters. Conflict which has happened must left some changes to some characters of the story. In the plot there are conflicts. Conflict rose to deliver the message that would be delivered by the author via the characters. How characters deal with the conflict finally becomes the point of stories. The value is implied in the action of characters overcome the conflict.

Conflict can be an opposition of two people, between larger groups of people, or between individual and larger forces (nature). “Unless there is doubt, there is no tension, and unless there is tension, there is no interest” (Jacobs, 1987: 87-88)

Conflict in Plot is the establishment of contrasting or conflicting situations and responses that produces the interest the short-short story contains. So there may be more than one conflict in the fiction. It also may lead to one major conflict in the end of the story.(Jacobs, 1987: 88)

There is a falling action. It is like a cooling down after the climax is reached in a play. Here, the tense is decreasing as the story comes to the end which is called resolution.

In the resolution, there is a conclusion about the answer of the conflict which is happened. It can be the declaration or statement of the writer to end up the story. It also can be an action of the characters to close the story by solving the problem arising in the play.

C. Theoretical Framework

The theory character and characterization is used to analyze the natures of man characters which are shown in the play. The natures of man characters can be derived from first, the description of the author. Second, It can be shown frim the other characters’ utterance about the character. Third, behind the utterance of the character himself there is the implication of the nature of the character. Forth, the nature of the character is lied behind the action that the character did.

The theory of plot is really important to see the flow of the story in the play. There are five steps of the flow of the story. The first one is exposition. The second one is raising action. The third one is climax. The forth one is falling action and the last one is resolution. In each part of the plot there are some reactions from the man characters that finally lead them to the failure of motive disclosure. The characters of man in Trifles which had been found in the first part of analysis using the theory of character and characterization is used to see how the character react against the condition existed in the flow of the story.

20

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. Object of the Study

The object of the study is a play script by Susan Glaspell entitledTrifles. It is a one act play-script released on January 7, 2004 and updated on March 17, 2011.Trifles is released at gutenberg.org with other Glaspell’s play script. There areTrifles, The Outside. The Verge, and Inheritors. The e-book was produced by Suzanne Shell, Sandra Brown and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team. Trifles is a firstly played by Princetown Players at Wharf Theatre, Provincetown, Mass., August 8, 1916.

There are seven characters but, only five characters plays in this story. The two characters are Minnie Foster and John Wright. They are a married couple. Both of them are not shown in the story. The readers know them from the description of other characters and the author’s statement. The five characters are those who came to the house of Minnie Foster to looking for the evidence to show the motive of the murder of John Wright. They are Mr. Henderson as a County attorney, Mr. Hale as a farmer neighbor and his wife Mrs. Hale, Mr. Peters the sheriff and his wife Mrs. Peters.

The whole story takes place in the kitchen. The place reflects the role of women in that story. Susan Glaspell is a feminist writer and she carries a message to not underestimate women in her story. The kitchen and how the women show her ability is completely shown in this story.

This one-act play script tells about the struggle of motive disclosure. In this play the characters sems like divided into two groups, the men and the women. It is about the struggle of men characters to find the motive of the murder. Finally the motive is found but instead of the men, the women find it out. Glaspell’s Trifles shows the reader that women also has power to find the “Trifles”, the thing that is considered as unused thing by the men, which is actually the motive of John Wright Murder.

B. Approach of the Study

Writer use new criticism to analyze Trifles. New criticism is a literary theory that focuses on the work itself without considering other elements outside the work. New Criticism is an approach that is established as a reaction to liberal humanism. It is firstly invented by T. S. Eliot, an American poet who settled in London.

They firstly invented New Criticism as a way of seeing literature separated from other element such as social condition which is mainly discussed in that time. The New Criticism brings new way of seeing work of literature. It sees the more aesthetic aspect of the literature and concern only with the work itself. T. S. Eliot considers that literary work, especially poetry, the genre he most interested in, is impersonal. He does not deny that poet cannot express their feeling through poetry but according to him it is more important to focus on the poetry itself then other aspects.

In “Tradition and the Individual Talent’, for instance, we find him claiming that the poet has ‘not “a personality to express, but a particular medium’ (Eliot[1919] 1972: 75). Eliot’s main aim, however, is to deflect his readers’ attention from everything he considers of at best secondary importance—the poet’s personal or social circumstances, and so on—and to get the poetry itself centre stage.(Hans, 2003:12)

The attention of the reader is expected to focus on the poetry itself. The elements inside the poetry such as the diction, rhyme, metaphor, etc will leads to the reaching of the feeling or emotion as a result of reading the literary work. Eliot use the words “objective correlative” to stands for the reaction of the reader after reading the poet that stimulate their emotion toward the poetry.

What the poet needs to look for, Eliot tells us in ‘Hamlet’ another essay from 1919, is an ‘objective correlative’: ‘a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion’ (Eliot [1919] 1969:145). Emotion must be conveyed indirectly. The poet’s emotion should be invested in such ‘objective correlative’, (Hans, 2003: 12)

C. Method of the Study

Writer use library sources to do this study. Some of the important books that writer use are Edgar V. Robert and Henry E. Jacob’s Fiction: An Introduction to Reading and Writing, Raman Selden, Peter Widdowson, Peter Broker’s A Reader’s Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory: Fourth Edition, Hans Bertens’ Literary Theory : The Basics, and Roger B. Henkle’s Reading the Novel : An Introduction to the Techniques of Interpreting Fiction.Beside that, writer also had taken some of the writing and theory from credible website.

The theories in those books are applied to analyze the play script. First, writer used theory of character and characterization to analyze the nature of man

character in Trifles. With theory of character and characterization writer got the natures of men by looking for the evidence of men natures through the men utterances, attitude, or other character’s utterances.

After the nature found then, by using theory of plot by Fretag, writer analyzed the flow of the story. The plot is about how the story constructed. It is important to know the plot because plot is the way from the beginning of the story until the end. When the plot is gotten it is possible to know how the story end up and what is the aim of the story.

Then, writer analyzed both characters and what happened to them by the time the story flow. In this part, it is also important to get how the characters react against condition that is happened. Finally, the reason of men failure to disclose the motif of the murder is revealed.

24

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS

This analysis starts from the nature of male character using theory of character and characterization. Writer uses the theory by Roger B. Henkle, Edgar V. Robert, and Henry E. Jacob. The next analysis is about plot of Susan Glaspell Trifles. Writer uses theory of plot from the book by Edgar V. Robert and Henry E. Jacob. The plot here is how the story flows from the beginning until the end.

The last analysis is about the relation of the nature of male character with the failure of motive disclosure. Writer relates the nature of male character in a subchapter I to the Plot of the play in chapter II. It is about how the male characters react toward events which happened in the play that finally lead to the failure of motive disclosure.

A. The Natures of Male Characters

In this part the nature of male characters are explained one by one. Using theory of character and characterization and relate it with setting of the play

1. Mr. Lewis Hale

The first approach to know about character is by seeing what is stated by the narrator. At the beginning the narrator stated about the age of Mr. Hale. It is stated; the sheriff and Hale are man in middle life. From that line we can assume that Mr. Hale age is about 40 up to 50 years old.

The other way to see the characters’ personality or nature is by examining their action or utterances.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: How did she seem to feel about your coming? HALE: Why, I don't think she minded—one way or other. She didn't pay

much attention. I said, 'How do, Mrs Wright it's cold, ain't it?' And she said, 'Is it?'—and went on kind of pleating at her apron. Well, I was surprised; she didn't ask me to come up to the stove, or to set down, but just sat there, not even looking at me, so I said, 'I want to see John.' And then she—laughed.” (lines: 52-57)

From the answer of Mr. Hale to Mr. Henderson as a county attorney the nature of Mr. Hale can be revealed. He is a naive person. He honestly answers the question complete with the details. He also said who was saying this and that and also stated what is exactly Mrs. Foster did when she answer the question. Mr. Hale keeps answering the question about what was happened when he came to Mrs. Wright’s house the day before. He answers it one by one as clear as possible. He followed all instructions that Mr. Henderson and Mr. Peter gave.

Besides those personalities, Mr. Hale is also just like Mr. Peters and Mr. Henderson. He underestimates women and considers the thing that women worried about is trifles.

SHERIFF : Well, can you beat the women! Held for murder and worryin' about her preserves.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: I guess before we're through she may have something more serious than preserves to worry about.

HALE : Well, women are used to worrying over trifles.(lines: 104-108)

From conversation above Mr. Hale used to think that women usually worrying over trifles. It means that not only at that time he thinks about that, but many times before he found women worrying over trifles.

At the very first part of the play in the cast list there stated Mr. Lewis Hale is a farmer neighbors. From that information and from the setting which is stated in the first sentence of the play we can conclude that Mr. Hale was living in a farmer society. Mr. Hale and Mr. Wright who was murdered is a fellow farmer. As a farmer they usually have to work hard every day. Sometimes farmers have a party telephone. It is stated by Mr. Hale while he is explaining what happened at the first time.

HALE: Harry and I started to town with a load of potatoes. We came along the road from my place and as I got here I said, I’m going to see if I can’t get John Wright to go with me on a party telephone. I spoke to Wright about it one before and he put me off, saying folks talked too much anyway... (line: 30-33)

Mr. Hale is naive or just being what he really is. He also always obeys what is asked by Sheriff or County Attorney. He must respects County Attorney and Sheriff as they are from upper class. On the other hand, the respect toward women is the same with other men in the play.

From those analyses it is derived that Mr. Hale is a middle-aged farmer, honest, naive, and underestimating women.

2. Mr. Henry Peters (Sheriff)

Mr. Peters is a sheriff and he came to the house with his wife. He is in his middle of age just like Mr. Hale. We can found it in the text stated by the narrator. “The sheriff and Hale are men in middle life, The County Attorney is a young man; all are bundled up and go at one to the stove. They are followed by two women- the Sheriff wife first..” (line: 6)

Natures of Sheriff can be found also from his act and utterances. Not long after entering John Wright house, Mr. Peters started to ask Mr. Hale about what happened yesterday morning when he came to the house.

Mr. Peters is a straight forward person as reflected from his utterances to Mr. Hale. After unbuttoning his coat he straightly ask Mr. Hale about what did happened when Mr. Hale came to the house yesterday. He also has a character as a leader since he is the one who start the investigation.

SHERIFF: (unbuttoning his overcoat and stepping away from the stove as if to mark the beginning of official business) Now, Mr. Hale, before we move things about, you explain to Mr. Henderson just what you saw when you came here yesterday morning. (lines: 15-17)

Mr. Peters do not want to waste the time. He immediately start the investigation by the time they get insdide the house. As a sheriff it is proper for him to have such a character. He wants to clear up the case as soon as possible.

As a leader he is also a well prepared person. He asked Frank to go to the house this morning to make a fire because it dropped below zero at the night. He said it is no use getting pneumonia with a big case on. He also makes sure that Frank will not touching anything but the stove. (lines: 20-23)

Just like Mr. Hale, Mr. Peters also underestimating women and women’s stuff. From these utterances he undervalues women and even laughs at them.

SHERIFF: Nothing here but kitchen things.

[The COUNTY ATTORNEY , after again looking around the kitchen, opens the door of a cupboard closet, He gets up on a chair and looks on a shelf. Pulls his hand away, stiky.]

COUNTY ATTORNEY: Here’s a nice mess. [The women draw nearer]

MRS. PETERS: (to the other woman) Oh! Her fruit; it did freeze, (to the LAWYER) She worried about that when it turned so cold. She said the fire’d go out and her jars would break.

SHERIFF: Well, can you beat the women! Held for murder and worryin’ about her preserves.(lines: 95-105)

Kitchen things are considered as nothing to Mr. Peters. Kitchen is identical with the women and he sees it as an unimportant things. The thing which is done by women also becomes a joke for him. He thinks that in that situation, worrying over preserves is really ridiculous. From those explanation, Mr Peters is a good leader, well-prepared person, and also underestimating women.

3. Mr. Henderson (County Attorney)

Based on the writer statement in the script Mr. Henderson is a young man. He is a County Attorney, so he has a higher position among other men. It can be said so because of his manner in asking question and giving direction to others.

At the rear of the outer door opens and the SHERIFF comes in followed by the COUNTY ATTORNEY and HALE. The SHERIFF and HALE are men in middle life, the COUNTY ATTORNEY is a young man; all are much bundled up and go at once to the stove. (lines: 4-8)

Mr. Henderson shares some natures in common with the other male characters in this play. He is a strait forward people who trying to keep the conversation on the right track. He tries to get the Mr. Hale back to the main topic so that they are not wasting the time. This is what he says to Mr. Hale when Mr. Hale begins to talk aside from the topic that they have been discussed. “Let's talk about that later, Mr. Hale. I do want to talk about that, but tell now just what happened when you got to the house.” (lines: 37-38)

As a county Attorney Mr. Henderson is a critical person. He is trying to catch what he want and focus on it so that if there is something that is out of the point or something not clear he will soon ask for the explanation.

HALE: Well, she looked queer.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: How do you mean—queer?

HALE: Well, as if she didn't know what she was going to do next. And kind of done up.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: How did she seem to feel about your coming? (lines: 47-52)

As a County Attorney, Mr. Henderson is doing investigation clearly in the house while they all trying to figure out the motive of the murder. He asked Mrs. Hale about the thing she knows about Minnie Foster. By the questions which are asked by Mr. Henderson, it can be said that he is a logical person. He keeps trying to figure out the personality of Minnie Foster by the statement that comes from Mrs. Hale. He said that if Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Wright were neighbors it is likely for them to be friend too. Mrs. Hale then replies it with the answer that she is no longer come to Mrs. Wright house for more than a year. Knowing that answer, Mrs. Henderson thinks about the reason why Mrs. Hale did not come again to the house. There must be something wrong that make neighbors do not visit each other.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: Ah, loyal to your sex, I see. But you and Mrs Wright were neighbors. I suppose you were friends, too.

MRS HALE:(shaking her head)I've not seen much of her of late years. I've not been in this house—it's more than a year.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: And why was that? You didn't like her?

MRS HALE: I liked her all well enough. Farmers' wives have their hands full, Mr Henderson. And then— (lines: 122-128)

The County Attorney also comes with cynical expression toward the women. He seems arrogant to talk about the women with such a cynical expression. He is neither talking in a high voice nor saying bad words but he looks down upon the women by his action and his satire words. From this, we can take the point that County Attorney as a man considers that all the household duties should be done by women. He indirectly blames the women for the dirty kitchen.

COUNTY ATTORNEY:(with the gallantry of a young politician)And yet, for all their worries, what would we do without the

ladies?(the women do not unbend. He goes to the sink, takes a dipperful of water from the pail and pouring it into a basin, washes his hands. Starts to wipe them on the roller-towel, turns it for a cleaner place)Dirty towels!(kicks his foot against the pans under the sink)Not much of a housekeeper, would you say, ladies? ( lines: 110-115)

In the stage drection above County Attorney seems so arrogant. He act like a boss trying to give an example of the things that should be done by women by pouring the water in a dipper. He also kicks the pans under the sink. He shows his power in this part. The arrogancy shows more of his underestimation toward women.

B. The Plot ofTrifles

Plot is group of events which occur in the story. It can be called the back bone. It controls the flow and also arise reader’s emotion by serving a life like story. The collection of events can go back and fro based on the timing of events told in the story.

InTriflesthe plot can be defined to the beginning of the story which gives the reader a general situation and characters knowledge. Then in the middle of the plot, the conflict is arising. It is possible to have many conflicts in a story. The

conflicts later will finally reach the climax in a central conflict which is the turning point of action and characters development. It is where the changes of character shown and the main idea of the story arisen. After that at the end will there will come a solution, a feedback given by the characters to the conflict. This is an answer of the question which has become the reason why the story is written.

1. Exposition

In the exposition ofTriflesreaders are given the setting of the kitchen, the character of the play, and begin with the gestures of the characters entering the house of Minnie Foster. First, there is the description of the kitchen of Minnie Foster. It is said that the Kitchen is gloomy, left without having been put in order. There are unwashed pans under the sink, a loaf of bread outside the bread-box, a dish towel on the table, and also other unfinished work. From that description the readers will feel the bad feeling, nerves, and confusion. After that there are some descriptions of the characters and what they do in the kitchen.

[The kitchen in the now abandoned farmhouse of JOHN WRIGHT, a gloomy kitchen, and left without having been put in order—unwashed pans under the sink, a loaf of bread outside the bread-box, a dish-towel on the table—other signs of incompleted work. At the rear the outer door opens and the SHERIFF comes in followed by the COUNTY

ATTORNEY and HALE. The SHERIFF and HALE are men in middle life, the COUNTY ATTORNEY is a young man; all are much bundled up and go at once to the stove. They are followed by the two women—the SHERIFF's wife first; she is a slight wiry woman, a thin nervous face. MRS HALE is larger and would ordinarily be called more comfortable looking, but she is disturbed now and looks fearfully about as she enters. The women have come in slowly, and stand close together near the door.] (lines: 1-12)

There are some dialogues from each character that give the readers an impression about their personality. They talked about what is happening yesterday in that house and how the murder can be happened. In this part the exposition of the story can be seen. Here we can conclude that the people coming there are the Sheriff, County Attorney, Mrs. Peters, Mr. Hale, and Mrs. Hale. There

COUNTY ATTORNEY: (rubbing his hands) This feels good. Come up to the fire, ladies.

MRS PETERS: (after taking a step forward) I'm not—cold.

SHERIFF: (unbuttoning his overcoat and stepping away from the stove as if to mark the beginning of official business) Now, Mr. Hale, before we move things about, you explain to Mr. Henderson just what you saw when you came here yesterday morning.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: By the way, has anything been moved? Are things just as you left them yesterday? (lines:13-19)

They talked about what was happening yesterday in that house and how the murder could happen. In this part the reader can know further about the characters. What their role and position are. From this exposition we can derived that man is so dominant to lead the women and start investigation. The women are beholden as a follower and seem weak because of much sarcasm that is thrown by the men.

The male characters make fun of the women because of what they do. When the women worry about preserves the men just laugh and this give an impression of the higher position of the men. It is not straightly stated but pragmatically the words that are speaking by the men said how the stupid was the women. The men also focus on the bad thing in the kitchen. When they see the dirty towels, and unwashed sink, they blame the women for not doing the thing

right. From that part there can be derived a conclusion that there is a different perspective toward things in a kitchen and woman life between man and woman characters.

The investigation continued to the upstairs to find the motive. This is where the conflict is arisen. The focus of the play moves completely to the two women Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale. They try to do what they should do. Mrs. Peters take Minnie Foster clothes and shoes and then with Mrs. Hale they clean up the kitchen a little. There is a little conflict between the two women because they are not supposed to move anything. Mrs. Peters finds a sewing basket and quilt inside it. They two is thinking about Minnie Foster is going to quilt it or knot it. Then, naturally Mrs. Hale is fixing the quilt because she finds that the quilt is so good and even at some part and in other part is so messy.

MRS HALE: (Examining another block) Mrs. Peters, look at this one. Here, this is the one she was working on, and look at the sewing! All the rest of it has been so nice and even. And look at this! It’s all over the place! Why, it looks as if she didn’t know what she was about.

(After she has said this they look each other, then start to glance back at the door. After an instant MRS HALE has pulled at a knot and ripped the sewing). (lines: 235 241)

After that, Mrs. Hale starts asking Mrs. Peters about what makes Mrs. Wright so nervous. As women they share common knowledge about piecing a quilt. Mrs. Hale thinks that when she is nervous about something she can make a bad quilt but, Mrs. Peters says that she is sews awful queer when she just tired.

MRS. HALE : What do you supposed she was so nervous about? MRS. PETERS : Oh—I don’t know. I don’t know as she was nervous. I

sometimes sew awful queer when I’m jus tired.(MRS. HALE starts to say something, looks ar MRS. PETERS, then goes on

sewing)Well I must get these things wrapped up. They maybe through sooner than we think,(putting apron and other things together) I wonder where I can find a piece of paper, and string. (lines: 249-254)

This exposition gives the background of the story so that the reader now who and how the characters will develop in the story. There will absolutely be Mr. Henderson, Mr. Peters, Mr, Hale, Mrs. Hale, and Mrs. Peters playing some roles in the play. They will be discussing about motive disclosure of the murder og John Wright, Minnie Foster’s husband.

2. Raising Action

The raising action begins when the women finds a bird cage inside the cupboard. Mrs. Peters is looking at the cupboard to look for a piece of paper and string. There she finds a bird cage. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are examining the bird cage and then starting to question where the bird is. Mrs. Hale thinks that the cat got it but Mrs. Peters says that Mrs. Wright did not like cats because when she came to the house previous day Mrs. Wright really upset for Mrs. Peter’s cat entering her room. Then, their suspicion raise when they find the cage door broke.

MRS. PETERS: (examining the cage) Why, look at this door. It’s broke. One hinge is pulled apart.

MRS. HALE: (looking too) Looks as if someone have been rough with it. MRS. PETERS: Why, yes. (lines: 268-271)

From those conversations we can conclude that both Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale agree that someone has been rough with the door. That makes the curiosity grows higher. The women start to feel something wrong but they try to ignore it by wishing the investigation to be ended soon.

Another reason of why the bird cage is empty is that the bird got sick and died. They finally agree that Minnie Foster used to have bird. The consideration is that Minnie Foster was like bird herself. She used to sing in a church. She wore pretty dress, but kind of timid and fluttery. Mrs. Hale realizes the change of Mrs. Wright after the marriage. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters here can see the life of Minnie Foster though the bird cage as a symbol.

3. Climax

The climax of this play occurs when the women are finding the real answer of where the bird had flown. The women think about what makes Minnie foster feel better because they know that Minnie Foster had been through a hard life. They then consider taking the quilt with them and bringing it to Minnie Foster so that she will have something good to do. While searching the sewing thing Mrs. Hale finds a red box. She firstly guesses that there is scissors in it. The thing inside it is shocking. They find a dead canary inside the pretty box. The dead canary with the scars around the neck is found in the box. It seems like somebody had wrung the bird’s neck.

MRS. HALE: (jumping up)But, Mrs. Peter-look at it! It’s all-other side to. MRS. PETERS: Somebody-wrung-its-neck.

[their eyes meet. A look of growing comprehension of horror. Steps are heard outside. MRS HALE slips box under quilt piece, and sinks into her chair. Enter SHERIFF and COUNTY ATTORNET. MRS PETERS rises.]. (lines: 320-326)

Knowing how the bird is killed just like Mr. Wright, the two women trying to figure out what is really happened. The horror here immediately stopped by the men who come down from upstairs. The County Attorney asking about the bird

cage and Mrs. Hale says that the cat got it. Here, Mrs. Hale is making a lie. By what she gets before, we know that the dead bird is found in the pretty box. By this expression we can catch that actually the women have known the truth and the motive of this murder. Mrs. Hale dares to make a lie and Mrs. Peters who is said married to the law says no words but, they are still afraid to ensure their self that the motive of the murder is because John Wright kills the bird. They try to find the logic again together.

These are the logics that the women assume in order help them accepting the fact that they actually have expected before. The first is the statement of Mrs. Peters about her kitten. There was a boy who wants to hurt her kitten and that makes her so mad that she is going to hurt the boy.

MRS PETERS :(in a whisper)When I was a girl—my kitten—there was a boy took a hatchet, and before my eyes—and before I could get there—(cover her face an instant) If they hadn’t held me back I would have—(catches herself, looks upstairs where steps are heard, falters weakly)—hurt him. (lines: 346-349)

Mrs. Peters implicitly feels the same way as what she assumes Mrs. Wright feels. The bird and the kitten here is not considered as animal anymore. They are just like human that Mrs. Peters thinks Mrs. Wright is fond of. From that utterances, we can conclude that Mrs. Peters strongly thinks that Mr. Wright had killed the bird so, Mrs. Wright killed him too but, she does not have heart to say it directly. Mrs. Peters just says an analogy of herself in the same position with Mrs. Wright.

On the other hand Mrs. Hale is more straightforward to state her assumption that John Wright killed the bird so Minnie Foster killed him too. She says that Wright (Mr. John Wright) would not like the bird, a thing that sang.

Then, Mrs. Peters tries to ignore the fact again by stating that they still do not know who killed the bird. Mrs. Hale speaks more straightforward. She said that she knew John Wright, so she assures that it is possible for John Wright to do that. Not only that, Mrs. Hale also adds more information to support her argument.

MRS HALE: (her own feeling not interupted) If there’d been years and years of nothing, then a bird to sing to you, it would be awful— still, after the bird was still.

MRS PETERS: (something within her speaking) I know what stillness is. When we homestated in Dakota, and my first baby died—after he was two years old, and me with no other then— (lines: 360-364) Both Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters lament over the stillness that Minnie Foster felt. Mrs. Hale understands that the bird has filled the empty heart of Minnie Foster. After a long time of nothing without any children and she has a bird with her, a thing that can sing and fill the silent. The bird must be so meaningful to her. Mrs. Peters also states her feeling of stillness after her first son died in Dakota. She is left with no child and she feels the stillness.

After those things, they realize Mrs. Peters says that the law has to punish crime. Crime here means the things that Minnie Foster did, killing her own husband, John Wright. She actually has the empathy to Minnie Foster but the reality that they should face is that Minnie Foster has to be punished because of murdering his husband. Mrs. Peters cannot stand for that reality. According to her, the act of killing the bird which is done by John Wright is a crime too, but no one is going to punish that.

MRS HALE: (not as if answering that)I wish you’d seen Minnie Foster when she wore a white dress with blue ribbons and stood up there in the choir and sang. (a look around the room) Oh, I wish I’d come over here once a while! That was a crime! That was a crime! Who’s going to punish that? (lines: 369-372)

The utterances of Mrs. Hale ensure how the bird is so meaningful to Minnie Foster. The Bird is just like the reflection of Minnie Foster herself. The logic that can be grabbed here is that the bird is the soul of Minnie Foster. John Wright does not like the bird, a thing that sings. According to Mrs. Hale John Wright does not like the bird and he is the only person who is likely to kill the bird. Moreover, the way the bird is killed is similar to the way John Wright is killed. Both Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters know that Minnie Foster is the murderer of her own husband. They know that John Wright has killed the bird, the soul of Minnie Foster so that Minnie Foster dares to kill him in the same way. The passage above shows the beginning of characters’ personality change. The major conflict in climax leads to the personality change of round character. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are round characters because their point of view toward law changes in this part of the play.

It is different to the attitude of the women in the beginning of the play which is careful and standing for the law, the women in this part change to be against the law. They know that the bird is the motive that has been searching for but they decide to keep the bird instead of telling the truth to the men.

MRS PETERS: (takes the bottle, looks about something to wrap it in; takes petticoat from the clothes brought from the other room, very nervously begins winding this around the bottle. In false voice) My, it’s a good thing the men couldn’t hear us. Wouldn’t they just laugh! Getting all stirred up over a little thing like a—dead canary. As if that could have anything to do with—with— wouldn’t they laugh!

[The men are heard coming down stairs.]

MRS HALE: (under her breath) Maybe they would—maybe they wouldn’t. (lines: 380-386)

The women have known that they have found is the motive that the men have been searching for. By saying “maybe they would maybe they wouldn’t”, Mrs. Hale realize about it and they do it consciously.

4. Falling Action

The falling action is when the men come downstairs. They interrupt the women who is still discussing about the bird. Again the men cannot catch the signal or the weird expression of the women. County attorney is throwing sarcasm again toward the women when Sheriff reminding him about if he is going to take a look of what Mrs. Peters took for Minnie Foster.

[The LAWYER goes to the table, picks up the apron, laughs.]

COUNTY ATTORNEY: Oh, I guess they’re not very dangerous things the ladies have picked out. (Moves a few things about, disturbing the quilt pieces which cover the box. Steps back)No, Mrs. Peters doesn’t need supervising. For that matter, a sheriff’s wife is married to the law. Ever think of it that way, Mrs. Peters? MRS PETERS: Not—just that way. (lines: 397-402)

Here, the men are actually very close to the motive which is the bird that covered by the quilt. Even the lawyer has touched it but, the thing that all those stuffs are just trifles. County Attorney also says that the things the ladies going to take in are not very dangerous. He asks Mrs. Peters about her utterances “married to the law” to show both trust and underestimation that women will not do important things. Then Mrs. Peters answer it with “not just that way”. It conveys ambiguous meaning. The thing that is understood by the men is that Mrs. Peter says yes, she is married t the law more than they think. The men think she will not do things which are against the law. The fact is that Mrs. Peters not thing about it. On the other hand, Mrs. Peters thinks more about the law, to give the justice

because John Wright had killed the soul of Minnie Foster she decides to cover the motive.

5. Resolution

Finally, the resolution is when the women decide to keep the canary themselves.

[HALE goes outside. The SHERIFF follows the COUNTY ATTORNEY into the other room. Then MRS. HALE rises, hands tight together, looking intensely at MRS. PETERS, whose eyes make a slow turn, finally meeting MRS. HALE’s. A moment MRS. HALE holds her, then her own eyes point the way to where the box is concealed. Suddenly MRS. PETERS throws back quilt pieces and tries to put the box in the bag she is wearing. It is too big. She opens box, starts to take bird out, cannot touch it, goes to pieces, stands there helpless. Sound of a knob turning in the other room. MRS. HALE snatches the box and puts it in the pocket of her big coat. Enter COUNTY ATTORNEY and SHERIFF. (lines: 407-416)

Their action shows their stand for Minnie Foster. With the empathy of experiencing the same thing, at the end they are saving Minnie Foster’s deed for killing the body of the men who has killed her soul. When the men are outside, the women decide to keep the bird quietly. In this part the women are showing the answer of the question that rose in the story. The question of what is the motive is answered by this action.

It now becomes clear that the motive of Minnie Foster killing her husband is because her husband killed the canary. Canary is the symbol of Minnie Foster herself. The women can feel that too, the feeling that can be felt only by the women. Only women can notice it because women consider about trifles. Women are used to deal with the kitchen and small things like quilt and sewing. The

women hide the motive in order to end the story and also stand for the justice. They know no one will punish John Wright who has killed the soul of Minnie Foster so it is fair that Minnie Foster killed John Wright.

The statement that declares the decision chosen by the women is underlined behind these symbolic utterances:

COUNTY ATTORNEY: (facetiously) Well, Henry, at least we found out that she was not going to quilt it. She was going to—what is it you call it, ladies?

MRS. HALE: [Her hand against her pocket.] We call it—knot it, Mr. Henderson. (lines: 417-419)

At the very end of the play Mrs. Hale is saying a smart trick. She answers County Attorney’s question but she is intended to give another meaning. It is true considering the action that she did before with Mrs. Peters and her action of reassuring the bird inside the pocket. The word knot that is spoken by Mrs. Hale does not mean to knot the quilt but to end up the searching of motive. The quilt here is also a symbol of this motive searching.

C. The Reactions of Male Characters Which Lead to the Failure of Motive Disclosure.

In this play there are some reactions from the male characters toward the situation. In the plot the natures of men characters are exposed step by step. Sometimes the men are dominant but not in the whole play that finally lead to the failure of men to find the motive.

1. Underestimating Women’s things

In the first part the men is playing a quit big deal of contribution to respond the situation around and to be the center of the story. The natures of men which are leading and critical are helping the reader to get the setting of place and situation in the first part of the play.

Mrs. Peters lead the women to come inside the house. Mr. Henderson also lead the motive searching in the house by firstly ask Mr. Hale what was happened in the house. Up to the middle of the play The County Attorney ask Mrs. Hale critically about the relation between her and Minnie Foster.

On the other hand the arrogance of the men is starting to come out. It is shown by their respond toward women and the kitchen. When the men examining the kitchen they criticizing the condition unconsciously, like it is use to be like that and it is a normal way to underestimate women’s things.

Their reaction of ignoring the women’s things in unproper. First they blame women for the dirty kitchen. County Attorney kicks the pans under the sink. Their attitude really show the underestimation toward women.

Those natures of man characters actually can lead them into finding of the motive. Unfortunately, the man characters are also carrying the nature of straightforwardness that makes them ignorance to the thing around them which is really close to motive disclosure. Besides that, the male characters are underestimating women and all the thing about women. They forget that women are the center of the conflict that should be focused too.

2. Ignoring the Quilt and Bird Cage

In the second part, where the conflict arises, the men only show up in a few times. In the little time, the men still do not understand what’s happening in the story. The focus and straightforwardness of the men in finding the motive disclosure is blocking their mind to see what is happening around them. They do not catch the weird situation and gesture that is shown by the ladies in the kitchen. The men stick on what is in their mind and not open it wider to see all the possibilities that might happen.

When it comes to the raising action, the men also keep ignoring the thing arround them and focusing on their own point of view. The raising action is pinned with the founding of the awful quilt in the sewing basket by the women. At that moment the men is going downstairs and found the women discussing about that.

MRS HALE: It’s log cabin pattern. Pretty, isn’t it? I wonder if she was goin’ to quilt it or just knot it?

[Footsteps have been heard coming down the stairs. The SHERIFF enters followed by HALE and COUNTY ATTORNEY.]

SHERIFF: They wonder if she was going to quilt it or just knot it! [The men laugh, the woman look abashed](lines: 219-224)

The men do not expect anything about the quilt all they know is just that is a quilt which does not seem to have any relation with the motive. Actually this is where the conflict is going to be started but for the men it becomes funny to talk over trifles in that situation. They are being ignorance of the entire thing outside the motive in their point of view. In this part they miss the very first sign of the motive because of their straightforwardness so that they look down over trifles.

The emergence of the men in this play is made in such a lucky and appropriate time. They appear in the time when the important thing happens in the motive searching. Unfortunately, they always fail to notice the hints about the motive. In the part when the women were shocked by the espial of the birdcage and the killed bird in a scissors box, the men come and they still being imperceptive.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: (as one turning from serious things to little pleasantries) Well ladies, have you decided whether see was going to quilt it or knot it?

MRS PETERS: We think she was going to—knot it.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: Well, that’s interesting, I’m sure. (seeing the bird cage)Has the bird flown?

MRS HALE: (putting more quilt pieces over the box) We think the—cat got it.

COUNTY ATTORNEY:(preoccupied) Is there a cat?

[MRS HALE glances in a quick covert way at MRS PETERS] MRS PETERS: Well, not know. They’re superstitious you know, They

leave.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: (to the sheriff continuing an interrupted conversation)..(lines: 327-336)

When the men come to pass the kitchen again, the atmosphere of the kitchen has been tighten, but they don’t sense it. County Attorney start the conversation with chit chatting about the quilt pieces until he see the bird cage. He almost has a suspicion to it but he back to his business to find the motive.

3. BeingInsensitive Toward the Women Gesture and Utterance

The male characters did not show up in the climax of the play. Basically Trifles’plot is lead by the female characters. While the male characters is upstairs, the climax happens. Furthermore, the ignorance of men still carried on to the falling action. Up to when the conflict happened to the ladies, the men still did not

catch or realize any signal. The underestimation toward woman finally leads them to the failure of motive disclosure. They cannot see the change in women’s action and saying. They cannot grab the meaning behind the words spoken by the women. They only think that women are stupid to talking over the cage and they just ask where the bird is. In the underestimation of men there laid a naive and innocence thought toward women. The men think that the women will not think further behind the empty bird cage. The nature of the men which is in the first part of the play shown critical became nothing because they think only in their zone.

When the male characters went downstairs, they did not react againts the change in the female characters’ behavior. The female characters had been covering the box in which lays the motive itself, but they still did not notice the awkwardness.

[The LAWYER goes to the table, picks up the apron, laughs.]

COUNTY ATTORNEY: Oh, I guess they’re not very dangerous things the ladies have picked out. (Moves a few things about, disturbing the quilt pieces which cover the box. Steps back) No, Mrs. Peters doesn’t need supervising. For that matter, a sheriff’s wife is married to the law. Ever think of it that way, Mrs. Peters? MRS PETERS: Not—just that way. (lines: 397-402)

County Attorney said that what the ladies have picked out were not very dangerous things and he almost touched the box but failed to figure out what is inside. That deeds is an irony, County Attorney is really close to the motive that have been looked for, the most important things, but he said that it is not important because of his underestimation toward trifles.

They forget that Minnie Foster is a woman that they should be investigating using the woman’s way. The men think that the things women do is

no more than trifles. Again, in a very close state to the motive, the male characters fail to grab it because of being insensitive and underestimate the women.

At the final, when the women decide to hide the dead bird which is actually the motive the men still way apart from it. They even have time to mocking the women if the women are going to quilt or knot the wire, the question to prove the victory of women.

COUNTY ATTORNEY: (facetiously) Well, Henry, at least we found out that she was not going to quilt it. She was going to—what is it you call it, ladies?

MRS. HALE [Her hand against her pocket.] We call it—knot it, Mr. Henderson. (lines: 417-419)

When the women answer it with the word knot it, they really mean to knot all the case because they have gotten the motive and going to demolish it. The male characters’ reaction toward the condition made them fail. They didn’t even think that the utterance of women means more that it sounded.They cannot catch the meaning behind the words “knot it” and quilt it”. The ignorance of small sign, weird gesture of women, dirty abandoned kitchen and piece of quilt finally lead to the failure for sure.

47 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION

At the first part of analysis, the founding of natures of the male characters is needed. The male characters bring some natures which they share in common and belong to each of them. The natures of the male characters are analyzed by observing other character’s utterances, by statement of the author, and by the action and utterances of the character.

Mr. Lewis Hale is a farmer neighbor of John Wright. He is a man in the middle of his age. He is naive, honest, and underestimating women. Mr. Henry Peters is a sheriff. He is a straight forward and a well-prepared person. He is also underestimating women. The last one is Mr. Henderson or County Attorney. He is a young man but has the highest social position in this play. He is a straight forward and critical person. He is also underestimating women and the things that women did.

Using the Freytag’s theory, the play is divided into five elements of plot. The first is exposition, second raising action, third climax, forth falling action, and the last resolution. The exposition at the beginning of the play is describing the setting of place which is in the kitchen, setting o the time, which is in winter, social setiing, which is in a farmer- low class society, and also introducing the characters and their position.

Before raising action there is an inciting incident. It is when the women find the bad sewing. The raising action is when the women find a bird cage. It makes them wondering that if there is a bird cage there must be a bird in it.

The climax happens when the women find the bird inside the pretty box. In that moment they discussed about the possibilities that might happen to the bird because the way the bird killed is exactly the same with the way John Wright is killed. From that founding, finally the women can conclude that John Wright has killed the bird. The bird is the reflection of Minnie Foster herself so, it is logical for the women that Minnie Foster killed her husband.

The falling action is the moment when the men are coming downstairs. The moment when the County Attorney is asking Mrs. Peters who is supposed to be married to the law, Mrs. Peters’ answers is “not just that way”. It assures that she is in the side of Minnie Foster and not going to reveal the motive.

The resolution is stated at the end by the time the men arrived and asked about the quilt. The quilt is the symbol of the motive disclosure itself. When the men ask if the women are going to quilt it or knot it, Mrs. Hale answers that she is going to knot it. It does not only mean to end the quilt but also to end the end of the motive searching.

There are some characters or natures of male characters that are found in the play which stimulate them to react against the condition and finally lead tem to the failure of motive disclosure. Not all of these natures are not good but the way the men act is just not in a place that it did not lead them to their goal.

The reactions of the male characters that make them fail to get the motive of the murder are mosly influenced by their natures. The first nature is straightforward. In the exposition the staightforwardness is good to keep the thing run as fast as it can be. It is good to be straightforward but it makes them be

47 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION

At the first part of analysis, the founding of natures of the male characters is needed. The male characters bring some natures which they share in common and belong to each of them. The natures of the male characters are analyzed by observing other character’s utterances, by statement of the author, and by the action and utterances of the character.

Mr. Lewis Hale is a farmer neighbor of John Wright. He is a man in the middle of his age. He is naive, honest, and underestimating women. Mr. Henry Peters is a sheriff. He is a straight forward and a well-prepared person. He is also underestimating women. The last one is Mr. Henderson or County Attorney. He is a young man but has the highest social position in this play. He is a straight forward and critical person. He is also underestimating women and the things that women did.

Using the Freytag’s theory, the play is divided into five elements of plot. The first is exposition, second raising action, third climax, forth falling action, and the last resolution. The exposition at the beginning of the play is describing the setting of place which is in the kitchen, setting o the time, which is in winter, social setiing, which is in a farmer- low class society, and also introducing the characters and their position.

Before raising action there is an inciting incident. It is when the women find the bad sewing. The raising action is when the women find a bird cage. It makes them wondering that if there is a bird cage there must be a bird in it.

The climax happens when the women find the bird inside the pretty box. In that moment they discussed about the possibilities that might happen to the bird because the way the bird killed is exactly the same with the way John Wright is killed. From that founding, finally the women can conclude that John Wright has killed the bird. The bird is the reflection of Minnie Foster herself so, it is logical for the women that Minnie Foster killed her husband.

The falling action is the moment when the men are coming downstairs. The moment when the County Attorney is asking Mrs. Peters who is supposed to be married to the law, Mrs. Peters’ answers is “not just that way”. It assures that she is in the side of Minnie Foster and not going to reveal the motive.

The resolution is stated at the end by the time the men arrived and asked about the quilt. The quilt is the symbol of the motive disclosure itself. When the men ask if the women are going to quilt it or knot it, Mrs. Hale answers that she is going to knot it. It does not only mean to end the quilt but also to end the end of the motive searching.

There are some characters or natures of male characters that are found in the play which stimulate them to react against the condition and finally lead tem to the failure of motive disclosure. Not all of these natures are not good but the way the men act is just not in a place that it did not lead them to their goal.

The reactions of the male characters that make them fail to get the motive of the murder are mosly influenced by their natures. The first nature is straightforward. In the exposition the staightforwardness is good to keep the thing run as fast as it can be. It is good to be straightforward but it makes them be

ignorant. The natures of male characters lead them to other attitudes that make them be further from the motive disclosure. By being straightforward they close their eyes to other possible things that might give signs and clues to the motive.

In raising action the straightforwardness raises their sensitiveness so that they cannot feel the atmosphere of weird thing that is experienced by the women which is actually the way to the motive disclosure. The gesture and excuse which come out from the women also sound just well for them. In the other hand, the men are looked naive and so easy to be fooled by the women. It can be so because the men think what the women do are not important.

The male character’s reaction cannot be seen in the climax of this play because they were upstairs. When the women found the motive and decide to cover it, the male characters were busy examining the upstairs to find the motive too. That is not an exuse for the male characters to fail disclosing the motive. Their own reaction from the beginning to this stage is static. The male characters keep being ignorant and underestimate women. The male characters can figure out the motive if only they pay more attention to trifles.

In the last part of the play, falling action and resolution, the male characters’ reaction is not really proper to the situation because they can grab the motive eventhough they were really close to it.They underestimate what women do and say. They consider that all the things that women do are just trifles. Finally at the end of the play the natures of the men carry them to the failure of motive disclosure.

50

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“An Online Resource Guide to Fretag’s Pyramid”

<http://quickbase.intuit.com/articles/an-online-resource-guide-to-freytags-pyramid> (12 January 2016)

Bertens, Hans.The Basics. London: Routledge. 2003

Glaspell, Susan.Trifles.2011

<http://gutenberrg.org> (15 November 2014) “Playwriting101”. 2016

<http://www.playwriting101.com/glossary> (29 January 2016)

Guillermo, Caroline. “The Difference between a Male a Boy a Man”. 2014 <http://hubpages.com/relationships/The-Difference-between-a-Male-a-Boy-a-Man> (12 January 2016)

Harland, Richard. Literary Theory from Plato to Barthes: An Introductory History.New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999.

Hudson, William Henry.An Introduction to the Study of Literature.London: George Harrap & Co. Ltd, 1958.

Jacobs, Henry E. and Edgar V. Robert. Fiction: An Introduction to Reading and Writing. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1986.

Jaworowski, Ken. Sometimes, It Takes a Woman to Solve a Murder. 2010 <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/theater/reviews/02trifles.html?_r= 0> (4 April 2015)

Kumalasari, Ratna. “Susan Glaspell View toward Women’s Position in Her Age as Seen in Her Trifles”. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma, 2008.

Lorcher, Trent. ”Trifles by Susan Glaspell:. Drama in the Classroom Reviews”. 2012.

< http://www.brighthubeducation.com/high-school-english-lessons/20755-trifles-by-susan-glaspell-review-and-analysis/> (4 April 2015)

Mailakais, Mikes. “A Woman’s Palce: Literary Background for Glaspell’s “Trifles””. <http://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/wohlpart/alra/glaspell.html> (4 April 2015)

Perwitasari, Tita. “A New Criticism Study of Edgar Alan Poe’s The Fall of The House of Usher”. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma, 2003.

Rastika, Icha. “Pakai "Apel Malang" dan "Apel Washington" supaya Tidak Vulgar”. 2012.

<http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2012/01/16/13045852/Pakai.Apel.Ma lang.dan.Apel.Washington.supaya.Tidak.Vulgar> (14 April 2015)

Henkle, Roger B. Reading The Novel: An Introduction to the Tehniques of Interpreting Fiction.New York: Harper & Row, Publisher. 1977.

Smith, Nicole. “Analysis of the Play “Trifles” by Susan Glaspell”. 2011

<http://www.articlemyriad.com/analysis-play-trifles-susan-glaspell/ > (5 July 2015)

Smith, P. Brian. “The Emergence of Society and Culture.”

<http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/smith.html> (4 April 2015)

Spirkin, A.“Dialectical Materialism”. Chapter 5. On the Human Being and Being Human

< https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/spirkin/works/dialectical-materialism/ch05-s04.html> (4 April 2015)

The Law Dictionary:Featuring Black’s Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed. What Is Motive?

Warburton, Nigel.Freedom: An Introduction with Readings.London: Routledge. 2001.

“What do we mean by “sex” and “gender”?”