Law and Literature Seminar
Questions for Reading Assignment 1
Susan Glaspell, A Jury of Her Peers
Lon Fuller, The Case of the Speluncean Explorers
1.
How do the authors deal with “justice” as a theme? Is justice meted out fairly to
everyone, or are there discrepancies in the concept of justice relating to race, gender, poverty, or
other conditions?
2.
Is “law” universal within a society, or are there times and circumstances when the laws
simply do not apply, or cannot be applied justly? What response do we have, as a society, when
ideas of “law” and “justice” fail to coincide? Which is superior, and why?
3.
What would be the result of following J. Handy’s suggestion in the Speluncean Explorers
(p.19, last paragraph) that men should “apply their common sense to problems of law and
government?” Is there any real “common” sense, or do people’s emotions, and political,
religious, or other moral affiliations make commonality impossible? Whose “common” sense
should be applied, when there is not an overwhelming consensus? If “common sense” should be
used to resolve legal and political questions, why do we have requirements for judges, lawyers,
and (to an extent) politicians with relation to age and education?
1. In A Jury of Her Peers, how do Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters differ with respect to justifying
secrecy? Specifically, Mrs. Hale seems burdened by the guilt of not visiting Minnie Foster, a
feeling which Mrs. Peters does not share. Both women, however, express empathy for Minnie
Foster’s troubling life as Mr. Wright’s spouse. Is their empathy principally generated by their
common bond: gender?
2. If the suspect of the plot had been male, rather than female, would Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters
have been as apt in hypothesizing a motive from subtle clues? Even if they were similarly able to
surmise a motive, would the end result (i.e. maintaining secrecy) have been different due to the
suspect’s status as male?
3. In considering the “sneakin[ess]” of locking Minnie Foster up and snooping around her
house, Mrs. Peters declares that such an investigation is justified because “the law is the law.” To
this, Mrs. Hale agrees—at least she professes to agree, saying “I s’pose ‘tis.” What changes from
that moment to the final moment of the story, when the two women silently agree to keep quiet?
1. In what way does the author’s use of color themes serve to further her purpose of defining the
gender roles at play in the story? Specifically, are the tones of gray described and the theme of
loneliness used to speak to a general sense of purgatory in a woman’s status, or the
inapplicability of the law created by men to the suspected murder at hand? …or both? (In RE:
Jury of Her Peers)
2. Implicit to the analysis of “the law of nature” v. “the law of civil society” is the question of
who does the law, in its purest form, serve? With this thought in mind, is true justice that which
bears its fruit for the benefit of society as a whole, or the individual whose liberty is in peril (In
RE: Speluncean Explorers)
3. Legislation from the bench is a topic, which dominates the current evaluation of judicial
decisions. Especially when considering the decisions of our nation’s highest court. In view of
this, would each of these authors maintain the position that a certain amount of both judicial and
societal infringement in the prescribed judicial process necessary in order for our system of
justice to function in its highest and best form? (In RE: both readings)
1. Do you think Glaspell’s main theme was to depict how human emotions significantly
influence all parts of the law, or simply to portray a rare situation where human emotion impacts
this specific outcome?
2. Could A Jury of Her Peers be taken as a critique of the legal system because it is a system
that creates the potential for human emotions to play too important role?
3. As a practical matter, you do feel that Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are representative of how
individuals would actually respond when in this type of situation?
1. Describe the possible "the law of nature" theme and how it affected the acts of both the
spelunkers and the women in A Jury of Her Peers. What is it about the characters from each
reading that may be alike? What are the differences?
2. What does it mean in either reading that finding life requires taking a life?
3.
In what instances does the justification of a possible crime acceptable? By whom?
1. What, if any, significance did you find in the phrase "knot it" when the women were talking
about the type of stitching used in the quilt?
2. What do you think caused Mrs. Peters to have a change of heart?
3. What did you find to be the main differences in the rationale of the judges in the law review
article vs. the rational of the women?
1. Does the county attorney's "observation" that Mrs. Peters is "married to the law" give her
"authority" she feels she needs to complete the ladies' cover-up? [For Trifles]
2.
Are the women consciously considering that Mrs. Wright would not have faced a "jury of
her peers," or does their behavior result from a more emotional loyalty to one's sex, regardless of
the gender inequity Mrs. Wright might have faced at trial?
3. [For Speluncean Explorers] Considering the maxim Judge Foster invokes, "cessante ratione
legis, cessat et ipsa lex," how can we best judge when the reason for a law has ceased? Should
this maxim be systematized with a legislative review and repeal of "unnecessary laws," applied
by courts on a case by case basis, or ignored altogether?
1. How do the views of the justification for committing a crime compare in the two pieces?
2. Which Justice in The Case of the Speluncean Explorers has a view that most conforms to how
statutes are typically understood and enforced today? that is "right"?
3. Why did Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters not share their discovery about Mrs. Wright with the men?
Should they have shared what they discovered?
1.
How would A Jury of Her Peers and The Case of the Speluncean Explorers differ if the
genders of all characters were reversed?
2. What is the significance of the quilt in A Jury of Her Peers?
3. Which of the judges in The Case of the Speluncean Explorers presented the most compelling
opinion?
1. What role or significance do names have in this play? Obviously there's a sense of formality in
the community, but the narrator doesn't identify Mrs. Hale as "Martha" more than a few times.
Despite the collusion between Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters while they are alone in the kitchen, this
is one point on which they remain steadfast, never calling each other by name--why is that? And
what about Mrs. Hale insisting on referring to Mrs. Wright by her full maiden name?
2. A knotted or tied quilt is one where someone sews the blocks together in a giant square, then
pulls through little lengths of fabric in an even spacing to secure the large middle area so the
pieces don't float or get away. Is there any significance to Mrs. Wright's choice in a tied quilt
versus a true quilt, where she would have had to spend much more time sewing down each
block?
3. Mrs. Hale seems to take the lead on concealing or obstructing most of the evidence, while
Mrs. Peters seems to reluctantly concede such behavior. If Mrs. Peters filled the role of the
archetypal "sheriff's wife" and was what Mrs. Hale had expected her to be, do you think the
outcome of the story would be different, or would the sense of necessary protection among
women in that community overcome a stronger woman who is still "married to the law"?
1. What does Minnie Foster's canary symbolize, and what is the significance of the way it was
killed?
2. How would you have rule as a judge in the Case of the Speluncean Explorers? What would be
your rationale?
3. How does the Case of the Speluncean Explorers illustrate the relationship between law and
morality?
1. What role do you think ethical principles played in each judge's opinion in the Case of the
Speluncean Explorers?
2. Does Trifles or a Jury of Her Peers (as a title) better represent Glaspell's themes?
3. Are Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Hale motivated only by compassion and understanding in hiding the
evidence of the murder, or are their actions also a form of rebellion or revenge?
1. Are these stories about forgiveness or justification?
2. How should sympathetic criminals and/or scenarios inform our perspectives on black letter
law not written to account for these idiosyncrasies?
3. Must someone be held accountable for the 10 lives lost in the process of rescuing the
speluncean explorers?
1.
How would you define justice? Do you feel as if the play meshes with your definition?
2. Do you empathize with the killer in the play? Why or why not? Why do you suppose the
other women do?
3. Do you have an issue with the fact that the man who was eaten by the other explorers didn't
role his own dice? Does it change how you feel to know he brought the dice and came up with
the idea? How do you feel about the law of nature?