Skip to main content

What are some elements of realism in the play Trifles?

In its presentation and content, realistic drama strives to preserve the illusion of real, everyday life. Susan Glaspell's Trifles, first performed in 1916 and based upon a true story of a woman who lived an isolated life on a farm in Iowa and killed her husband, includes many realistic elements. 


Here are some realistic elements in Trifles:


Characterization


  • Mr. Wright is presented as a rather taciturn man, a man who is also unconcerned with the "trifles" that would matter to his wife, such as a party telephone line. So, when Mr. Hale comes to the Wright's house and asks John Wright if he would like to go in with him on a party-line phone, Wright abruptly replies that "people talk too much anyway." Hale adds,


"I went to the house and talked about it before to his wife, though I said to Harry that I didn't know as what his wife wanted made much difference to John—"



  • As Mrs. Wright talks, she pleats her apron nervously, distracted from the things around her, but rather hysterical, too. The dialogue between Mr. Hale and Mrs. Wright is certainly realistic:


"Can't I see John?"
"No."
"Ain't he home?"
"Yes, he's home."
"Then why can't I see him?"
"'Cause he's dead."
"Dead?" 
She just nodded her head, not getting a bit excited, but rockin' back and forth. . .
"Why, what did he die of?"
"He died of a rope round his neck."



Setting and Social Situation


  • It is certainly realistic that people's lives would be lonely if they lived on a farm, especially in the winter. (Mrs. Hale comments that the Wright home seems "a lonesome place.")
    In such a lonely setting, ownership of something like a canary could easily become more important to its owner than under normal circumstances.

  • In 1916, women were often repressed, as Mrs. Wright is. Because of the divide between the sexes at that time, it is, perhaps, more credible that Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are so sympathetic to Mrs. Wright that they conceal evidence.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more