Character Analysis in A Jury of Her Peers

Mrs. Peters’ utterance surprises Mrs. Hale in the middle of her stream of thought as the two women survey the kitchen in the Wright home. The most striking feature of the sentence is its impersonal nature. The subject is “a person,” which allows Mrs. Peters’ observations of the kitchen to touch upon a broader truth. One senses that Mrs. Peters is speaking about herself through her encounter with the artifacts of Mrs. Wright’s life. Mrs. Peters’ own experience of discouragement and diminishment is evident throughout the story.

The reference to Mr. Peters as “Mrs. Peters’ husband” is telling. After Mrs. Peters is defined as “married to the law,” the narrative voice reverses, perhaps even corrects, that definition. First Mrs. Peters is defined in terms of her husband. Then, through the narration, Mr. Peters is defined in terms of his wife.

One of the most compelling threads in the story is Mrs. Peters’s development, the revealing of her latent, though initially concealed, gifts. Mrs. Peters possesses a quality of vision, that which the essayist and poet Jonathan Swift defines as “the art of seeing what is invisible to others.” In this scene, Mrs. Peters scans the room, correctly landing on the quilt as an object full of telling details.

The “other thing in Mrs. Peters’ eyes” is a quality Mrs. Hale noted previously: “her eyes looked as if they could see a long way into things.” While Mrs. Peters is introduced as a meek personality, her remarkable perceptiveness reveals itself more and more. As Mrs. Hale notices, it is fear which “blur[s]” that perceptiveness. The implicit suggestion is that Mrs. Peters’ intelligence and intuition are not valued in the world of men; her fear of stepping out of line “blurs” and fogs her talents.

As the men attempt to uncover the story of the murder, Mrs. Hale takes interest in a different story: that of Minnie’s adult life. Driven by a capacity for empathy and a sense of guilt for having lost touch with her neighbor, Mrs. Hale wants to understand what has happened to Mrs. Wright since “she was Minnie Foster, one of the town girls, singing in the choir.”

Consider that Mrs. Hale compares herself to Minnie here. Mrs. Hale empathizes with Minnie because she too was “interrupted” from her housework and forced to leave things undone. Note that Mrs. Hale wonders in the next sentence what had brought Minnie away from her work. This cryptic sentence sets a mysterious tone, leading the reader to wonder if what “interrupted” Minnie was more sinister.

Mrs. Hale once again demonstrates that she is one of the most observant characters in the story. The men have just gone around the entire kitchen, managing to accomplish nothing but criticize Minnie’s housekeeping. Mrs. Hale is able to consider all possibilities when assessing her surroundings and find clues that the men largely ignore, intentionally or not.

Notice that Mrs. Hale is able to immediately “[release] herself from something strange” after the men leave the room. Their oppressive, powerful presence keeps her from acting on her feelings, in this case especially, since the men were criticising Minnie’s homemaking and being generally condescending towards the women. Their “joking” is obviously harmful, and keeps Mrs. Hale from feeling allowed to act in the way that she naturally would.

The county attorney assumes that the reasoning behind the women’s defensiveness is mere loyalty to their gender. This certainly is part of it, and women as allies will become a theme as the story progresses. But the county attorney’s assumption is reductive, and his laughter indicates that he dismisses these women as biased, silly protectors, rather than intelligent, logical, and observant individuals.

Martha Hale’s description of Mrs. Peters in this passage highlights the power differences between Mrs. Peters and her husband. Mrs. Peters is “small and thin” and does not have “a strong voice.” But the sheriff is characterized as “heavy” with a “big-voice” and a disposition that made it “plain that he knew the difference between criminals and non-criminals.” The sheriff’s large stature and big personality completely overshadow Mrs. Peters, emphasizing both his physical and metaphorical power over his wife.

The halting way in which Mrs. Hale speaks in this line shows that she has an emotional connection to Minnie and her situation. Mrs. Hale fears that Minnie will be convicted of the murder and this demonstrates that she has exonerated Minnie in her mind.

Throughout the story, Mrs. Peters is reluctant to take Minnie’s side against the law. However, when the women realize that Mr. Wright killed Minnie’s bird, Mrs. Peters tells this story to show that her opinion of the situation is changing: she empathizes with Minnie’s anger over her murdered bird because she experienced a similar feeling.

When discussing the presence of a motive, Mrs. Hale notices that Minnie did not finish putting away the sugar or wiping down the table. From her own feelings about leaving her kitchen messy, Mrs. Hale sees that there is something amiss in these details. Mr. Hale is able to empathize with and understand Minnie because she too is a woman and a farmer's wife.

In this context, “close” means stingy or oppressive. Mrs. Hale sees Minnie’s tattered skirt as evidence that her husband was so stingy that he would not buy her new clothes. In the patriarchal society in which these women live, women are supposed to take care of the house and men are supposed to take care of the women. Minnie’s shabby clothes and kitchen are signs that Mr. Wright did not keep up his end of this social contract: he did not take care of his wife.

When Mrs. Peters goes to look at Minnie’s fruit, she finds that all of the jars have burst except for one. The tone of this discovery is somber. Unlike the county attorney and sheriff who laugh at the women for worrying over the fruit, the two women recognize the tragedy in ruined preserves. Mrs. Peters becomes slightly more optimistic that the jar that survived was full of “cherries” which not only suggests that this fruit is hard to preserve but also that these women know how much work goes into making preserves. Thus, the survival of the cherry preserves is a consolation for Minnie’s situation. Mrs. Peters’ recognition of this fact shows the camaraderie these women feel over their shared work.

The county attorney seems to miss Mrs. Hale’s suggestion here that the towels are dirty not because women do not clean them, but because men carelessly wipe their dirty hands on them. This claim defends Minnie by offering equal blame to her husband for her messy kitchen. The attorney’s inability to understand the implications of this claim also shows that he does not believe Mrs. Hale capable of an intelligent insult.

The county attorney’s resentful tone suggests that he has already drawn a conclusion about Minnie’s character and guilt in this crime. To him, the “sticky mess” in her cupboard signals that she is not a good housekeeper and therefore not a good woman.

Minnie’s response to the suggestion that John would install a telephone in their house signals to the reader that they did not have a safe or happy relationship. She laughs at the proposition that John would accept anything in the house that connects them to the outside world, then she becomes scared of her reaction. These two signals point to an abusive relationship.

Notice that Mr. Hale mentions this detail multiple times throughout his story. Mr. Hale seems to believe that Minnie should have a more emotional response to this situation. He uses “pleatin’ her apron” as a symbol for Minnie’s inappropriate response to her husband’s death and diminished mental state. In his story, Minnie seems to have gone insane.

Studying the furniture in the Wright house, Mrs. Hale compares the Minnie Foster of today to the Minnie Foster whom she knew 20 years ago. Since Mrs. Hale has not visited Minnie in her home or kept in contact with her, she looks to the furniture of the place to draw conclusions about Minnie’s life. In this way, the setting can be read as a metaphorical representation of both Minnie’s circumstances and identity.

Rather than hearing what Mr. Hale has to say and drawing conclusions or observations from it, the county attorney cuts Mr. Hale off mid-sentence in order to control the story he is telling. This foreshadows how his arrogance and superior attitude will cause him to miss clues and discount evidence from people he does not value.

Mrs. Hale characterizes Lewis as slightly dimwitted. He does not seem to have the intelligence to understand the consequences of what he says, or be able to craft a narrative around his experiences. Notice also that Mrs. Hale is protecting Minnie Foster: she does not want Mr. Hale to say anything that will incriminate the woman.

Notice that Mrs. Peters begins to follow instructions before she decides what she wants to do. This reinforces the previous impression of Mrs. Peters as someone who adheres to social obligations and male authority.

Notice that this conversation is characterized as obligatory. Mrs. Peters believes that they “ought to be talking” because the men are talking. This quality of speech suggests that Mrs. Peters adheres to social obligations and conventions.

Mrs. Hale identifies these two wives, Mrs. Gorman and Mrs. Peters, by their individual characteristics rather than assigning them characteristics based on their marriage. This careful consideration of the woman and her husband demonstrate Mrs. Hale’s perceptive skills; skills that the speculative sheriff seems to lack.