Susan Glaspell's "Trifles" (1916): women's conspiracy of silence beyond the melodrama of beset womanhood

Rei•ista de Estudios Norreamericanos, n. º 7 (200 0) , f'P· 55 - 65 SUSAN GLASPELL'S TRIPLES (1916): WOMEN ' S CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE BEYOND TH E MELODRAMA OF BESET WOMANHOOD CARME MA NUE L Universitat de Valencia Women ha ve been driven mad, «gasli ghted,» for centuries by the rcfutation of our experience and our instincts in a culture which validat es only male expericnce. The truth of our bodies a nd our minds has been mystified to us. We therefore h av e a primary obligation to each other; not to undermine each other 's sense of reality for the sake of expediency; not to gaslig bt each other. Adrienne Rich Su san Glaspell ( 1882-1948) was a famous dramatist and fiction writcr who published ten novels and more than forty short stories.1 To getber with Gcorge Cram Coo k. he r hu sba nd , shc organiz ed a group of Provincetown act or s, known as the Provincetown Players. in 19 15. who pcrformed one-act plays in a w harf theater and later in Greenwich vi ll age, in Ncw York. Glaspell and Cook 's productions were anticommercial and avant-garde and they fostered the first experimental drama in the United St ates. According to Bar bara Ozieblo, their real achievement líes «in their 1. Among her works mention must be rna de uf th c p lay The Ve1 ;i:e ( 1921 ), whit:h dcalt with the Ncw Woman and the psychological portra ya l of charactcr; and her dr ama ti sation of thc lif c of Emily ü ickinson. Alison 's How·e ( 19 30 ), which won her the Pulitz cr Prize for drama. For a n:visionist study on Glaspell and h er imp ortan ce on forging the new Am erican drama. see Ozicblo «A Stru gg lc Shared: Susan Glaspc ll and Eugcnc O'Neill» . 56 Cm-me Manuel single-minded promotion of the American playwright». Not onl y did chey offe r a testing arena co young dramatists w ho reacted against the hegemony of Broadway -es pecially for Eugene O'Neill and Glaspell herself-, but enco uraged « th e value of little th eatres and their experimental work and so seeding th e mature drama in America» (The Provincetown 11 ).2 Trijles was Glaspe tr s first play for the Provincetown and was produced at the Wharf Theatre in Provincetown on 8 August 1916.3 The pla y conveys the emasculating experience of being a farm wife in a lonely, bleak landscape of Iowa during the latter half of the nineteenth century. The main characters -Jo hn Wright and his wife, Minnie- a.re never seen and assume a shadowy presence against which the rest of th e characters are pitted, and whose struggle is cchoed by the two women figures on stage who realize «lhe prison house that patriarchy has constructed of marriage» (Ozieblo, The Provinc:etown 18). The play illustrates th e tensions that imply being a woman. Mi nnie has been invisible both to her husband and to the community. While he went out to battle nature, she was forced to slay indoors. Placed against isolation and male violence, she atlemptcd lo nurture beauty to sustain life as well as to invent an existence of her own in<l epe ndent of her husband's male construction of it. Glaspell's structuring of the play strives to transcend the mere committed exposition of Minnie's plight and works, instead, through the complicity between the women characters and the audience as they unveil their own existential similarities and pass judgment on the murderer. The content of this one-act play goes br ietly like this. John Wright has bet:n strangled while sleeping. Hi s wife, Minnie, has been taken to p1ison as she has been held responsible for the murder. The play, initially built on the conventionulised frame of the murder-mystery melodrama , st ar ts the following day when the County Attorney, the Sheriff and his wife. and a neighbouring farmer and his wi fe arrive at the empty house. While the men go to th e upstairs bedroom and to the ba.rn to look for clues that will prove that it is Minnie who has murdered her husband, the two middleaged rural women are left alone in the kitchen to collect clothes for their imprisonetl neighbour. As Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters observe the triíles they find in the messy 2. For a study on thc importance of thc Provincetown Playcrs and thcir history as wcll as for a sckction of plays written and staged by them. sce Ozicbloºs The Pr1n-i11 cetown Players. 3. Glaspell tells about thc way she wrote th c play and the source of her inspiration in her hushand's biography, T/ze Road to rhe Temple: «So l went out on thc wharf. sat alonc 011 une uf our woodcn bcnches without a back. and looked a long time at that bare little stage. After a time the stagc bccamc a kitchen -a k it chcn thcrc ali by itsc lf. 1 saw just whcrc thc stove was. the table, and the stcps going upstairs. Then thc d oor at the back opcncd, and peoplc a li bu nd lc d up ca me io - twu or threc mcn, l wasn·1 sure which, but sure enou gh ahuut thc two wo men. who hung back, rcluctant to entcr that kitchcn. When I was a ncwspapcr reponer out in Iowa. 1 was scnt down-state to do a murder tria!, am i 1 nevcr forgot going into the kitchen of a woman lockcd up in town. 1 had mcant to do it as a short story. hui the stagc took it for its own, so I hurried in from the wharf to writc down what I had s.:cn. Whencvcr l gut stuck. I would run across the street to the uld w ha rf . sit in that lcaning li ttle thcat er und er which the sea sounded, until the play wa~ rcady to conti nu c. Sumetimcs things writtcn in my room would not form on the stagc. and 1 mu st go hume and cro ss thcm out» (Bigsby. «ln troduction» 9). S11.rnn Gluspe/l's Tr illes (1916): \#1111en 's Con.,pirac\' ofSilence 57 kitchen,they slowly statt to patch up together possible pi ece s of evidence that bcspeak the reasons for the crime. When the men retum, in a sil cnt act of bonding, they suppress the information they ha ve gathered and the mcn are left wilhout evidence to condemn Minnie Wr ight. According to C. W. E. Bigsby, the play is «a well-observed study of male arrogance and insensi ti vity»; a play which «w orks by understatement. The melodrama inherent in the scene is rígorously excluded. It is an ensemble piece, lyrical but spare» (Critical 25, 26). Bi gsby's opinion is a good cxample of restrained literary re ading, uncercain to poi nt at what stands behind that supposedly «male arrogance». Gilb e1t and Gubar go to further lengths to describe Glaspell's work. For them, Trifles is a play which revolves around t wo major subjects. lt is firstly a study uf «the co nfining en vironments that frustrale the full development of human potential», a nd second ly of «the impacl of gender on the co mplex process by which we read and interpret not only literary texts but also social texts» ( 1351 ). l agree wi th this broad definition but 1 feel it nccds sorne speci fy ing, bccause Trifles is not merely local color drama caught up in the web of the first decades of twentieth-century American regionalism, but ra th er a direct result of the tenets thc American feminist movement was preaching at that moment. In this respect, Helene Keysar's descripti on of the play as a work th at «reveals the complexities of women 's lives and subverts assumed nolions of women 's social powerlessness» (22) seems to be more operative to my purposes of analysi s. On the other hand and following Gi lbert and Gubar's definition, Trifles' dramatic effect on the audience rests on building our complicity with the women characters on stage and, as such. the play presupposes a spectator actively involved with it. Paraphrasing Louise M. Rosenblatt's definition of a poem, Trijles is what the viewer Ji ves th rough und er the guidance of the text and experiences as relevant to that text. Arthur H. Quinn, examining the changes which ca rn e in dr ama in the first three decades of the twentieth ce ntur y. explains that one of the effects of the Great War was a sea rch in g scrutiny that resulted in drama in «an exam ination of the institut io n of maiTiagc, into the relations of parents and children, and the relations of the individual to society». And though these were no new themes, «the novelty has come in the method of approach». He labels that sort of drama. «domestic drama» by wbich he means «the play that grows out of complications and conflicts among closely related pcople, drawn usually from a group not distinguished by acute social consciousness, but more concerned with the personal aspects of the struggle» (207). Helene Keysar provides ano th er name for this type of plays. She refers to th em as feminist dram a, which became increasingly rare once th e vote was won -in England in 191 8 (restricted to those over thirty until 1928) and in th c United States in 1919- and suffragette plays disappeared. Between 1919 and 1960, the most persistent gesture towards feminism in the theatre was a focus on female characte rs and the pa rticulm· obstacles these characters encountered beca use they were women. lf for Quinn, Susan Glaspell' s productions belong to the group uf domes tic drama and Trifles is one of her best works, since «it is distinctly dramatic, and the effect of the personality of the absent wife is suggested by deft touch es » (209). For Keysar, Tr(fles remains the most provocative archetype of feminism in drama. Mr s. Hale and Mrs. Peters gradua ll y uncover thc oppression under which Minnie Wr ight lived with her husband; and «by 58 Carme Manu el making us acknowledge a woman's world, the play cxposes a space usually ignored on-stage, and once we see this inner life, the murder appears justified» (25-26). Yet, in this sense, Trifles cannot be seen as an exceptional drnmatization of the pli ght of women in the first decades of the twentieth century, sin ce it relates to what Josephine Donovan calls the «Cu ltural feminism» of the nineteenth century which comprised those other veins in this period which went beyond «the fundamentally rationalist and lega li st thrust of Enlightenment liberal theory» and which, ins tead of emphasizing the similarities between men an d women, often stressed «the diff erences, ultimately affirming that feminine qualities may be a source of personal strength and pride and a fount of public regeneration» (31 ). From the Iiterary point of view, feminist critics have taught us to reread nineteenth-century women's fiction as the embodiment of how domestic id eo lo gy articulated it self as a means to effect social and política! reform from the prívate sphere. In this sense, one of the most importan! and popular books in nineteenthcentury Ame1ica was Catherine · s Beecher Treatise of Domestic: Economy publ ished in 1841. Beecher's book is an attempt to articulate a housekeeping ethics which aims at regulating a systematic domestic econ omy. «There is no one thing more necessary to a housekcepcr, in performing her va.ried duties, than a habit of system and arder» ( 144 ), she stated. By performing their household ta sks , which in her political phrasing becomc a way to sustain «a prosperous domestic state », women participate in «the greatest work that was ever committed to human responsibility [ ... ] the building of a glorious temple, whose base shall be co-extensive with the bounds of the eai1h, whose summit shall pierce the skies, whose splendor shall beam on ali lands» (14). Thus, American women's responsibility acquires a Mcssianic role as their concern for regularity and order in family arrangeme nt s is regarded as a patriotic and religious duty. Correct housekeeping becomes a pol itical practice and the home a political model that has to be protected from the fluctuations of the world outside - the marketplace. Family life in American líterature is consequent ly presented as an instilution with a potential for reforming society and therefore as separated from and purged of the pernicious vices infecting the public sphere. Women be come the sole guardians of this sacred private space, predestined to keep it as a peaccful order in contrast with the disorder outside. The sphere of female activity defined by Beecher and other female educators is thus circumscribed by the boundaries of the home, and consequently the fa.et whether that domestic ideology extends rather than subverts pa triarchal power remains a moot question. In 1916 retaking the main elements that structured domestic fiction, Glaspell shows in Trifles how in a period of political tunnoi l the American Ede nic ho me becomes a threatening nightmarish space for the allege d security of patri archal dominalion and how the separation between the kitchen a nd polity is but a fictional construc t. Minn ie Wright personifies the hysterical woman Carroll Smith-Roserb erg presents as a rebel against the coercive et ho s of will. control, and hard work personified in the ideal do mestic woman, whom she sees as the discursive product of patriarchal power. lt is true that when Glaspell was writing American women bad startcd to enter into collegcs and into professional careers such as teaching a nd nursing and that these were regarded as the springboard for the recognition of th eir Su. 1w1 G/aspell 's Trifles ( 1916): Wi11nen 's Conspiracy of Si/ence 59 political rights. But Minnie Wright is a nineteenth-century American woman living in a rural enclave isolated from the mainstream currents of Lwentieth-century life, from progress and technological communication. Glaspell dramatizes how the Victorian domestic mystique intersected and collaborated with patriarcal power to delegitimize women's claims to financia!, social, and political autonomy. Yet one of the main questions Trijles asks is if the domestic ideology and its concomitan! gender oppression render women really powerless . One of the determinant structures of experience that have differenciated women from men ha s been tbeir assignation to the domestic sphere. The experience ofliving nnder different conditions from men -no t only limitation to tbe domestic sphere, but experience of política! oppression, their historie economic funtion as production for use, nol for cxchange, different experience of significanl physical events (childbü1h)- has led to the formation of «a particular consciousness, a particul ar epistemology, a particular ethic, anda particular aesthetic» (Dono van 173). In the domestic sphere women have experienced a sense of personal vulnerability to environmental influence, fostering a sense of being bound to circumstance, of not being in control of one 's world, of feel ing tied to physical realities that impinge upon their projects. Howeve r. in this dornestic sphere women were also able to carve out a se parate space of their own and to sustain separate cultural traditions, as Minnie Wright shows and Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters recognise. Here it is interesting to turn to Kathryn Allen Rabuzzi's The Sacred and the Feminine: Toward a Theology <~f Housework ( 1982). Rab uzzi argues that we should not denigrate the realm of housework, but rather see it as the site of continuing femenine cullure as it contributes to tbe development of a feminine world. In fact,Minnie Wright's ciime implies a transformation of the home. Isolated from the cveryday world into the rural realm of the male farn1, her life is ruled by the primigenia! rhythms of the mythical time of seasons -symbolized in the play by her cherished preserves- and, contrary to the typically masculine mode of being, which is that of questing, her feminine mode is that of waiting. Her life <loes not follow a progressive, linear change, but is repetitious. cyclical, and static (Rabuzzi 143-145, 146). Notwithstanding, Trijles attests to the capacity of women in relocating power within the essentialist concept-; that define them, that is to say, within the leve! of im manence. But Trifles goes beyond a mere exhibition of ge nder oppression. Glaspell's one-act play redefines the dramatic event as something that only exists meaningfully in the mind of the reader/viewer. As Stanley E. Fish provocatively explains of a poem in «How to Recognize a Po em When You See One», in this case if we want to interpret the play, we do not ha ve to decode it, we have to make it (327). Andas Wolfgang Iser focuses on the gaps in the text, on what is not expressed, he argues that what is missing from a narrative causes tbe reader to fill in the blanks creatively. Now tbe way we fill in these blanks will ultimately depend on gcnder. Minnie' s act of rebelliousness acquires the proportions of specular reality against which the characters of the play and the audience have to produce significance to understand a past that refracts thc present. Co nsequently, the outcome of this confrontation will depend directly not only on the com prehension of immanent feminine signs by women, but ultimately on the 60 Canne Manuel refusal on the part of men to replace a fossilized patriarchal reading of female experience. In this play we have two women and three men exposed to the same experien ce -that of reading the text written by Minnie. Sorne critics on Trijles understand the play as a failure on men's part to be competen! readers of women's texts. For ex ample , Annette Kolodny observes that, «if the absent Minnie Foster is the 'transmitter' or 'sender' in this schema, then only lhe women are co mpetent ·receivers' or 'readers' of her message, since they alone share not only her context (the supposed insignifican ce of kitchen things), but, as a result, th e conceptual patterns which make up her wo rld » (42). And for Barbara Ozieblo, Trijles evinces how Glaspell shows that «men spcak a different language from women and they not only refuse to understand them but they al so despise their words and activities» («La mujer» 401 ). Yet in the pl ay th e characters do not seem to behave with such a clear-cut preci sio n. On the one hand , George He nd erson, the young co unty attorne y, deviales attention towards the prívate rclationship bclween John and Minnie Wright on two occasions, both previous to the men's going upstairs to Jook for facts thal corroborate her participation in the murder. Firstly, when Mr. Hale starts to describe John 's indifference lowards Minnie's wish es, and secondly. when Mrs. Hale points to John 's character as gloomy enough to make any place uncheerful. Henderson 's willingness to postpone revelation -to enter into a dialogue with the unknown fcmale sloryis suspiciously in strumental in furthering silence on a key question -the true nature of John and Minni e's man-i ed and family life. On the other hand, Mrs. Ha le is aware of the fact thal Mr s. Peters and her own reading of the different clues inscribed in the text of the kitchen might not be different from the men 's. In fact, when Mrs. Peters desperately tri es to laugh off her fears dispelling the ominous lruth they have jus t gl ea ned from their female reading ( «Getting ali sti 1Ted up ove r a Iittle thing like a - dead canary. As if that could have anything to do withwith -w ould n't they /augh 1 >>}, Mr s. Hale mutters, «Maybe they wouldmaybe they wouldn'l». Furthermore, she a nd Mrs . Pelers are extremely careful to des troy all indications th at substantiate Minnie 's murder, showing how unsurc they feel of possessing a language of their own lh at cloaks a hidden meaning. Two questions need to be asked at this point -why is it that these women react Jike chis ') And why do the men rcfuse toread Minnie's text? As far as the tirst question is co ncerned, in the play women are valid because they seem to men to embody a model of stability ac hi eved through co mplete se lf -deni al. Th eir exemplary lives of social invisibility are the perfect comp lem ent to the political and economic world these men engage in. Thc only setting in Trifles is that of Minnie's kitchen. The tr es passing, the sneaking, of men into it is perceived by women as a dom estic violation, but as research routine by men. The disarr an ge d st ate of the room scandalizes the attomey and seems to offend his domestic propriety much more than the act of murder disturbs his moral sense. Yet the disorder of th e kitchen mürn rs th e di sorder of Minnie 's mind as it is perceived by Mrs Hale and Mrs. Peters, though not by the men as they apparenlly and only apparently fail to re cognize the intimacy between dom es ti c and personal/political iss ue s for women. Mar y Crawford and Rog er Chaffin 's cogn itive research on ge nder and comprehension is helpful now. They suggest that one reason th at differences between Susun Glaspe/l's Trifles ( 1916): ~hmen \ Coll.\piracy of Sile11ce 61 women and men are not readily apparcnt is that women learn to read and understand from a male point of view. a possibility suggested by muted group theory which describes situations in which groups of people cxist in asymmetrical power relationships. The theory proposes «that language and the norms for its use are controlled by thc dominant group. Members of the muted group are disadvantaged in articulating their experience. since the language they must use is derived largely from the perceptions of the dominant group» (21). In fact. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are those members of the muted group. but they stand ata point of vantage, for not only do they possess a languagc of their own and are able to recognise it, but most important for the end of the play, they have also been trained and are experts at shaping their reading to the rules defined by the male world. Thus Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters know that the disorder in the kitchen cannol be remedied without reference to the system the kitchcn articulates in its modes of gender relationship. It is in this sense that Minnie's embodiment of the myth of Philomel makes sensc. Like her she has suffered violence and has been condemned to silence. Philomel had her tongue cut off as Minnie's pet bird has had its neck wrung and symbolically her voice muted. The repeated comparison between her and a singing bird drawn by Mrs. Hale also brings home the strategy of identification upon which the play is built. since Mrs. Hale and Mrs Peters only gain insighl into the situation after they identify with Minnie. Hence their reading and the audience's are an example of the reader's-response criticism hailed by Norman Holland. Holland assumes the absolute priority of individual selves as creators of texts. Mrs. Hale succeeds in deciphering Minnie's handwriting in the text that her kitchen becomes because she is motivated by deep-scated, personal, and psychological needs which she transfers to an initially reluctant Mrs. Peters. Both women find in Minnie's text, in Holland's phrase, their own «identity theme» ( 122), that is to say a replication of their sel ves as they work out through their neighbour's kitchen their own characteristic patterns of desire. However, what makes Trijles' plot ad vanee dramatically is Glaspell's distinct description ofthe two women's engagement into that identification and consequently active respons e. Mrs. Hale has known Minnie since she was young. Married to a ncighbouring farmer, she is aware of the oppression to which rural life condemns women. Her first reaction to Mr. Henderson' s cri ticísm of Minnie' s failure to fit in to the model of the ideal housekeeper triggers her immediate recognition of sisterly bonds within a cultural system meaningless to men and which the man' s patronizing remark labels as her Ioyalty to her sex. Mrs. Hale, like the feminist reader, takes the part of the woman writer, Minnie, «against patriarchal misreadings that trivialize or distort her work» (Schweickart 46). But the climatic moment of her recognition arrives when she discovers Minnie's sewing basket and the quilt she was piecing. The disorderly sewing is the clue that tellingly narrates her neighbour's story, as Philomel wove the account of her rape into the tapestry for her sister Procne. Minnie's verbal and existential sacrifice is transposed. as in the classical myth. on the sewing of the quilt. Its chaotic threads tell explicitly the tale justifying her revenge. As expected, other women read her story because they can deciph er the common code of quilling since they also share the experience of being reduced to silence by the patriarchal structures of society. It is thus that Glaspell appropriates women's practices in the 62 Carme Manuel home an<l revcals the subver sive potential that is inscribed into them. Minnie's sprawled sewing is not only indi ca tive of the fact that she cannot control her f eelings enough to create an orderly art but, most importan!, the messy stiches of her quilt -her kno ts -are an evident replication of her knotting her husband. Piccing, according to Schowalter, is « an art of making do and eking ou t, an art of ingenuity, and conservation. lL reílects the fragmentation of women's time , the scrappiness and un ce rtainty of women's creative or solitary moments» ( 149). Mrs. Hale recogni ses th at the rambling mixing and matching of fragments is not only the pro<luct of an intenupte<l life, but the gendered metaphar for abuse and exploitation. Moreover, her knots are also rem ini scent of two <listinctivc meanings that the tenn incorporates. As the Oxfor<l English Dictionary explains, firstly, they are the main point in a problem, the camp li catiori in the plot of the drama. In fact, Trifles revolves around a question of a murder by knotting and a reading of quilt knotting. And secondly, both issues merge in to another sen se of the term -tha t of the marriage tie. Minnie' s irregular knots stand then for her attempt to break asunder the bond -or better bondage- to her husband. Hence. the subvcrsion of aesthetic decisions -the disruption of what should be seen as repetitive, obsessive and compulsi ve in the log cabin pattem of the quiltreflects the inscription of a new order for women which Mrs. Hale deciphers, though only to restare it to its inilial arder soon after. In the same way, Mrs. Peters becomes also a proficient reader of Minnie 's text because she fi nally finds clues in her own life that replicate her neighbour's. The killing of the bird -the death and silencing of the singing voice of Minniealledgedly by Jahn is the u·aditional strategy used by the male daminated society to keep itself in power. Mrs. Peters imagines Minnie's desolation when her bird had its ne ck wrung and remembers her own grief after a young bay killed her kitten and her loneliness after the death of her first child. Yet for her this implies a painful process of conversion since «the Jaw has got to punish crime» and seems to have been alienated from her awn poten ti al for sisterly response. Mrs. Pctcrs is a goad example of how women have internalized otherness and it has made them unable to speak in the language of the seif lhat arouses fantasies of guilt and anxiety. Mr. Henderson underscores his male sanctioning of the women's acts when he reaffirms Mrs. Peters'definition as a woman «m arried to the law» thus reconstituting he r from the masculine point of view and implicitly warning her of th e perils of shedding that definition. The logical question now is -why domen refuse toread Minnie's text? When they are confrontcd with the visible signs of Minnie 's Iife, they respond: «Nothing here but kitchen things», «a nice mess», «!rifles». The uncovered hidden signs of Minnie 's presence -her bread set, her preserves, her clothes, her sewing basket-are ridiculed as women's things. For Henderson, as the embodiment of the voice of authority, it becomes vital to sanction the legend af John's life as that of a gaad man because that would perpetuate the perceptions and arder of the world by the dominan! group. Not only this, if men recognised Minnic's te xt as it is articulated through the signs in the kitchen, they would inevitably be l ead to face the fact that subversion to their system is within the possibilities of the dominated group and thus they would suffer the loss of its control. Moreover, this wauld impinge an their prívate lives as thcy would have to apply the lesson to their own home si tuations. Men w0uld rather Susun G/aspe/l"s Trilles ( 1916): lWimen 's Co11spiracy of Sile11ce 63 leavc Minnie's kitchen disarranged because introducing order into this chaos would ultimalely force them to introduce chaos into their apparenlly tidy p1ivate and public sel ves. The paradox herc is that for Mrs. Hale the only crime that nobody is going to pay for is her ignorance of Minnie, her reluctance to overcome her own disgust and provide sorne consolation for her loneliness. Trifles works by a system of retlections. She and Mrs. Peters solve the mystery because they identify with what they discover. The kitchen text taps thcir awareness that as women « We ali go through the same things». Moreover, the reading of Minnie's tcxt has displayed ils potential for giving rhem a knowledge of their own selvcs. for putting them in contact with their real situation in lifc. Minnie 's text acts as a mirror in whi ch they recognise each other. Minnie 's condemnation to silence is uscd as a w eapon of resistance to g ive her, contrasting the patriarchal language, a space where she can build up her own self. Howcver. whcn Mrs. Hale pulls out stitches that are not very well sewed in Minnie's quilt lo erase evidence of the murdcr, she is unconsciously destroying Minnie's radical assertion as an artist. The frustration of the woman struggling to creatc an appropriate .. form for her experíence within a patriarchal culture increasingly indifferent or even hostile to womcn's domestic lives is then rcinforced. Minnie's story is to such a degrcc sub versive that she ends up in dcfeat. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters keep silent bccause, paradoxically. the only way to save Minnie is by adapting to the idiom of the dominant group and to reading like them. Mrs. Hale fears that mcn are trying to «get her own house to turn against her», and the only way to counteract this act of betrayal is by another act of sedition-tuming Minni c's homely text in her favor. Unfortunately, this imp l ies erasing it. As Ozieblo puts it , «although the women rebel against tradit ional mores, they are ali effectively silenced» (The Provincetown 11). And Minnic 's name stands for that symbolical minimizing that reduces her voice to the «mini» proportions of a miniature. Mr. Henderson's unwillingness to del ve into details is indication of the fact that his suspicions may turn into real ev id ence, since when men Jook into thc apparent clear surface of domesticity what they are forced to come to terms with is their own oppressive patriarchal structures that can be demolished from the insidc, using the stralegies they themselves have already provided. As Judith Fetterley puts it, « it is not simply lhe case thal men can not recognize or read women's texts; it is, rather, that they will not» (152). lnstead, they laugh off intimations of female truth. « Well, Henry, al least we found out that she was going to quilt it. She was going to -what is it you call it, Jadies? », asks Henderson facetiously al the end of the play and thus forcing the women to sanction male control. In fact, when Mrs. Hale ends up the play responding «We ca ll it - knot it, Mr. Henderson», she is depriving the key word of the play -«knot»- of ali the polysemic load wi th which it has appeared on previous occasions and stripping it bar e to Mr. Henderson's desire of faslening odds and ends with a binding spell. In a period wherc women were still politically silenced and invisible, Glaspell's play acquires more disturbing tones as she shows how the seeds of the des t ruction of patriarchy are profou ndl y imbedded in the private s phere. She arliculates the hom e as political. Minnie Wright is r egar d ed as a monstruous exceptional case, not lo be publicized and thrown openly into the world, but rather to