Trifles vs A Jury of Her Peers

SWA #7:
Trifles vs. A Jury of Her Peers

After reading the two versions of Glaspell’s story I conclude that the short story form overall is easier to follow and understand. While the play version helps to portray the setting of the events, the short story form helps you comprehend the events without having to jump between who is saying what. The play form is very scattered; it jumps from person to person every other sentence, while the short story form ties the dialogue into the narration of the story smoothly. The short story was also easier to read because you did not have to keep reminding yourself who was saying which line. As far as which form lent itself more easily to cultural/historical analysis, the short story form did. Because the stories events flowed more easily it was easier to understand what was happening, which made it easier to determine the cultural ties. The choppy play form discourages any cultural/historical analysis because it is simply hard to tie every aspect together; the short story form ties everything together for you. You could easily determine that the story took place around 1916 through the short story. While the play form gives the setting it is not as easily determinable through the events as it is through the short story form. In the short story form you can easily analyze the time period it occurred in through the layout of events such as the sewing and the neighborly farm culture. Also, while it is only slightly hinted to you can determine the culture and historical ties through the fact that the women were treated unfairly. This is hinted to when the bird is discovered and the ladies talk about how he killed the old lady’s singing. To conclude, the short story form has more advantages than disadvantages comparing it to the play form. The cultural/historical analysis is easier to obtain and the events are easier to follow.