Why Is Trifles Morally Wrong

Everyone has done something morally or lawfully wrong but rightfully justified. Maybe a child didn’t tell their friend that the cookie they just ate had fallen on the floor, or an adventurer wouldn’t say to their dying friend that their partner was already dead. Every person has reasons to not tell the whole story - what you don’t know can’t hurt you, right? But where do you draw the line? Typically, it depends on the justifiability of the situation - whether the reasons behind someone’s actions was enough. If someone doesn’t tell a baseball player that their mother died until after a major league game to keep their streak alive, that can be generally argued as acceptable. But if someone kills a child just because they were bored, that is most certainly not okay. In the case of the short play

Wright’s planned murder scheme is absolutely justifiable. Mr. Wright mistreats her - he hurts her, leaves her alone for hours or days at a time, won’t let her have any friends, and even when he is there, they don’t talk. He just makes her feel alone. Her only real friend is a bird, a friendly canary. That bird is the only contact she truly has with anyone, and it’s the one happiness she has in a dark cloud of a horrific marriage. But why does she enjoy a bird, of all creatures? Why not a mouse or a fish? According to Mrs. Peters, “She - come to think of it, she was kind of like a bird herself - real sweet and pretty, but kind of timid and - fluttery” (123). Notice how emotional Mrs. Peters is getting. Mrs. Wright and the canary are obviously close enough to mimic each other’s personalities. However, John has a hatred of the bird - is it jealousy or an effort to minimize his wife’s happiness? Either way, he despises the canary - and, by extension, Mrs. Wright. Of course, Mrs. Wright isn’t pleased with the fact that her husband can’t stand her best friend. And since she follows the rule of sisters before misters, his murder of the bird is, understandably, the final