The Beaver Coat – Ambiguity

An interesting tactic in The Beaver Coat is the lack of information in the play, and the long delay on the information that is presented.  One such example is the fact that the beaver coat is not even mentioned until act IV, despite being the title and very subject of the play.  In fact, the beaver coat was not the only stolen object, as the firewood is of great concern as well, and mentioned earlier in the play.  There is one thing that we are told: that Mrs. Wolff stole the firewood.  This is told early on in the play and allows us to be suspicious about her as the play proceeds to become ambiguous about everything. 

The judge’s apathy toward Mr. Kreuger’s situation and the general stupidity of everyone around seems to indicate a crowd that is unable to even suspect Mrs. Wolff’s guilt.  Mr. Kreuger himself held his own stolen wood in Mrs. Wolff’s home, and yet still did not suspect a thing.  We are never told that she stole the beaver coat and were the audience not certain of her guilt in the firewood matter, the blame could hardly be drawn toward her, as she is the honest, hardworking protagonist of the play. 

It seems that this is, in a way, similar to The Broken Jug.  In The Broken Jug, Judge Adam has absolute power and uses every tool to deceive the population.  In fact, being perceived as the good, honest judge, no one would ever suspect him except the one person who knew: Eve.  In this case, Mrs. Wolff is perceived as an absolutely honest woman that can be trusted above suspicion, and so she can get away with the crimes.  Unlike poor Adam in the Broken Jug, there is no intelligent force to see through the ambiguity and the lack of evidence in The Beaver Coat.  It seems that this play was written to make the audience feel a little lost, by focusing in greatly on the personal lives of characters that don’t really matter, and barely covering any of the crunchy crime details.