Great response from Arthur Miller Essay Example for Free

Great response from Arthur Miller Essay The Crucible was written in 1953, by Arthur Miller. Miller has said that the purpose of the play is to comment on the parallels between the unfair Salem Witch trials and the Red Scare that lasted eight years 1948-1956. A Crucible is a large container that is used in the production of steel, where they are heated until they melt. A Crucible can stand extremely high temperatures. This is a direct comment on what the play is about. Arthur Miller provided an artistic response to the political climate and he wrote to tackle certain issues such as intimidation. Under McCarthyism, the United States was afraid of communisms influence. McCarthyism came from Senator John McCarthy, who set out to find any threats to the American life and their security. Anybody suspected of communism, mainly those in the entertainment industry, either confessed and gave names of other people or the American Government blacklisted them. Miller, in the entertainment industry, who was protecting his business and friends from any negative outlook it gave, refused to testify to the Committee and was blacklisted. McCarthyism has a great likeness to the play The Crucible. In both situations people only wishing to save themselves falsely accuse many people who suffer. John and Elizabeth Proctor dont have a normal husband and wife relationship, although they are married. They are distant with one another. Their relationship is full of suspicions and clearly has a lack of trust: What keeps you so late? is an accusation. Elizabeth really means what have you been doing or where have you been to keep you so late. The strength of their relationship is tested. John tries to please Elizabeth but she cannot forget her suspicions. John explains to her: I have not moved from there to there without I think to please you, and still an everlasting funeral marches around you heart. This shows that John feels guilt. John Proctor is an honest man. We see this through the way he acts and what he says. John works hard to provide for his family. He has a good clean name in the village and is well respected. However, when the hysteria begins, he wonders whether to expose Abigail for what she really is, even though his name will be ruined. We see that he truly loves Elizabeth when he confesses lechery in order to protect his wife. The audience are drawn to John Proctor. He is one of few people in the play to be truthful throughout, along with Reverend John Hale. Elizabeth is also an honest person. She is a good Christian woman and acts the way shes supposed to as a wife and mother. However, sometimes she can be very cold. She, along with many others, is accused of witchcraft simply because she fired Abigail when she suspected that her and John were attracted to one another and didnt want it to go any further. Even though she has suspected John of lechery and is distant towards him, we know that she deeply loves him. Hale is called into Salem to find out what is going on. He seems a respectful man and gives everyone a chance to prove his or her innocence. He is sort of the plays saviour or hero.  We get to know Abigail Williams through her language and what other characters say. We see that she has power over the other girls and just how far she will go to protect herself, especially in Act 1: I have seen some reddish work done at night and I can make you wish you had never seen the sun go down! Abigail leads the girls in accusing innocent people of witchcraft. Abigail saw the Indians murder her parents. This could have had an affect on the way Abigail is and how she acts. I think that she is able to threaten danger to the girls partly because of her childhood and what she has seen. In Act 3, Abigail shows her power by the way she speaks to Danforth in the courtroom. She even threatens him, saying that the Hell can take him: Let you beware, Mr. Danforth Beware of it! After realising what she has said, she immediately pretends she is in another trance and can see things. This is to allow her to get away with what she has said and so Danforth cant reply to her. There is a great change from Act 1 to Act 3 with regards to hysteria. In Act 1, the girls accuse a few names and they tell just enough lies to protect themselves. Abigail and John Proctor take a gentle lighthearted approach to it in Act 1 and they laugh and joke about it. However, in Act 3 it becomes much more serious. They tell a massive amount of lies and act to make their story believable. Act 3 starts straight away with hysteria. The audience are aware of the gradual build-up because of the characters dialogue. As the play moves further along, the plot thickens as more names are thrown into it and even more unbelievable acting takes place with more and more lies being told. In Act 3, Mary Warren tries to go against the girls with the help of John Proctor in order to save Elizabeth and the other innocents. Mary Warren is already a weak and feeble character and when Danforth questions and speaks to her, he uses cruel vocabulary to fade her. It is obvious that he is on the girls side and doesnt believe a word of what Mary Warren is saying. The girls then accuse Mary Warren of witchcraft. Then she sees that she cannot tell the real truth and overcome the girls lies so she decides to rejoin the girls. To protect herself she accuses John of making her go against the girls and tell lies to them by threatening her. The stage directions in this act build up tension. They add to the drama and the way the girls convincingly act. The stage directions are just as important as the speech. They let us know what is going on and help us understand the characters more. The language also builds up tension. There is a lot of talk about God in the courtroom. Also, there is a lot of cutting each other off. Abigail always tends to cut off Danforth from speaking, so he cant respond to her, this also shows her power. It is almost like Abigail is speaking and saying things just to stop anyone else from doing so.  Personally, I really like the play. I think its a great response from Arthur Miller. There is a mixture of characters and its interesting to see how they interact with one another. I like the play partly because its a true story and I was interested in finding out what happened.