Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Act 4 Discussion

PLEASE READ THESE DIRECTIONS:
We are going to do our Socratic discussion here, based on Act 4 of The Crucible. Answer my question first and I want you to respond to at least 3 others, make comments, and continue questioning one another.  In terms of comments toward one another, make sure you focus on the real world implications of this text, discussing what is significant and what we can actually take away.
I do not want one word responses; I expect formal writing and intelligent thought showing your discerning observations and analysis. Please keep in mind the ideological statements and central questions as a means of helping you to analyze further.  Depth is a must!


You must choose between question 1 or 2 and everyone must do #3.

1.  As you read this Act, what spoke to you the most or evoked the most emotion?  What quote was the most powerful and why?  Make sure you really reflect on what Miller shows through the quote and why.


2.  Think about the definition of an allegory; we know this text is an allegory for the time period during which Miller lived.-list 2-3 characters, events, or facets of setting that you think are allegorical from the play and what do they correspond to specifically?

*3.  As a result of reading the play and seeing the movie, are you more interested in what actually happened in Salem in 1692, what actually happened during McCarthyism in the 1950s, what happens when an illicit teenage lover is spurned, the effects of infidelity on a married couple, etc.? (these are just ideas, but there are obviously more).  What is it about Miller's work that prompts your interest? (Question from Margo Burns)  Hence, tell me what you really walk away with in terms of what this play can teach us on a humanistic level.  This is a critical, yet subjective response, and  I expect you to be thoughtful.

When you finish your responses to the above, make sure you ask questions and begin responding to others. Make sure to respond to different people; challenge one another, question each other; help each other to see more.

115 comments:

  1. 2. There are clearly similarities and connections between the happenings in The Crucible and the events of Miller's time having to do with the Red Scare and communism. One of the biggest allegorical characters I've noticed is Abigail Williams to Senator McCarthy. Both characters have continuously called out others in their society in order to save their own name. Like McCarthy's supposed list of the members of the government that were secretly Soviets, Abigail had a "list" (more in her head than physical) of who she had been wronged by and who she was going to call out. Both characters were so desperate to save their own skin and protect themselves that they were willing to do anything, even lead others to death, essentially. Another similarity I see between the two times in history is more of an idea than a concrete event or person. The overarching idea of witchcraft is closely related to the fear of communism. Both aspects severely shook society and caused turmoil left and right. During Miller's time, many refuted, or rejected, the idea of communism and that there might be a greater force at play. Similarly, we saw plenty of characters in The Crucible reject the idea of witchcraft and the idea that something other-wordly was involved. In their respective times, communism and witchcraft both controlled society and provided reason for chaos and fear.

    3. Miller's writing has definitely sparked my interest in the happenings of Salem in 1692 and the aspects of marriage and infidelity. The way that Miller wrote his characters, and even more, the emotion that was almost tangible in their words, moved me. Especially at the end, when John Proctor refused to sign the page in order to save his name, I wondered more about the implications of a shattered name in a town like Salem back then. Even Abigail, in the beginning of the play, pleaded with Parris to assure him that her name was still pure. This play teaches us the power of peer pressure and conformation. Once Abigail started acting in the courtroom, or calling out names of who she "saw with the Devil", the rest of the girls quickly followed suit, to save their skin. Even Mary Warren, who was on the verge of confessing the pretense, was torn away by Abigail and the girls' actions. It proves how selfish people can really be, even the supposedly innocent and pure teenagers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really like what you are saying in 3 Ashley. How do you think that a shattered name today compares to a shattered name in Salem? What would it take for today's society to fall apart like Salem?

      Delete
    2. Similarly to Carly's reply, your response to number three really spoke to me. Do you think that people today are more likely to save their own skins? How do you think someone can (if they can) redeem themselves and their name? What are the consequences of people seeking to destroy each other?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Senator McCarthy and Abigail have a lot in common, as you discussed. Furthermore, McCarthy ended up overextending himself and his "power", leading to his downfall. Would you consider this another similarity between the two, or a difference? Also, how does the label of “innocent” and “pure” change over time? Who would be considered innocent in modern times compared to the past or even compared to different cultures?

      Delete
    5. Katherine in response to your question about the labels of "pure" and "innocent" I believe that today there is not necessarily a group of people or age where one is seen as completely innocent. Obviously, babies and children who are too young to know what is going on around them are "pure" and "innocent", but in the times of the Salem Witch Trials all children were seen as innocent. There have been many events in today's society that shows that not even children are always innocent.

      Delete
  2. One quote from act 4 of The Crucible that stood out to me greatly was a quote from Hale that reads “I came into this village like a bridegroom to his beloved, bearing gifts of high religion; the very crowns of only law I brought, and what I touched with my bright confidence, it died; and where I turned with my bright confidence, it died; and where I turned the eye of my great faith, blood flowed up. Beware, Goody Proctor-cleave to no faith when faith brings blood.” Despite the chaos that surrounded him, Hale was somehow able to see above the hysteria, and realize how unjust and unholy the Salem witch hunts truly were. This quote in particular seemed to sum up the entire issue of religion in relation to the Salem Witch Trials, and was able to communicate the idea that religion was no longer being used as a way to cleanse the town of evil, but was now being used as an excuse used to justify the execution of obviously innocent individuals. The way that Miller phrased this piece of dialogue was very effective, due to the notion that he was able to compact such a large and profound realization into just one quote, and how he is able to describe how religion was used in such a negative way in Salem during the time of the trials. Hale’s quote possesses a substantial deal of power because it demonstrates how, after such a large amount of suffering, Hale was finally able to realize one cannot justify the spilling of such a monumental amount of blood with religion. It shows how faith is no longer good when it can be held responsible for the killing of innocent people.
    To what extent are the people of Salem able to control and prosecute others by claiming that they are simply executing their God-given duties?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that the people of Salem too often place the blame of what they are doing on their God-given duties. They take the bible so literally that they are ultimately doing things that are not "Christian actions." I also believe that some of the characters know that what they are doing is wrong regardless of what they blame it on, but still do it because they care so much about their reputation and ultimately staying alive.

      Delete
    2. The people of Salem and by extension all Puritans believed that the Bible was written by God and it was their duty to enact the Bible's words. People like John Proctor, like Hale were governed by the Bible as well as their own morals. This caused them to have a very serious qualm of conscience. Salem could have completely annihilated themselves and each other and still claimed it was their God-given right. We see blood spilled in the name of religion throughout history. I ask you, to what extent do we allow our religious views to control us over our personal morals?

      Delete
    3. Looking as imperialism in Africa and the other "uncivilized" continents, some Europeans claimed it was their God-given duty to help the more unfortunate and unenlightened, while others saw it as the white man's God-given right to control the world. How has religion and God-given rights/duties effected the course of human history?

      Delete
    4. Religion is the biggest part of the society in Salem. If the people think they are performing their duty to god then it would be very hard to compel them to stop doing it and they will do whatever they think is necessary for them to complete the duty. During the witch trials, most of the people thought their duty to god at the time was to help find all the witches and bring them to justice. The people thought that was the one thing they needed to do for god at the time and it made the situation a lot worse than it should have been.

      Delete
  3. This text is an allegory to the 1950s time period during McCarthyism. During the Salem Witch trials when people were accused of witchcraft they were served the death penalty if they did not confess. In the 1950s if you were accused of being a Communist you could risk being punished with the death penalty. Although not as many people received the death penalty in the times of McCarthyism as they did during the Salem Witch trials, many people were convicted or false confessed to these forbidden actions. During both times periods, it was vastly popular to place false blame on the people around you to take the attention and blame off of yourself. It was almost impossible to actually prove that anyone was a communist or performing witch craft because there was no way to show that people were doing these forbidden things.

    As a result of reading this play and watching the movie, I am very interested in what happened during both the time period of the Salem Witch Trials and the time of McCarthyism. The fact that one accusation in a community or even a whole nation can cause so much anxiety within the people fascinated me. The part of Miller's work that prompts my interest was the way he showed that a small action of event in a community can cause so much fear and anxiety in people and it will cause them to act incredibly irrationally. It made me wonder that if in today's society there is as much fear and anxiety occurring within people due to small events that they may not even be involved in like there was during these times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fear and anxiety are often things that individuals deal with alone, each having their own things to worry about. Do you think that it was a relief for people of these two times (and even today) to have one fear that they all could share, to bear the burden of together, and even to fight together? Or do you think having your fears acknowledged and shared by those around you would only make your fears worse? Does fear feed off of fear, being alone, or something else entirely?

      Delete
    2. I agree! However, I do have a few questions:
      1) Do you consider an accusation of witchcraft to be a small thing? Today I think it probably would be because people would simply dismiss it, but in Salem, it threatened everything that they had built their lives off of.
      2) When lots of people cry 'Wolf!' (or in this case, 'Witch!'), does it lessen the value of the accusation? Should it?

      Delete
    3. Allie,
      Today I agree with you in the fact that people would dismiss it simply because not everyone is living the same Puritan lifestyle as they were back then and people have different religions and values and we have science to back up what was truly occurring.
      I also think that when people cry 'Wolf' that is does lessen the value of the accusation, however when it comes to a judge's point of view I do not think that the amount of accusations should lessen the value due to the fact that they have to base their judgements on facts rather than assumptions

      Delete
  4. 1. Throughout this act, what evoked the most emotion for me was the scene in which Proctor and Elizabeth are alone, having their last words before Proctor makes his decision. Specifically, Elizabeth states “John, it come to naught that I should forgive you, if you’ll not forgive yourself. It is not my soul, John, it is yours." This so immediately makes me think about Elizabeth knowing about what Proctor has done. She believes she cannot forgive what he has done until he has accepted it and, frankly told Elizabeth himself. It is heart wrenching to know that she would forgive him regardless of what he did or how big of a sin it was to the rest of the village.

    As a result of watching the film and reading the play, I am mostly intrigued by the effects that placing blame can have on a society. Once one person has created a fear in a society, humans in general will do anything to save themselves, their reputation, life, etc. The extent of selfishness that the characters in this play go to is actually disturbing to some matter. Things get so tangled because everyone is lying and nobody knows who is pretending and who is being serious. Overall, the role that fear plays in a society and what it causes humans to do in terms of blame and selfishness is discouraging as well as disappointing, and is a human characteristic that is unfortunately still alive today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hallie, do you think that Elizabeth would forgive him had he admitted that he feels bad for what he did? To me it sounds like she already has moved past this horrible situation in her life and only wants the best for John. Later on the same page she says, "whatever you will do, it is a good man does it." To me this says that she respects him and will stand behind him no matter what.

      Delete
    2. Hallie, I thought your observation about the character's level of selfishness in the play was very accurate. In today's society, I think the idea of integrity can easily be seen in the presidential campaign going on right now. One candidate will try to badmouth another, and take control of any propaganda in the media to get his/her point across. Candidates don't seem to hesitate to slam another candidate's ideas, just to make their own opinions seem better. This leads to false promises, and nobody ends up happy.
      I really like what you said!

      Delete
    3. Yes, I do believe that she would forgive John because like you said, her quote suggests she will stand behind him no matter what decision he makes. Ultimately they do love each other and Elizabeth wants the best for John, just as John wants for her as he did everything he could to get her out of jail.

      Delete
    4. I agree with your observation of the characters selfishness. I like how you talked about how everybody knew there was lies being told but nobody knew how to stop it. I think this is an element of peer pressure almost. The idea of some people thinking one thing is right but, nobody wants to stand out and disagree with them.

      Delete
    5. Hallie, I agree with what you are saying. Along with Scott, it seems like they've adopted a mob mentality to go with the peer pressure. The girls in the courtroom especially were completely under the control of this, seeing as they followed blindly into whatever Abigail led them to. If they stood up to her, Abby simply accused them on witchcraft and they had the possibility of being killed. It's all very chaotic.

      Delete
  5. 1.During Act 4 of The Crucible John is refusing to sign his name to the testament that he confesses to witchcraft with amazing reason as to why, “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave my name!” (Miller 133). This passage was extremely meaningful to me because John was the voice of reason throughout the play. He was always the one saying what madness the trials were, and in the end he is on death row for witchcraft. To save his life he must abandon his morals, and he almost does. He states that he practiced witchcraft, but when he has to sign his name on the copy of his confession, he gets pulled back to the reality of his actions. John realizes how if he signs he goes against all he stood for, and would not be able to live with himself. He says it would be signing his name away and he would not get another in his life. When Proctor stays true to his morals in the end, it shows how despite the fact that he cheated on his wife, he was the most sensible character overall. He decides that his life is not worth sacrificing his good name and lying. Also he dies for his morals, he was so close to caving in but he realized what was happening and refused. Proctor first appeared to be just a cheater, but in the end, he was the protagonist in the play due to his unwavering morals.

    3. After reading The Crucible by Arthur Miller, I am interested in how far one will go to get what they want, and think they deserve. Abigail cried witch to kill John Proctor’s wife so she could be with him. She was willing to kill people who have done nothing wrong in order to end up with John. Later when John rejects Abigail and calls her out for being a whore, she cries witch on him. The idea of vengeance as a motivator in Abigail’s character are huge. I would like to learn more on what motivates us as people. Can we all be pushed to that limit where we will kill anyone in our way? Do we all have the potential to seek vengeance within us, just waiting for a catalyst to bring it out? I am also wondering why Proctor added the affair between Abigail and John Proctor? I would think he did so to highlight the points of Abigail’s character, such as revenge and self-preservation. Did he also add it as a way of showing that human nature is to fend for one’s self with disregard for who one hurts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really like what you are saying in 1. How do you think the voice of reason seen in Proctor is seen in conflicts today? Can we learn from Proctor's self redemption? I think that today there is more caving than standing up for what you believe in. What do you think?

      Delete
    2. Why do you think people always believe Abigail even though she is just a teenager? However I do not believe that people should go all the way to the extent of having someone killed to get what we want. I think there are better ways to relieve built up anger and get the things we want. However, what Abigail wanted (John) was something that she needed to learn without. Why do you think Abigail was so infatuated with him?

      Delete
    3. To Proctor, his name is all that he has left. Throughout the book, people are concerned with their names and how they are judged through their name. How is this different now, where people are judged through their action, cloths, and opinions, while names are everchanging for some people?

      Delete
    4. Katherine I think that in today's society people are judged more based off of appearance and opinions rather than their name because there are so may different ways to express yourself. In the time in which this play took place, everyone in the town was the same religion with around the same money and they all wore very similar clothing. The puritans all also had the same beliefs and therefore had very similar opinions on things going on around them. Where today even in just your neighborhood there are people who have significantly different yearly income, different religious beliefs, different fashion styles, and different personalities. This means that there are more things for people to judge people off of than there was back during the Witch Trials.

      Delete
    5. Bree, I believe that everyone believed Abigail because she was still seen as innocent, with how young she was. Even though we know her to not be innocent or very young at all, considering her actions with Proctor, society looked at teenagers and still saw kids, untainted by the evil in the world. And, one of the characters said this earlier on in the play, but that it is only the accused who were looked at with suspicion, never the accusers. Clearly, that is still true in this incident as well.

      Delete
  6. 1. Reading through Act Four, John refusing to give Danforth his signed confession. “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies!” I think that this quote is the most powerful one in the act, if not the whole play. It evokes a feeling conflicting morals. How does one's appearance affect their behavior? I think that John had already disgraced himself by having an affair that by not lying he was putting himself right. That maybe if he could go as a man free of sin he may be redeemed in a later life. This quote not only evoked emotion in the reader/ audience but also the characters in the play. Particularly Hale, who wanted John to confess and save himself as well as prevent the blame he would cast upon himself if John died; Elizabeth was also the most moved by this line, knowing that there was nothing she could do now that John had found a way to make right by himself and God. I think Miller used this quote to show that no matter what our morals will always be strong and in the end we will make things right.
    3. This play caused me to really think about how morals affect behavior and how other view them. I think that both the Hollywood trials and the Salem trials expose how easily humanity’s moralities can change and what that in turn does to society. Through the use of John Proctor, Miller illustrates how the morals and beliefs of an individual can bring not only a call for change in society but can jeopardize that individuals beliefs. What I really walk away with is a greater understanding and appreciation for the ability to think and make opinions of my own. The freedom of thought and the ability to know what crosses your moral line creates a strong independent individual who can bring sanity into situations. Individual thinkers are the some of the best leaders of our time, if everyone’s opinions were the same there would be no progress. There would only be one large mob mentality, a world full of single stories, fear, and paranoia. The freedom to have our own moral compass is the greatest freedom we have, and this play has given me a greater appreciation for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Based on Carly's second response, how important do you think that a freedom of opinions is to the characters in the play? The people in the trials?

      Delete
    2. I agree with your second point, it truly is astonishing how morals affect behavior.
      I noticed throughout this that many of the puritans in the play were going against their own beliefs, even though they claimed to be doing the right thing. Lying was considered the worst sin, and they were willing to kill people and judge them (even though only God was supposed to make judgement) over something that a young girl accused them of. Also, even though it wasn't in the novel, I read that in Salem, they actually killed toddlers accused of witchcraft, even though kids were innocent and pure. What are your thoughts on the contrasts of that?

      Delete
    3. I like that you touched on Hale's emotions towards the end of the play. In the script, it is clear that Hale is exasperated by the situation that John is in. It is clear that Hale felt guilt when he signed away the names of the accused, especially Rebbeca Nurse.

      Delete
    4. I enjoyed that you added the effect of morals into your second response. Morals play a huge role in how people act and how cultures change over time. Since the morals of people in these times were drastically changed because of events that had occurred, how has that changed and shaped the future societies we have lived in?

      Delete
    5. I also used that quote for question 1, and I really like how you also stated how it effected the characters, and not just the audience.

      Also, with the idea of freedom of thought, can one think that people sacrifice this in paranoia? Saying how you stop thinking for yourself and go with what is being said by others.

      Delete
  7. Throughout this act Elizabeth’s feelings and what she says to John really resonated with me. She says, “John it come to naught that I should forgive you, if you’ll not forgive yourself. It is not my soul, John, it is yours. Only be sure of this, for I know it now: Whatever you will do, it is a good man does it. I have read my heart this three month, John. I have sins of my own to count. It needs a cold wife to prompt lechery” (Miller 137). This quote was extremely powerful because of the way that Miller turns Elizabeth’s feelings about her husband. Throughout the story she is very resentful because of the sin he has committed but this quote shows that in the end, she loves him. The way Miller portrayed Elizabeth’s lines is what made it so powerful. I can tell that she truly means what she says and cares deeply for her husband and trusts his judgement. At first I was very taken aback when she blamed herself for his affair with Abby, but then after thinking about it, it became easier to understand. Despite the fact that I can understand where she is coming from, I disagree and do not believe John’s mistake was her fault. Because she felt so bad for John, she used herself as a scapegoat. By blaming herself, he looks less guilty. The main message I received from this passage was that when love is deep enough, there is nothing that can break that. If Elizabeth did not lover her husband passionately she would not have been able to forgive him or speak so highly of him.


    After reading this play and seeing the movie, I’m very interested to know how relationships were truly affected during the Salem Witch Trials. You would think that if a loved one was convicted of a horrible crime that family and friends would stand by and support them. After reading this story I doubt that this would happen. Throughout The Crucible families are torn apart because of the accusations placed. Miller wrote this play in a way that I was really able to connect with the characters and build strong opinions of them. These characters are so realistic it makes me interested in the truth of what happened in Salem. However, I’m more intrigued by the way people acted compared to how the trials turned out. I find it fascinating that people act the same way today as they did when Miller wrote this play and during the 1600s. This message was the one that stuck with me the most throughout the story. Despite the time period, humans are the same. We create scapegoats, we will do anything to protect our reputations, and our logic can be extremely skewed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Going off your second response, do you think that people's faith to a God should be stronger than the faith in their lived ones? Do you think people would rather cast blame on their loved ones than sacrifice themselves?

      Delete
    2. I really like your comment on how humans really haven't changed and we still do the same things that people did way back in 1692. It makes me question, will we ever change? I mean here we 300 plus years later and we still cast blame on others rather than ourselves. Is there any hope for the future that we will change?

      Delete
    3. I really like your message that love can be deep enough to withstand any conflict. This connects to something I was pondering about love and trust a while ago. I think trust is fragile while love is strong. You can continue to love when someone else challenges that love, however trust is harder to maintain when someone challenges it. In Proctor and Elizabeth's case. Proctor broke Elizabeth's trust in him. She still loves him and cares for him but doesn't trust him the same way. What are your thoughts on trust and love in relationships? I also wrote about that same quote from your first paragraph. I interpreted more that John's pride is reminding him of that sin and is causing it to fester in conscience and corrode his confidence. For him to finally be accepted by Elizabeth again, he has to believe in himself again and let this mistake go.

      Delete
    4. I like how you talked about even 300 years ago we stilled found scapegoats and placed blame elsewhere. I also agree with the fact that it is human nature and we find scapegoats all the time. But, I was wondering if we have changed any and in today's society we are owning up to our mistakes? Do you think this will change in future societies?

      Delete
  8. 1. Towards the end of Act four, it appeared the hysteria in Salem was spiraling out of control. Hangings had begun, scores of people were being accused, and livestock roamed aimlessly alongside orphans on the streets. Among all this insanity, Proctor kept his wits about him, and that really struck me. After Proctor has signed the confession statement, he refuses to hand it over to Danforth, saying, “I have confessed myself! Is there no good penitence but it be public?...God sees my name; God knows how black my sins are! It is enough!” (Miller 142). As John announced his feelings, I myself gave him a silent “hurrah”. Proctor realizes what others in Salem do not - that true forgiveness, and actual liberty cannot come from a piece of paper nailed to the door, or the dead body of an accused witch. For example, even if Proctor signed a statement confessing to adultery, he still isn’t fully forgiven. Proctor still lives with his misdeeds on his conscience, and very few (if any) signatures, pardons, or statements can clear one’s conscience. Through Proctor’s quote, Miller is conveying this message to the reader. During the second Red Scare in the United States, Miller realizes that a jury’s decision is not the final word in an accusation. He imparts this wisdom upon his readers through Proctor’s refusal to hand over his confession.

    3. The play undoubtedly opened my eyes to the catastrophe that can happen when hysteria is spread about an issue with no hard evidence. Prosecutors in 17th century Salem had just as much of a reason to call out a “witch” as 20th century Americans had to declare somebody a communist. Both of these accusations come without any true evidence, and both are resolved by tremendously subjective decisions. The motives behind the accusations is what most interests me about The Crucible. What drives a person to send another to his/her death over a seemingly trivial issue? On a humanistic level, this play can teach us to look at issues with an outsider’s view. While it’s effortless to discuss an issue passionately when that issue directly involves yourself, it’s instrumental that people take a step back in order to clearly see the consequences, both positive and negative, that can come as a result of a hastily-made decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looking at what drives people to act in this way, I think that as we have seen many times through out this play fear and conformity drives people to chose to have someone lose their life over this trivial issue. I think we can see fear through the girls agreeing with Abigail about things in the courtroom rather than going against her because that may cause them to be the one being tried. I think that even though some of these issues seem trivial people fear what could happen to them if they do no agree with the more powerful person so they conform to save themselves and kill someone else rather than being killed.

      Delete
    2. I can understand where you are coming from when you are saying that some characters are placing a ridiculous amount of blame on one another, but I don't think these people are purposefully meaning for others to be killed. When the possibility of witchcraft arose it was probably not as big of a deal as it eventually became. By placing blame on one another people were just trying to get attention taken off of them, not necessarily trying to get another person killed. However, I do believe once it had been escalated to this point people should have stopped putting their neighbors among the danger of death. These acts are more selfish than they are an act of targeting someone else.

      Delete
    3. I believe that, in the beginning of the trials, people may have had a somewhat legitimate reason to cry, 'Witch!' However, after that first go, it was really all based on not wanting to be accused themselves and vengeance. The same thing goes for the Red Scare; maybe the first accusation had some kind of sketchy proof, but after that, none of it was really backed-up. I think that truly malicious people are willing to use any opportunity to kill/send others to jail because of a small disagreement, or simply to take the blame off of themselves.

      Delete
    4. I completely agree with you that John isn't truly granted forgiveness when society considered him pure. I would think that John can only truly be forgiven or considered pure in his own eyes. He has to first decide to forgive himself for crossing his virtues before he is capable to allow the rest of society to forgive him too. If he doesn't solve the conflict at home first, then it will fester and everyone will take notice of it. If he manages to do away with his shame then he can finally put forth an image that can be forgiven.

      Delete
    5. You make a very good point Kirk. We need to be able to look in and learn from the tragedies that were caused by the Red Scare and the Salem Witch Trials. It is kind of scary to think about McCarthyism and the possibility that it could happen again, because people can really get caught up in the hysteria if prompted. As a society, we need to be able to introspect and look in on the internal issues of the country, and not get caught up in the hysteria.

      Delete
    6. I agree with you Kirk. At the time of the trials hasty decisions were made to please the people who didn't have answers and needed them. To answer your question, within the Crucible it was really the hysteria and self preservation that led to the accusations. The hysteria led to the quick decisions being made and self preservation led to people placing the blame elsewhere.

      Delete
  9. 1. The part of this Act that evoked the most emotion for me was seeing Proctor and Elizabeth's relationship change from the tension and distrust to respect for each other again once Proctor refused to sign and stood up for what was right instead of continuing to conform. The quote that supports that the most is when Elizabeth says, “He has his goodness now…” (145) She seems to be saying that even though he sinned and she was hurt by that. He for the first time in a long time was seen as good in her eyes and she had respect for him again. Miller seems to be saying that although he apologized to her and they tried to act like everything was fine, this is the first time that everything was actually fine and they did not have that tension they used to have. She saw the goodness of her husband again and she no longer saw him for what he had done to her but instead for what he was doing now. Did Miller use this last line to say that although Proctor is being hanged, there is again goodness seen in Salem?
    3. From reading this play and learning more about Puritan culture, I feel like I am more interested in what truly happened in Salem. I think that McCarthyism can be seen as very similar to the witch hunts. I am not sure if this similarity is from the author or these events are actually that similar. Thinking about how McCarthyism started, I think that Miller showed many similarities between the witch hunts and McCarthyism so he could be pointing to the fact that this is similar to the way McCarthyism started too. Looking at how teenage love can spur deep emotions and feelings I think that this is an over dramatic way to show the power of this but it is interesting to see how far Abigail was willing to go. I think one of the most interesting aspects of this book was the effect of infidelity on their marriage. Miller showed their relationship as very uncomfortable and full of tension right until the end of the book when Proctor refuses to sign. This is when the effects of infidelity in their relationship is not seen anymore and all that is seen is the relationship they once had. Elizabeth no longer sees Proctor as his sins, she again is able to respect him for the first time since this tension was brought into their relationship. I think that Miller clearly showed how this affected their relationship but I liked that in the end he showed how things had once been with Elizabeth again respecting Proctor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Questions:
      - If you were put in Proctors situation would you rather chose to live with guilt or die with what you believe?
      - The play ends with Proctor being killed but we don't know if that was the total end of the hysteria. Do you think that Proctor standing up for the truth ended the hysteria or did Miller only chose to stop there?

      Delete
    2. I agree with your thoughts on how emotional it was to see Elizabeth's emotions towards John change, and it makes me question what caused this change? How did she go from being so cold with him for his sin to loving him and forgiving him with his whole heart. Was it only because his life was on the line?

      Delete
    3. Courtney, I also loved the way Miller elaborated on Elizabeth and Proctor's relationship throughout the play. I find it interesting, however, that even with whatever resolution comes at the end in their marriage, Elizabeth remarries 4 years later. Do you think that she was just in need of companionship, or is she trying to replace Proctor, and start over, hopefully with someone who won't cheat? Just an interesting thought- things seem to be fixed, but yet she isn't fulfilled and continues to search for a "new man".

      Delete
    4. I love how you noticed all this depth in one line. Perhaps because the pay does not have an actual happy-ever-after ending, could this be Miller's version of that? Although not is all well, the conflict between Proctor and Elizabeth is at least resolved.

      Also, about the idea of McCarthyism, could it be seen in any characters besides Abigail? Could Giles be the opposite type of character as he refused to give into the hysteria?

      Delete
  10. 2. There are many parallels between the time period of the puritans and the time period in which Arthur Miller lived (The Cold War era). There are quite a few specific characters and situations within this text that show exactly how similar these two are.
    The blaming of others. In The Crucible and during The Cold War, people accused were expected to blame other people for being in the wrong as well, not just take responsibility of it themselves. We see this when the girls start calling out names, we see this when other witches accuse others of ‘forcing them to do it’ or ‘being seen with the devil’ and we see this when Proctor confesses and the judges attempt to force him to accuse Rebecca Nurse or anybody else he saw with the devil. This was seen very often during The Cold War, and if people accused of being a communist didn’t rat out others, they were often blackballed or even thrown into jail.
    An alternate incentive. Both in The Crucible and during Mccarthyism, the people accusing others usually had an alterior motive. In the play, Abigail’s name was being blackened, and she wanted to get back at the people accusing her of being wrongful. In addition, she was very much in love with John Proctor, and wanted to kill his wife, Elizabeth, in order to be with Proctor herself. All of the girls also wanted to accuse people in order to save themselves from punishment for dancing in the woods. Putnam also had a reason to accuse people; land. He was rich, and he wanted as much land as possible, so he was accusing people, for when they were hanged, he could buy their land. Parris also had a reason to accuse people. Like Abigail, his name was being blackened, and when Abigail began to accuse people of witchcraft, it made his house look more holy. During The Cold War, Joseph Mccarthy, a US senator, started to accuse members of the government of being communists. He wanted to do this because he looked like he was saving America from the Communists. He also wanted to move up in the government. Over time, other people started to accuse each other, because it would save themselves from being blackballed.
    Fear. Fear was a driving factor in both the play and during Miller’s time. People in the play were terrified to stand up or stand out, because it meant they would be either accused of trying to overthrow the court or accused of being a witch. When they were accused, they were terrified of being hanged, so in order to save themselves, they lied to save their own skin, and even accused others. Almost the same thing happened in the 1950s. If they stood up or disagreed with the idea that communists were taking over, they would be accused themselves or accused of trying to help the communists. Everything they did was driven by fear, and it caused them to confess and accuse others as well.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 3. This play made me rethink many things that I once thought. I always thought that if someone had core beliefs, more often than not, they would stick with their beliefs, at least most of the time. After reading the Crucible, I see how easy it would be for people to diverge from their beliefs, especially if their life or their good name is on the line. I find it very interesting that people would admit to crimes they did not commit, especially a crime such as this. One thing that very much confused me was how people would give up their souls (as lying was seen as the worst sin) to stay alive, as many Christians can hardly wait to be in heaven with God anyway. It shows that fear, especially the fear of death, can impact you in ways you never would have known. This also made me think quite a bit about infidelity. I always believed that if someone were to cheat on their significant other, it meant that they didn’t have any love for them at all, and they should never be forgiven. For me, personally, I could not forgive anyone who cheated on me, but it did make me see how people could be forgiven for things like that, especially if the love is still present. When reading, it is easy to see that Proctor still has deep love for Elizabeth. He gave everything up for her, just to try and save her and make her happy. If he didn’t love her, he would have never put her before himself that way, especially not in such a dangerous situation. You can see Elizabeth’s love for him as well, despite the fact that she is struggling with forgiveness. I just found it very interesting how their love for each other could stay so real. Overall, this play taught me that no matter how much you think you know someone, they can turn their back on you. Also, you should stick with your beliefs and not betray others in order to save your own skin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree; this challenged many of my same beliefs. However, I still believe that if someone cheats on their significant other, they either don't love their S.O., or just don't love them enough. In this case, I think Proctor simply doesn't love Elizabeth enough. They love each other enough to be married, but, in my opinion, not enough for there not to be an infidelity crisis or something like that. Cheating on someone means that, even for one second, that person knew what they were doing and how it would affect their S.O. and still did it. I see where you're coming from with him putting her before him, but I think that's part of puritanical culture. People were supposed to, almost required to by their religion, put others before themselves.

      Delete
    2. I agree when you stated that their love is still present even after the fact that Proctor cheated on her. But I don't think that Proctor gave everything up for Elizabeth out of love. I think that he gave everything up for her because he felt that he owed her. I believe that after Proctor cheated on her, he felt as if he needed to do things in order to make it up to her. In order to show that he still loved her.

      Delete
  12. In this Act, there wasn’t something that truly spoke to me. It was more what I learned from the whole situation. People seem to go back and forth between caring what people think, and not caring what people think. I realized that Proctor was having this realization towards the middle of the Act, when he realized that it does matter what people are saying about you. He understand what a good reputation truly is, and how to maintain that. Sadly, it was too late for him once he finally realized this. To me the most powerful scene (because I couldn’t choose just one quote) was, “Elizabeth: John, I counted myself so plain, so poorly made, no honest love could come to me! Suspicion kissed you when I did; I never knew how I should say my love. It were a cold house I kept! Hathorne: What say you, Proctor? The sun is soon up. Elizabeth: Do what you will. But let none be your judge. There be no higher judge under Heaven than Proctor is! Forgive me, forgive me, John - I never knew such goodness in the world!” (pg. 137). To me, Elizabeth is helplessly in love with John, almost to a pathetic level. She falls to his every need. It’s very apparent in the first quote when she says, “I counted myself so plain, so poorly made, no honest love could come to me! Suspicion kissed you when I did.” She was always insecure and questioning their relationship, even during the most intimate moments. That just shows how insecure, and unstable their relationship truly was. But, she’s still so helplessly in love with him. It just drives my curiosity as to why, and what lead her to fall down such a large hole. It says in the Epilogue, that Elizabeth remarries two years after Proctor is killed. For a wife that acts so obsessively in love, it surprises me that she would carry on so quickly, but I guess it’s unhealthy to be a single woman in that era of time. Elizabeth also says that “it’s a cold house I slept”, which to me means that it’s an unhappy household. Why does Miller seem to be going so back in forth in this quote? Elizabeth acts in love and insecure, then alone and lonely. John is there, but not really there. That could have driven Elizabeth to become insecure and question exactly what is going on in their relationship. She is asking for John’s forgiveness, but he doesn’t even seem to acknowledge that she needs that to keep herself together. It’s a very complicated, confusing relationship between the two. Overall, Miller is showing how the complications of their relationships eventually lead to an unhappy, untrustworthy, blameful marriage which drove to Proctor’s strenuous time now.

    After watching the movie and reading the play, I am extremely intrigued by the use of blame and how Miller so easily uses people blaming other people to cause an uproar throughout a town. I know this is still extremely common in today’s society, and how it continues to be a major theme throughout daily life, but why is this? Why do people continue to pass blame on others when they could just as easily own up to their own actions? I think people become frightened of the outcomes that might occur, and they think that is the only outlet. It’s an unfortunate way of life that continues to be common, and Miller does a great job of using it to add to the effect of drama in this play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chaney I like what you are saying here and it brought some things to my mind that I hadn't really thought about before especially concerning Miller's way of going back and forth. I would like to ask you though, what matters more, what people say about you or what you think about yourself?

      Delete
    2. And can you truly separate those two things form affecting one another? Won't other's opinions always taint, however slightly, your self image? Does it matter who the other people are? (your mother thinking you work for the devil or someone you have never met hating you for your name even being associated with witchcraft.) I ask because what seemed to really change Proctors mind was when he thought of his children. He dislikes almost all the people that he is in the room with, but the thought of his children wondering if he still talked to the devil seemed to stop Proctor in his tracks.

      Delete
    3. I agree with just about everything you said, except for one thing. I think passing blame to somebody else can appear to be much easier than taking credit for one's actions. The consequences, like you said, are what people fear. Do you think that if we as a society made punishments less severe, more people would voluntarily own up to their actions?

      Delete
  13. Miller's story can directly connected to his time. Throughout the play, people accused are forced to admit to being witches as well as accuse other people to being witches. This can directly connect to Millers time. The power Abigail, and the judges had over the people can connect to Joseph McCarthy. As Abigail says that she is the finger of God, and I think this can directly connect to Joseph McCarthy. Both of them thought that by accusing people or forcing other people to accuse they were doing the right thing. Both trails caused hysteria and fear. In both societies at the time of the trials it was the idea of communism or witchcraft that drove the people into fear and hysteria.

    After reading the play and watching the movie, It really interests me what really happened at the time of both of these trails. It really interested me that such a small action could cause such hysteria and how the hysteria could be fueled so easily. Miller's work really showed me how easily as a society that we can be moved. This really made me think about how easily some people will blame others to save themselves. This prompts me to ask what drives a person to accuse other people to save themselves? Also, could a trial of this size ever happen again in today's society.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that in today's society, the fear of punishment is so great that they would rather watch someone suffer than suffer themselves. Also, revenge and disliking someone is another factor that would make someone want to hurt others. It only takes a few people for other people to conform and then it spreads through everyone.

      Delete
    2. I agree with what you said in regards to the power of a seemingly small act. In "The Crucible", a group of girls dancing in the woods sparked an outbreak of hysteria in the town. It's fascinating to see another event like the Salem Witch Trials, the Red Scare, get blown out of proportion in the 1950s. Personally, I think a trial of this size could happen in today's society. I'm not sure what it would be about, but it's not out of the question.

      Delete
    3. I like that you mentioned that a small action can spark mass hysteria. I believe that people will blame others in order to fit into the mob/majority of society at a time of hysteria. If they are accusers than they see themselves as being immune to being accused.

      Delete
    4. You're right, it is scary that people are so quick to put the blame on others, but we can't be hypocritical because we all blame others when we truly should be reflecting on our own actions. That is a lesson we can learn from the Crucible, don't be so quick to blame others because many times it can be entirely your own fault. It is human nature so it can be hard to stop those instinctual thoughts. There is a possibility that hysteria can sweep the nation, although with our legal system, there will never again be such subjective trials. There is somewhat of a divisive issue across the nation about gun control, I personally believe that the Constitution is the law of the land and it should NEVER be changed. We just need to be able to staunch national hysteria before it starts

      Delete
    5. Fear drives people. If a person does not think he is in danger then he will have no reason to blame others. But if something bad could happen to them, then it would be very easy for a person to throw someone else under the bus to save their own skin. Fear drives people to make decisions quickly, and in most cases those decisions are for their own benefit. As for your second question, a trial of this size could possibly happen in today's society. Not if it was about the same problem, but if their was a matter this serious to the state of a country or area, then a trial this large could probably end up taking place.

      Delete
    6. I think a trial of this size could happen today. There are many controversial issues that people are still fighting over. Corruption of leadership will never go away and this will always cause conflict.

      Delete
    7. I really like your comparison between Abigail Williams and Joseph McCarthy. Both of these people seemed very insecure and like they needed the attention in order to boost themselves up. It was almost as if they were looking to stir up trouble, but in the grand scheme of things, they caused mass hysterias that negatively affected many people. How do you think these two were able to cause such a scare without having evidence to back themselves up?

      Delete
  14. 3. As a result of reading The Crucible, I am more interested in the effects of McCarthyism than the actual events in Salem. It is very interesting that Miller’s personal experiences with McCarthyism and the time period in which the book was written affects how we interpret the novel. Miller is able to portray the effects of mass hysteria and how it influences people to act rashly.The era in which Miller wrote The Crucible is reflected in the novel. In the modern age, information travels quickly and we are able to determine what is true and what is false. However, we still fall victim to hoaxes and information that taints a person’s image. The Crucible still remains relevant in this age because it has the universal theme of self-preservation. People will do anything to save themselves from harm. This can be seen in Abigail Williams and the other teenage of girls of Salem who are adapted from historical figures in Salem. What interests me the most is why the girls cried out in the first place, was it a cry for attention, an elaborate joke, etc.

    1. When I read Act 4, what spoke to me the most was how Proctor had the chance to save his life, but he would not because he had to sign his name away. Proctor was one signature away from his life being saved, but he knew that his name was the only thing that he had left. To Proctor, the paper was a material object just there to prove his word. “You will not use me! I am no Sarah Good or Tituba, I am John Proctor! You will not use me! It is no part of salvation that you should use me.” In Proctor’s eyes he had already been saved, but to the eyes of townspeople he had not been saved until he had given his name to them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you think that says about the townspeople, if they say that the devil is the enemy and the only way to rid yourself of the devil is to apologise to God and yet they need the paper saying that he is a witch to prove to the others that they are catching witches, to validate their insane crusade and have everyone think that they are the good ones. And what do you think it says about Proctor that in his most pressured moment, he still takes the time to mention how he believes that he is better than Sarah Good and Tituba.

      Delete
    2. I had the same thoughts as you about the Salem witch trials and McCarthyism. Both are interesting in their own right, but McCarthyism happened at a time of complete documentation and with points from all sides. It's more easily able to find info detailing the more exact conditions of Joseph McCarthy and the hunt for Communists than it is with the Salem witch trials.

      Delete
    3. Why do you think that the townspeople thought he hadn't been saved until he gave his name? What does that pressure show about Puritans and ideals of that time?

      Delete
  15. 1.The end of this Act was incredibly powerful overall but nothing resonated with me quite as much as John Proctor’s decision to forfeit his life so he could keep his integrity. Originally he wanted his life and was willingly to sign the false testimony but after an intense struggle with his conscience he decided he would rather die honest and without releasing false accusations upon his friends. The most powerful quote in the Act is towards the end when Hale is begging Proctor to sign the testimony and Proctor refuses, “Proctor, his eyes full of tears: ‘I can. And there’s your first marvel, that I can. You have made your magic now, for now I do think I see some shred of goodness in John Proctor. Not enough to weave a banner with, but white enough to keep it from such dogs.’ Elizabeth, in a burst of terror, rushes to him and weeps against his hand. ‘Give them no tear! Tears pleasure them! Show honor now, show a stony heart and sink them with it!’ He has lifted her, and kisses her now with great passion,” (Miller 144). These are Proctor’s final words in the play and his final words ever towards Elizabeth, this is his goodbye. He knows that he is going to hang, leave his children fatherless, his wife widowed and yet he still marches on. John Proctor knows that he has sinned but on his last morning he sees a glimmer of goodness inside himself and makes the powerful decision to preserve it by dying with his integrity and his honor. This part caused me to reflect on my life, my sins, and especially the value of integrity. In our current world it often seems that integrity and honor have no place, it is better to lie and play the game of life wearing your poker face than to be honest. The question I extend to you is, what defines a good person? What is the value of integrity?


    3. After reading The Crucible I have a very different perspective of the events in Salem in 1692. Before reading the play, even before this class, I had read a considerable amount about the trials and knew many of the names of the accused. I sympathized with them and thought about it purely as a tragedy based on religious hysteria. In my mind I related it to the European witch hunts that started in the 15th century. Arthur Miller’s way of writing this play changed how I thought about it greatly. He put faces, so to speak, to the names, gave the people personalities, words, and sins. I know that he did this for dramatics in the play however it made me realize that there nineteen people really did hang, one was pressed, and countless others died in prison. Arthur Miller forced me to empathize with the people and made them more than shadowed names from 300 years ago. I now want to go back to my readings and try to imagine more of what the people felt like as they experienced these real events. I am walking away with a greater understanding and respect of events that happened long before I existed. I believe that Arthur Miller is striving to teach us the value of integrity and the value of human conscience. He also shows, especially in the characters of Parris and Abigail Williams, how far people are willing to go to preserve themselves and their image.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The value of integrity- there is a quote from "The Catcher in the Rye" that is as follows "Here's what he said: 'The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one.'" (24.56) I pose a question in response to your question- was what he did choosing integrity, or was it a poorly thought out, rash romantic and possibly even cowardly decision to die as opposed to living with a soiled name?

      Delete
    2. I agree, reading this book helped me to empathize with those on both sides, but mostly the accused. The horrible thing about the Crucible is that it was real people and a lot of the story actually happened although some of it was made up. I too am feeling a deeper respect of what really occurred in the Salem Witch Trials. I realize it was just a bunch of people passing the baton of blame along to almost everyone in the town, you couldn't do anything right in those times.We just need to learn from this story because it has an endless amount of symbolism and merit in the real world.

      Delete
  16. As I read Act 4, the most emotional part for me was when Proctor had already signed the confession, and was now refusing to have his confession be posted in the village. Proctor pleaded that his confession before God and a room full of people was enough, and shouts, "You will not use me! I am no Sarah Good or Tituba, I am John Proctor! You will not use me! It is no part of salvation that you should use me!"(p.142-143) This part spoke to me because he was completely right, and was speaking so honestly about what the reader knows to be true, that these people who claimed that they only wanted him to surrender himself to God actually were more interested in making his confessing public to justify their search and murder of witches. Proctors pride also showed through in this declaration, as he revealed his superiority complex that even now, at his lowest, when he is telling a lie that he believes will damn him to hell in order to save his life, he still finds it outrageous that he should be treated like someone that he believes are less than him.
    As a result of reading the play and seeing the movie, I am certainly more horrified by what happened in Salem in 1692, and in a way, that makes me care more about it. I never before looked into the exact number of casualties, and the book brought up interesting aspects of the Salem trials that I had not considered, like in Act 4 when the amount of land, crops, animals children left unattended had an effect and was noticed. The book humanized the victims of unfair accusations, not just how tragic their deaths were but also how horrible their lives, as soon as someone would suggest that they may be a witch. It reveals truths of motivations that still are prevalent, and shows how social norms that are no longer readily accepted can shape someone's way of living.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A certain amount of interest comes from emotion towards something, whether it be anger or terror or horror or happiness or sadness and so on. The Salem witch trials were interesting because of their content and how violently people were made pariahs all because of the accusations of a young girl. The way it shows how mob mentalities work even if people feel they might not be able to be succumbed to the crowd is a powerful reminder of all that has happened in the world due to such power.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree when you stated that the people were more interested in making his confession public to justify their search and murder of witches. I think that this showed that the people did feel bad about their actions. And before they could stop they took it too far, and so they needed people to blame. They needed people who were weak spirited to confess, to back up their actions.

      Delete
    3. Courtney, I really liked how you touched on some of the overlooked parts of a story. We tend to focus on the deaths that came from the Salem Witch Trials, but the lives of the people after they were accused were pretty horrible as well. I also noticed that Miller mentioned all of the animals and children that were left unattended, and I think the purpose of including this was to get the reader to pay attention to the accidental effects of people's actions.

      Delete
  17. The definition of an allegory from what I have an understanding of it is that it is a different form of something else, a representation of something to a certain degree that does not have the same aesthetic but the same idea. The Crucible is an allegory for the time Miller wrote it, during the era of McCarthyism. Abigail Williams is the definite portrayal of Joseph McCarthy, the senator who decided the way to appeal to the frightened people of the time was to out anyone and everyone as potential confirmed Communists. Her manner of sinking all those around her to keep herself afloat by means of witch accusation mirrors McCarthy almost exactly. Reverend Parris is an allegory for those who formed committees and the like to copy McCarthy's ways and save themselves in the process. Those in a position of power, similar to Parris, were always in danger of being called out a Communist by McCarthy and his groupies. John Proctor is similar to most American heroes, and I believe mirrors Miller himself. Not to the T, but he still has similar facets. John was a man who was seen as being an outsider and suspicious in his own right, similar to Miller. Proctor wanted to avoid unnecessary conflict and try and keep things civilized, and Miller wanted a similar situation. Both in the end were asked something too great of them to consider, Proctor to lie that he did in fact see the Devil to avoid the noose, and Miller to out Communists to the government.

    Before the Crucible, I had a pretty basic understanding of the Salem witch trials. I knew that it was caused due to religious conflict and that many innocent people died for the sake of witchcraft. I’ve learned on a whole new level the atrocities that occured at Salem, as well as how well the Crucible uses the events at Salem to translate over to McCarthyism. In terms of interest, I find that anything else I could learn about the Salem witch trials would be greatly appreciated though not wholly necessary, as I have quite a bit of info about its events and timeline as I need to understand it well. My interest from before I read the Crucible has definitely increased I’d say, as well as about McCarthyism, though it is a similar boat I find myself in as I understand both fairly well with what I have learned. On a moral and humane route, I find that the reactions posed by the characters of the story definitely interest me, as I am always interested in why people do the things they do and react they way they do. Miller’s story frames many different points of view and choices in different but equal lights, highlighting how no one can react the same way under similar conditions as everyone is different. What this says about my interest, I do not know, but I am interested in why people are how they are and Miller’s book definitely sates me in that category. I can walk away having a better understanding of humanity and human morality in such a way that all facets are offered up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought it was interesting when you wondered why people are the way that they are. And sure environment, people around them play a huge role but I think that people are the way they are, based on their belief of the world. If they believe that the world is bad, they will fear the people and cultures in it. They will push people away and act irrationally. But if they believe that their is good in the world, then they will illuminate that, and their actions will reflect forgiveness and goodness.

      Delete
    2. Kara, it's interesting that people react differently to the same environment. I think that peoples past experiences play a huge role in how they react to the present. But what about instinct? Do you think that people have inherent qualities that control them in a life or death situation?

      Delete
  18. In The Crucible by Arthur Miller, I found it very intriguing that John Proctor was so fond of his pride almost as though it was the only thing he had. As a puritan, one had many standards to uphold, such as, if one was a man, doing laborious work all day and all night for a family, having kids, going to church every Sunday, bringing home money, etc. There were so many standards that it was almost hard to be anything but what the standards carved out. Proctor, accused of witchery, was willing to sign away his name, his identity, for his life. But then, just in the nick of time, Proctor realized the reality of his actions and knew that, should he give the officials his confession, his name would be stained with the shame of witchcraft. All that he ever had been and all that he ever would be, gone, just so he could live out the rest of his life in jail. Without his name, all he would ever be was another puritan. Without his name, no one would ever remember him as John Proctor, he who brought reason to the town of Salem, nor any other thing that did not have to do with being a puritan. Proctor, after being asked why he will not let the court have his name, exclaims, “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (Miller 143). He ultimately said that he does not even care to live if he could not have his name, his identity. Miller illustrates how, without character, it is useless to live; he explains that if one is only known for their background, why even know them?

    What happened in Salem is something that people in high school english can very easily reference when speaking about mob mentality, just like the Holocaust. The puritans made up one of the most rigorously conformist societies in history, and I personally love learning about events in which people basically went completely crazy. I like to think that if a situation like that arose in my time, I would have the brains to not be a part of it, but would I really? The Crucible teaches us about what happens when everyone mindlessly goes along with everyone else. Additionally, the play teaches us about how merciless people can be when they really want to. In this case, it can be seen from the actions of many people, however one example uses Abigail Williams. Abigail used the situation to exact revenge on her enemies, be them new or old. She took advantage of her power in order to make them hang. She accused many people of witchcraft and knew that they would all either hang or spend the rest of their lives in jail. From her actions, we can learn that our actions do have real effects on others and that we should place blame casually.

    Questions:

    Would you have preferred to die with your pride or live out the rest of your days in a jail cell without it? Why or why not?

    Should Proctor have confessed to sleeping with Abigail if he would also be punished? Is it right to tell the truth and bring justice if the truth-teller's name is also tarnished?

    Why is it that sometimes people simply do not care about the opinions of others?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. - Similarly to you, I was very intrigued by Proctor's pride. For me, your first question depends on the sort of pride we are talking about. If the pride is my evaluation of who I am, then I would much rather die proud to know myself honest to my virtues. If the pride created a haughty or arrogant attitude that made it impossible for me to connect to other people, then I would much rather quit that pride for my life. Your last question reminded me of something I've been told. What do you think of the comment that in high school no one cares what you say and are just waiting to speak. I would think that people don't care about other's opinions because they assume they are right or they are only trying to further themselves in life and don't care about the content or discussions that happen along the way.

      Delete
    2. Answering your second question about Proctor, Proctor should have confessed to sleeping with Abigail because at that moment, he was showing how he is an honest man who is not highly influenced by others and yet, was still lying for the Puritan standards of living. If Proctor was going to die anyway, why not actually die by showing he has sinned and he acknowledges it? In the last part of Act 4, Proctor would have displayed what he wanted to make clear if he revealed what he was hiding without shame.

      Delete
    3. In response to your second question, I think that Proctor should have confessed to sleeping with Abigail even though he would pay a price. Keep in mind that his reputation was already in question for not keeping all the puritain values. Without some confession of his own his loved ones and many other innocent people would have payed the price for crimes that they didn't commit. It's not only right to tell the truth and bring justice, but by admitting his own mistakes Proctor betters himself and comes to terms with his flaws.

      Delete
  19. I resonate strongly with the last point you make with the first paragraph: why even know someone if they are but the culmination of their fathers before them? A person's life can be dictated by many different things, and only living by who you are to others via your background is only living life to the minimum. Knowing someone who is the more than the sum of their parts is a worthwhile relationship, and the way Proctor understands that when his public and private self collided, he lost the way to live without shame and understanding anymore. He became but the sum of his parts in his final moments, and could not stand being that man anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 1) In Act 4, I found the discussion between Sarah Good and Tituba to evoke the most emotion. How they were so desperate to escape, even if it meant dying, that their minds snapped and turned to the Devil as the answer. This showed the atrocity of their time spent in jail, as well as their unbelievable anguish. The quote I found to be the most powerful was when Elizabeth was describing Giles’ death. “They say he give them but two words. ‘More weight,’ he says. And died” (135). This shows not only the determination, but also the love that a person can posses. Giles felt guilty for mentioning his wife’s fondness for reading to Hale, feeling that her imprisonment was his fault. Because of this, he later refused to say who had given him information regarding Abigail, causing him to be put in prison. He later protects his sons, dying rather than answer the charge of being a wizard. This allowed his sons to take possession of his lands when he died. All of this paints a picture of a strong, loving man who would do anything for the people he loves.

    3) After reading the play and seeing the movie, I am more interested in learning how emotions such as love, hatred, pride, and paranoia influence people everyday and throughout their entire life. Miller plays around with so many emotions, as well as touching a little on the 7 deadly sins and 7 virtues. Because of this, I walk away with a greater understanding of human reactions, as well as being able to look at my own reactions, pondering whether I am following the crowd without thinking, or if I am actually feeling something for myself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Katherine, I like your thoughts about walking away from this book with a better knowledge of human reactions, but what intrigues me is your point about following the crowd blindly or thinking for yourself. I think that as individual people, we should know how to work things out for ourselves, but also know the proper time to go with the flow of the crowd, so I like how you combined those two ideas into one point. I have a question for you: do you think it is better to follow the crowd, or think completely for yourself? Can you have only one, or do you need both to function in society?

      Delete
    2. Katherine, I really liked your takeaway from the book relating to how emotion influences us daily. I think that the two biggest influential emotions in the types of situations of The Crucible and The Red Scare are pride and paranoia. Paranoia leads people to find any possible explanation for a situation that they can't explain. Also, pride leads people to not admit to their mistakes and instead blame others for things they may not have done. I agree that this book has made me analyze my own actions to make sure that a certain emotion is not negatively influencing them.

      Delete
  21. 1.The ending of this play was definitely packed with emotion and feelings. To see Proctor evoke that much emotion was powerful, especially right before his untimely death. The Crucible was a beautifully constructed play, it displayed the slow deconstruction of the townspeople's tough exteriors to expose who they really were. Proctor finally opened up because he was tired of all the mental games people were playing with each other, avoiding the elephant in the room. He was fed up with the lies and deceit that were spread all throughout the play. Proctor had a powerful quote that summed up everything he was really thinking (the second to last quote on page 143) "I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name." He had done the opposite of what he really wanted to do, he sold his soul by exposing others. He already did what they wanted him to, he just didn’t want to sign away his name, to know that he confessed was enough, it was unnecessary to add his name to the document and take away his last shred of remaining dignity. Something about signing your name is very symbolic, it means more than just any grouping of letters, it holds power and dignity with it. Not to mention all the legalities of signing your name, which holds you responsible for whatever may be on the document.

    3. The Salem Witch Trials are a dark part of history, and they show what people are really possible of when prompted by fear, anger, or other base feelings. The Red Scare was another reflection of detestable human behavior and the mob mentality. These are parts of history that can be learned from, and they should be studied and we can try to never let them happen again. Besides the societal lessons that can be learned, there are smaller scale lessons to be learned, especially the fact that you shouldn’t cheat on your wife, and even worse with a teenage girl. Infidelity is a foundational human mistake that has been made ever since humans were monogamous. Besides the sexual desire, it can stem from a feeling of loneliness and rejection. It seems in the Crucible that it brought Proctor and Elizabeth closer together probably because she knew of his sins and they were no longer hidden from her. It seems that there was always love between them, but it was reignited when everything was on the table and they had talked through their blatant issues and resolved them as best they could. This is a good lesson, that secrets are never a good thing, they create tension and ruin relationships that could have been healthy. Societies need to work together and work through the apparent issues, it’s all about love and forgiveness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your thoughts on the relationship between Proctor and Elizabeth. Their relationship is able to show the power of forgiveness between the two before Proctor's death. Their relationship is a good example on the issue of honesty between people and the power of forgiveness.

      Delete
  22. 2. I think Abigail parallels Joseph McCarthy. Both characters claimed they had a list or knew who was deemed undesirable by society; either Communist or a witch. They both had an agenda to make their better. They claimed to be saviors that were cleansing the population of the devil but their true motives had more personal motivation. Abigail wanted attention and to remove Goody Proctor to free Proctor for her own desires. She also removed enemies or people who had hurt her. McCarthy was similar in the way he functioned. He wanted the attention and anyone who attacked him for his aggressive lies would be called to the hearings. The way the questions were asked to the assumed witches in Salem also paralleled how the McCarthy hearings were directed. The questions were framed in a way where the accused was forced to somehow admit that they were what they were accused of. They had no leeway to explain that they weren't criminals. They were then forced to accuse other people, innocent people, to save themselves. The two processes of how new defendants were determined was very similar.
    3. Because of the play, I am somewhat more fascinated in what happened in Salem during the Witch Trials and in the McCarthy hearings. Through his play, Miller suggests that the majority of issues and conflicts that surfaced during these two parallel events were products of pride. A further study and analysis of the hearings and witch trials would be excellent for a study in pride and how pride motivates social interaction. Miller also explores how pride influences one's self. One of my favorite lines is when Elizabeth addressed John's pride; "John, it come to naught that I should forgive you, if you'll not forgive yourself. Now he turns away a little, in great agony. It is not my soul, John, it is yours" (Miller 136). Elizabeth doesn't directly acknowledge John's pride but mentions that he is the one who is holding on to his sin and letting it fester inside. He is too prideful to admit he made a mistake to let the mistake go. Elizabeth also states, "Do what you will. But let none be your judge. There be no higher judge under Heaven than Proctor is!" (Miller 137), when John speaks of falsely confessing. The way Proctor holds himself and sees himself, the status of his pride, is the only thing that matters. In fact, he is the only person who will truly ever know himself and if he is honest and evaluates himself with clear eyes, then he will know who he truly is and that is all that matters. Society's image of people becomes convoluted from gossip and lies. An individual is the only person who can ever judge their own character. All conflicts with character someone suffers over are constraints that they puts on themselves. Miller knew that it didn't matter how society saw him or the other HUAC victims. They all knew what they were in their own minds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How does someone's opinion of themselves dictate their attitude and role in society?

      Delete
    2. I love your thoughts and ideas about pride in your second paragraph and I definitely agree that both events can be directly related to pride. For your question, I think it could result in two different extremes. One is pure confidence. If they have forgiven themselves for their mistakes they really aren't going to care what other people think. The only would be guilt and the feeling that you will never be good enough. This would happen if the person had not forgiven their own sins. And I think these two attitudes would greatly affect how people treat you. Somewhat like Elizabeth says, how can you expect a society to forgive and respect you if you can't forgive yourself. If you have forgiven yourself it becomes easier for other people to forgive you.

      Delete
    3. I think that someone's opinion of themselves makes a huge effect on their role in society. If you look at most leaders in both the Crucible and present day they are normally very confident and have a high opinion of themselves. If you look at the leaders in The Crucible, for example Paris, we can see that he sees himself in the beginning or the play as very righteous and fit to lead the town of Salem but as things go bad in Salem he loses this confidence and we see his authority and presence also decrease. I think Reverend Paris is a very good example of how self image can effect your role in society.

      Delete
  23. 1. In act 4, what stood out to me most was when Proctor stood up for himself to keep his dignity. “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (142). This quote is the most powerful because in it John refuses to be known as something that he is not, and that is something that takes a lot of courage and dignity to do. I think that is what Miller is trying to show through this quote; in a circumstance such as this, it would be more important to die with your dignity than to live a lie known by all. John Proctor was practically in a living hell with the shame of his wrongdoings of adultery, and he will not go through that again for something that he didn’t do wrong. While I wasn’t too fond of John Proctor in the story, I would say I was proud of him for dying the way he did. It showed true character upon his part and revealed the that your dignity is not something that should be given away; and rather you should hold it close and do your best to protect it, even it that means taking drastic measures.

    3. I am definitely more interested with what happened in Salem 1692 and Miller’s work prompts this interest by how he put all these events into play. The events that happened were completely ludicrous, and if reading without any background knowledge, The Crucible could have been mistaken for a fiction piece. Granted, what happened in the play didn’t happen exactly as it did in 1692 but it was not far off. Reading this book really makes you question the why and how of history. How could someone let something like this happen and why did it happen? What does that say about human nature? I think that biggest thing that I learned on a humanistic level from this play is that people will throw others under the bus faster than you can possibly imagine if it means saving themselves. I also learned that having pride in your name and holding your dignity close is an extremely important thing to do.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Questions: At what point does dying with your dignity become most important than living a lie and having no dignity?

    What changed in John from the moment he signed the paper to the moment where he lifted it up and kept it from everyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that even though it is a very hard thing to do, I would rather die with my dignity because otherwise you would live the rest of your life with the guilt of your lie. I think that people will look at you in a better way, like proctor, if you chose to stay with what you believe until the end instead of choosing to give up your beliefs for a life in guilt.

      Delete
    2. Kayla, I like the points that you bring up! I think that only when you can no longer live with yourself for lying is the point at which you should either die with dignity, or realize you should have died with dignity earlier. Personally, I hate the feeling of guilt when I do lie to protect myself, so I would probably want to die with my name and my dignity, no matter how hard it was. I think that John realized what he was committing himself to when it came time to sign the paper, and he couldn't do it! It seems as though he had a change of heart, and perhaps he felt like to make everything up to himself and Elizabeth, knew that he could tell the truth for the last time.

      Delete
  25. 1. One quote that speaks to me was at the end of the act, when John Proctor has agreed to confess, but doesn’t want to sign his name to his confession, “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” Proctor here is almost defending his name, saying how we only get one name in our lifetimes, and how he doesn’t want his name to be associated with lies. When Proctor said he would confess to witchcraft, he was sparing himself from hanging, but then sentenced himself to dying when he wouldn’t sign the paper. He had wanted to live, but then wanted more to be honest with himself than live with the guilt of a lie. This leads me to the question, what would you have done in Proctor’s case?
    Would you have died with honor, and the peace that you did the right thing, or live with the guilt of having lied? How do we tell the difference between these two ideas based on our consciences?

    3. Within The Crucible, Miller prompts emotions in the reader, spurring them to become at least somewhat interested in the Salem witch trials of 1692. For me personally, I have always thought the witch trials were interesting, but reading this text has provided me with more facts and evidence about the trials, making me want to learn more about the trials. It seems as though Miller connects us with the characters in each act, and we start to feel emotions for them, and in turn, we want to learn about the real life version of these people, and the rest of the trials. I think that this play has taught us many lessons about honesty, and blame, and responsibility that we can take away from it. For example, in the book, characters are frequently blaming each other for sins they’ve committed, but also to turn the attention away from themselves. Because there are so many people being accused of witchcraft, people will do whatever they can to save their own lives, and so rely on scapegoats to give them security. In modern society today, people are constantly blaming other people for their mistakes, whether in life or work or whatever they do. However, one lesson we can take away from the crucible is to be honest, and take responsibility for our actions. Just like John Proctor in the end of this act, if we take responsibility for what we have done, and know if what we are doing is wrong or right, everything will turn out well in the end. I think it is important as humans to be honest with each other, as all good relationships are built upon trust and truthfulness, and if we can also bring responsibility into the picture, our world today would be much more solid in connections and relationships.
    How does Miller portray the similarities between our society today, and the Puritan society, based off of blame and scapegoating?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To answer your first questions is basically saying how driven are you in your beliefs? I think we all hope if someone wants to make us do something we disagree with we will suffer the consequences and stay true to our self. However, the dedication required to do such an act is unbelievable. Proctor was willing to die rather that have his name tainted with lies.

      Also, I like the idea you bring up of scapegoating in society. Not only was this play an allegory for HUAC in the Cold War, but it also models problems much deeper down such as scapegoating. Abigail would rather killed off Proctor and Elizabeth (after she realized she couldn't be with Proctor herself) rather than fess up for having the affair. One could also say how all the victims were simply scapegoats in society, taking the blame for the bigger problems the town was facing, such as the fact that children are choosing who will be their next victim.

      Delete
  26. What evoked the most emotion to me in this Act was the scene between Proctor and Elizabeth. This scene showed how Elizabeth truly felt about everything. The quote that spoke the most to me was when Elizabeth states, “ I never knew how I should say my love. It were a cold house I kept!”(Miller 137). I think that this line is so powerful because it shows that Elizabeth blames herself. When the line states “I never knew how I should say my love” I think it reflects the fact that Elizabeth blames herself for Proctor cheating on her. Because she is saying that maybe if she were more open with her feelings then maybe Proctor wouldn’t have even for a second thought about cheating on her. Then when the line says “It were a cold house I kept!” She’s saying that her feelings weren’t ever expressed so Proctor was never able to realize her love and affection for him. And when the line stated the word “cold” I think that this resembles neglect. That because she never expressed her feelings that it neglected the relationship. This quote evoked the most emotion in me because it was heartbreaking that Elizabeth blames herself. That she believed that it was truly her fault, and sort of started to beat herself up about it.
    I’m more interested in what happened during McCarthyism in the 1950s because what actually happened in Salem was based on McCarthyism. Joseph McCarthy called people out for being communists when in fact he didn’t even have any proof. Just like how the girls were blaming others for being witches, for contacting the devil, and sending their spirits out. When in fact the only “proof” that they had were their words. There were false accusations that were made and innocent people that were accused in Salem of 1692. The idea of the importance of trust is emphasized, but through opposing actions. We see close friends turning against each other, coming up with lies, and completely bringing out the worst in each other. Trust is the most important factor in relationships and without it, there’s nothing. What I took away from this play was that it, in a way, it brought to life the reality of what fear could cause people to do. It made me realize that fear isn’t just an emotion. It’s a disease, that spreads through one’s thoughts and manifests itself deep in their minds. It controls their actions and makes them do things that would normally not follow their moral beliefs. Fear causes relationships to be broken, for people around us to be affected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really like your thoughts on fear, and how it is not just an emotion but a disease. Because, ultimately, the Salem Witch Trials happened because everyone in the town was so afraid of death and of being called out. It was the same thing with McCarthyism. Everyone was so afraid of Communism that the society took rash actions to create a sense of security. It's very interesting to think about the types of things that fear can make us do, but unfortunately we can still see fear working in our world today.

      Delete
    2. Michelle, I like your analysis of emotion in response to proof. I didn't really think about how the relationship between the girls evolved over time. Do you think all the girls really brought out the worst in each other or did trust keep them together? What is stronger, fear or trust?

      Delete
  27. 2. Many similarities can be seen between The Crucible and the events during McCarthyism. The biggest parallel I can see is between Proctor and Miller. During McCarthyism, Arthur Miller refuses to accuse anyone of communism. Miller is convicted of contempt, which means he is being disrespectful and uncooperative to the court. In The Crucible, John Proctor refuses to accuse anyone of witchcraft, or even admit to it himself, even when he knows admittance would save his life. Proctor is put into jail and sentenced to hanging for contempt. Both Proctor and Miller ultimately refuse to lie, even if they had lied before. I can also see parallels between McCarthy and Abigail. Senator John McCarthy accused many people of communism during the 1950's Red Scare, and he supposedly had a list of people he knew were Communist. Similarly, Abigail had a list in her head of the people she had accused of being witches. Both McCarthy and Abigail are the ones doing the accusing. Another easy parallel to see is between the courts in both The Crucible and in the 1950's. Both courts were clearly biased towards the accuser, and evidence against the accuser was considered an attack on the court. In the 1950's, Arthur Miller was told he was not cooperating with the court when he told the court that he did not know of any communists. Many parallels can be drawn between The Crucible and the happenings in America during the 1950's.


    3. After reading the book and seeing most of the movie, I am most interested in learning what actually happened during McCarthyism in the 1950's. Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible with the events going on around him in mind, and I'm sure there are many parallels that we cannot see. For example, Proctor committed infidelity and lied, and Proctor is most closely related to Arthur Miller. However, I am not sure what sins Miller commited before ultimately doing the right thing. The Crucible has made me think about why we as people are so quick to find an explanation for strange happenings, and why blaming other people is usually our first reaction. We as a society are so desperate for explanations that we will create them in extremely unlikely places. This play should be a wakeup call for us as humans to stay rational and not turn to extreme explanations or actions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My questions for you are:
      Do you ever find yourself blaming others or trying to find explanations for things you can't explain?
      Why do you think that doing these things gives us a sense of security?

      Delete
    2. To answer your second question, I think as a society they did need to rationalize the things the didn't know at the time. I think the biggest thing that they did was find a scape goat to keep the attention off them.

      Delete
  28. 2. The Crucible by Arthur Miller is an exhibit of an allegory to the Red Scare in the 1950s due to the fact that many of the characters and aspects of the story connect to those of the 50s, including Abigail Williams, Reverend Hale, and Judge Danforth. The first, and most important, Abigail Williams is can be directly compared to Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy, much like Abby, was confident that his numerous accusations of people being communists was helping cleanse society. He used these accusation to benefit his own political career and to boost his approval rating, exactly as Abigail did to improve how the town and John Proctor sees her. Another parallel to the events in the 60s is the similarity of the combination of Reverend Hale and Judge Danforth to the HUAC, or the House Un-American Activities Committee. HUAC was established in 1938, and it’s main objective was to discover Communists in the US during the Cold War. The aspect of finding Communists connects to Reverend Hale, his purpose was to find the witches of Salem through investigating accusations. HUAC was also found to be extremely intimidating and dramatic when talking about the threat of communism in the United States, similar to Judge Danforth. Danforth believed that the threat of witches in Salem was extremely real and dangerous, which then leads to very pressuring questioning, “It may be well that Mary Warren has been conquered by Satan, who sends her here to distract our sacred purpose. If so, her neck will break for it” (Miller 102). Danforth sees the problem of witchcraft so severe that he threatens to hang many girls for lying. Overall, undeniable parallels can be displayed between the Red Scare in the 1950s and the Salem witch trials as exhibited in The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

    3. Because of reading The Crucible and watching the movie based on it, I’m most interested in seeing how scapegoating and have affected parts of history, as it did in Salem and the Red Scare. Blame and anxiety, as I’ve learned from the book, are interesting dynamics of human nature. They are embedded in everyone, and can lead to extreme division, gain in support, punishment, and much more. In The Crucible, scapegoating is used as a way to save one’s life and take another's. During the Red Scare, McCarthy used anxiety to gain support as a politician. I’m interested in seeing more examples of such drastic changes in a culture or events that were caused by hysteria rooted from scapegoating and anxiety.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Question 2: The Crucible is used as an allegory for the time period which miller lived in throughout the text. The characters, events and setting of the Crucible were specifically crafted to be a political allegorical reference to Miller’s time specifically. One perfect example is the character John Proctor. Although he has sins of his own he would rather die than admit to a crime he didn't do. The amount of pride that John Proctor showed correlates to the pride that the artists blacklisted during Miller’s time defended while being accused as traitors to the US. Miller Created this tragic character to perpetuate the . Another allegorical reference miller purposely created is the ridiculous reasoning of the court. Witchcraft just like the spying crimes of the 1950’s are invisible crimes. Miller created the court hearings to suggest that with no concrete evidence to back up a crime the blame game can get out of hand. In salem the blame game resulted in numerous hangings and in Miller’s time that represented the blacklist and how it’s effects ruined lives.

    As a result of reading Miller's play I am more interested in the extent a person will go to prove something they think is right. Proctor goes to all extremes to keep his pride after being charged in the court. He wholeheartedly believes he is right and gives up his life for it. In the end I don't think that proctor proved anything to the people in salem as they didn't hear anything he had to say. So did he prove anything? As the reader I think we take away that doing what you think is right can be detrimental to not only yourself but also others.

    ReplyDelete
  30. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 1. During Act 4, John Proctor spoke to me the most. Throughout acts 1 through 3, he was the voice of reason in the book. He thought more rationally than any other character presented in the book. He did not give into the hysteria of the Devil at any point until act 4, and that made what he did very powerful in the end. In act 4 he is faced with the toughest decision he will ever have to make. Either confess to witchcraft and live, or tell the truth and be hung. He decides that the best option for himself and his family is to confess and live, but that changes when he finds out the implications. He must sign that he has committed witchcraft so it can be nailed to the church for the whole town to see. He quickly realizes that isn’t who he is. He cannot lie and be thought of that way because it is not the truth. His dignity would be gone and his name would be ruined. Proctor cries, “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (Miller 143). In that moment Proctor realizes what he must do. He will not confess to witchcraft and be hung. He would leave the world as who he really is and he has made peace with that and he dies as the one person who stayed true to himself. John Proctor gave up everything to do what was right and that is very powerful in my mind. He gave his life to tell the truth and many people would not do that in the story. That quote shows just how important the truth was to him and he could not bear to lie and save his life. He never faltered from his beliefs and that is the most powerful part of act 4.

    3. I am very intrigued by what actually occurred in Salem now that I have read The Crucible. The paranoia that was created in the book seems like it would be very hard to create in the real world and it would be interesting to find out just how an idea could end up controlling so many people. This goes for McCarthyism as well. The pure terror that the people in Salem faced really makes me interested. It amazes me that so many people could just believe something like this without seeing any actual evidence of it and that is what interests me the most about Miller’s work. At the time of the trials in Salem, they lived in a very strictly Puritan society. That made it very hard for anyone to break away from the social norms of that time and place. When the Witch Trials occurred that played a huge factor. It is very likely that many people disagreed with the idea that people among them had partnered with the Devil to wreak havoc on the town. But it would be extremely hard to disagree with that idea since many people had adopted it and became increasingly paranoid by it. So I am very interested in how these social norms affected the outcome of the witch trials and mcCarthyism.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The mindset of blind faith spoke to me very strongly throughout this act. The background of the puritan shows that their religion is the most important thing to them. This is completely disregarded throughout the story as people falsely confess to witchcraft. Instead Proctor puts unknowing faith in what will come in the afterlife. Rebecca: “Let you fear nothing! Another judgement waits us all!” Miller puts this quote in to show the reader the beliefs of the Puritan culture. Proctor chooses his death, having faith that it will be rewarded later in the afterlife. Elizabeth: “He have his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him!” This quote does a good job showing the reader the character motivation behind what Proctor chooses. It shows that he would rather be good and pure to his religion rather than his life on earth. This choice is powerful because in our culture there is lots of materialism and all about yourself. Giving your life up for the greater good is something that lots of people, including me, could not give up.


    3. After reading Miller's play it has definitely sparked my interest. The dynamic of the culture combined with the corrupt leaders makes this play remain current and is similar to today's culture and leadership. It intrigues me how author used blame along with self preservation to show the reader how the hysteria spread. The play also sparked my interest to see when these principles have been used in other cases in history. What happened in Salem and then again with McCarthyism is very similar because it both stems down from people abusing their leadership. In both stories official blinding accused someone having to evidence to back this claim. After reading this play I have a better understanding of how power and blame can affect a culture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. questions
      how do the trials relate to a current issue?
      how did the leaders corruption play a part in increasing the hysteria?

      Delete
    2. Grant-
      To answer your questions, I think that the trials relate to a lot of current issues. It is a game of he said, she said. Now a days, there is typically more evidence to back up an accusation, but rarely does the evidence reveal the entire story.
      I think the leaders corruption plays a huge role in the increasing hysteria because they are backing the accused into a corner by saying that they need to admit to witch craft whether or not they actually committed it, otherwise they will be sentenced to death. These people aren't given much of a choice, either lie and live, or tell the truth and die.

      Delete
  33. 1) Act four was a very powerful act in The Crucible that pulled your heartstrings. This text really evoked emotion for me when John wouldn’t allow the document upon which he signed to be placed on the church door. He knew that lying was a sin, even though it would save his life. After signing the document, Proctor had a sudden pang of conscience where he realized that lying would do him no good. “Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (p. 143) This quote is so powerful because by signing the paper, he sold out his own soul for lying. He would rather die for the sake of his name than to cave into the publicity of being charged with witchcraft. The state of his soul is unknown, so to have an un-blackened name left for him on earth is more meaningful than having a blackened name and possibly no life beyond death.

    3)As a result of reading the play and seeing the movie, I am very interested in both McCarthyism and what actually happened in Salem in 1692. Even though these events happened a few hundred years apart, they are both driven by fear and self preservation. That is why they both interest me. I find it fascinating that fear, possibly of death, or jail time can drive somebody to take blame and place it on a more suspecting person or group. Since this has happened more than one time throughout history, I hope people learn to stay calm in the case of a crisis and not panic, thus spreading fear on a much larger scale than it began. The human race needs to work together to accept blame and fight against fear, and if we aren’t helping one another out, we turn our backs away.

    Question:
    Had John Proctor gone through with posting his signature on the church door, do you think he would have helped people admit to witch craft, therefore saving their lives? Or would he have just backed up the accusations of others resulting in their death?

    ReplyDelete
  34. #1. As you read this Act, what spoke to you the most or evoked the most emotion? What quote was the most powerful and why? Make sure you really reflect on what Miller shows through the quote and why.
    Act four was an all around emotional act of The Crucible. The rest of the play had been leading up to this powerful conclusion. I think that the specific quote that evoked the most emotion and thought for me personally was the very ending of Act 4.
    “Proctor, with a cry of his whole soul: Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave my name!”
    I believe that this was a moving monologue for many who read it, but I think that the power of John Proctor’s words drove home Miller’s whole theme. It came down to John’s character and integrity. Proctor was flawed character from the very start, but unlike the other characters in the play, he did not pretend to be without those flaws. This specific quote says so much about how John believed that he was not a good enough person to die for his integrity since it had been tainted so much. He believed that he was not a good enough person to die for his honesty. I think that at this point in the play, Proctor starts to realize that his “name” is not the most important thing. He realized that he had to do good by himself, and forgive himself for his past sins. John realized that giving away the rest of what he stood for would, was not what he wanted for himself. This moment for John, reflects Miller’s stance on the integrity of people. It connects back to the theme of all these Puritans trying to save themselves, making themselves look good on the outside. The people of Salem lived in fear of what others would think of them, what God would think of them, and how it would affect their lives. They wanted their names to be flawless in the eyes of others. A name has a lot of strings attached to it, so when John agrees to falsely admit to wizardry he must accept what he had decided for himself. But, John Proctor realized he did not want to live the rest of his life under a lie, and stays true to himself and his virtues. Until the end, and even with the death sentence it brought, he stood by the fact that he never “compacted with the Devil”.

    Did any interpret this outburst from John Proctor differently? How?


    #3. As a result of reading the play and seeing the movie, are you more interested in what actually happened in Salem in 1692, what actually happened during McCarthyism in the 1950s, what happens when an illicit teenage lover is spurned, the effects of infidelity on a married couple, etc.? (these are just ideas, but there are obviously more). What is it about Miller's work that prompts your interest? (Question from Margo Burns) Hence, tell me what you really walk away with in terms of what this play can teach us on a humanistic level. This is a critical, yet subjective response, and I expect you to be thoughtful.
    Arthur Miller’s play speaks to many of the darker sides of humanity in general. The Crucible is an all around extreme example of some of these things, but they are still very prevalent in today's society. Some of the main themes that come to mind is how societies can be based around fear and focusing on the unknown. How growing in a society like that can shape people's view point. It also speaks volumes to people's characters and how important (or not) their integrity is. I liked reading about the Salem Witch Trials, and the play The Crucible because it made me think a lot more about when and where we can find these themes in today’s society. It is an interesting perspective from Miller, and I thought it made the event more intriguing.
    What else did you find most interesting about his work in The Crucible and why?

    ReplyDelete