Comparing The Crucible And The Film The King

Arthur miller’s play the crucible and the film the king in New York directed by Charlie Chaplin explores the way politics and people are entwined. Both these composers, through their texts, sagaciously convey the notion of how oppressive politics can be. They ingrain on the responder of the way in which politics can ruin and lead both people and societies to destruction when given excessive power. Arthur miller and Charlie Chaplin were profoundly affected by the mass hysteria of communism driven and instigated by Joseph McCarthy that occurred in America in the 1950’s. They suffered under the political oppression of the House of Un-American Activities (HUAC) when they were accused of supporting the communist ideology. Amid the political disarray,

Chaplin was exiled from America and Miller was almost sent to prison, if it not had been for the influence of Marilyn Munroe at that time. Their past experiences inspired them to create these texts, which was primarily intended to persuade the responder to their political notions. Hence, the responder is positioned to clearly see the faults in political systems.
In the crucible, Miller challenges the way, theocratic societies forcefully control and pressure both people and the larger society.

Miller exhibits this through the character Parris when he commands Abigail, “child sit you down”. His imposing tone, underlines the low status of children in the Salem community. It accentuates the way, children in the Salem community were seen as possessions that were inherently controlled by adults. The controlling nature of theocratic societies is further conveyed when Parris exclaims that he has “Sought here three long years to bend these stiff-necked people to me”. Through this strong imagery, the responder learns how forceful theocratic societies are on its people. Moreover, the burden of this political system is conveyed through the metaphor “I pray you feel the weight of truth upon you”. This reveals the pressure that both the society and its people are in which is a direct allusion to the title of the book “The Crucible”. All in all, miller compels the responder to believe that theocratic societies are dangerous to its

people.
Conversely, in King in New York Chaplin asserts that all governments are oppressive to its people, especially to those that defy the authority.

Chaplin through his film appraises the responder that political systems “antagonise the people” especially the government in America. This is symbolically depicted through the high positioning of the American flag in the mise en scène which conveys the American government to be to overbearing. Moreover, since the king is portrayed as Charlie Chaplin, it reminds the audience of his expulsion from America. Furthermore, the government is ridiculed by the boy via his back and forth hand movement. This is symbolic of the actions of Hitler, a dictator who caused much havoc to the world. Hence, through this symbolism, Chaplin suggests how destructive governments are for both people and society. In addition, the mockery of the King via the long shot of the boys pointing and laughing at him is symbolic of way governments undermine people that oppose them. This is apparent as the King is a representation of people in society. Therefore, Chaplin, through this scene warns society of the dangers and unfavorable ramifications of political

systems.

In the crucible, miller enforces the responder of how political systems can motivate individuals to oppress and challenge both authority and people. This is revealed through the character Abigail. Abigail’s control of others is exhibited when she “smashes” Betty “across the face”. Abigail’s power and authority are emitted through this stage direction. Abigail resorts to such actions due to the conformity of the theocratic society which deems people who dance as devils. The degree to which she will go to hide this fact is portrayed when she threatens the girls, “I will bring a pointy reckoning that will shudder you”. Her use of high modality allows the responder to glimpse the power motivation can bring in a political system that seeks to oppress others. Moreover, Abigail challenges the theocratic society through the symbolism of her “rising” up to Danforth, who is seen as the embodiment of the theocratic society. Through this stage direction, Miller demonstrates the way rebellion can be incited by political systems that repress its people. In summary, political systems can induce mass chaos when certain people confront the political clout.
Similarly, in King in New York, Chaplin criticises how political systems driven by an individual can become dictatorial if the individual has too much power. This is seen through the presumptuous actions of the young boy. The boy repeatedly interrupts the King, which is exemplified through the medium shot of the scene. This demonstrates how an individual can gain power that can completely control others in society. This is coupled with the irony and humour of the scene when the boy asks, “and free speech does that exist”. This furthermore exposes how ignorant people in power are. Close up shot is also utilised when the boy stands up to the king. The boy, although significantly shorter than the man is conveyed to have more power as he is shown to be taller in the scene. This expresses the way in which small political systems can intimidate the larger majority. Lastly, his domineering demeanour conveys displeasure. He constantly shouts at the king and symbolically moves directly up to his face seen via the close-up shot. This epitomizes his tyrannical demeanour hence the tormenting nature of political systems. On the whole, Chaplin exhibits the way an individual can gain too much power through political means and dominate others in society.
Both Arthur miller and Charlie Chaplin through their respective texts positions the audience to embrace their beliefs on politics. They strive to persuade the responder to see people and politics through their eyes, hence viewing political frameworks as damaging to society. As a result of their insightful texts, the responder learns how personal experiences can shape one’s writing and hence influence others in society.