Comparing The Moral Teachings Of The Crucible By Arthur Miller

The Moral Teachings of The Crucible

The Crucible’s author Arthur Miller’s purpose for writing his play, during the mid twentieth century, was in order to express his opposition against the hysteria over communism infiltrating America in the era of McCarthyism. Relations became unstable between the U.S. and the Soviet Union on the spread of communist influence continuing to increase into the Americas, in a period known as the Cold War. Emphasising on the American public’s worry that certain individuals known as “red spies”, sent to expose U.S. government information by disguising themselves within the ordinary middle class population. Miller very strongly disagreed with the constant accusations of those deemed likely caused by fear, tension,

and speculation between neighbors, spreading to shift the nation’s perception on a certain ethnical group as a whole. Written in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, fear is used to reinforce suspicion in lieu of solid evidence, portrayed by how Abby Williams and her company of girls are able to freely accuse who they wish, using spectral evidence as their cover, as witches afflicting them without their motives or credibility being called into question.
Allowing speculation as substantial proof can ruin a person’s life and reputation. Miller uses the character of Giles Corey as an example of how damaging a claim considered heavy, during a time were incidents instill fear of ill-being over a majority. As Giles proclaims to judge Danforth in the play, “Your Excellency, I only said [Martha Corey] were readin’ books, sir,… It is my third wife, sir, I never had no wife that be so taken with books, and I thought to find the cause of it, d’y’see, but it were no witch I blamed her for.” (Miller p.182). Giles example of his wife being judged by her actions is a double edged sword when only certain actions are the focus of an accusation. Similarly, Giles Corey’s focus when mentioning the matter to Reverend Hale during the beginning of the play, was only on the fact his wife reading multiple books bewildered him to the point he could not concentrate praying. He however did not mention any other information to further explain the purpose of her behavior. Leading to a narrow conclusion for Martha to be accused and later found guilty of suspicious activity alongside the devil, without taking into account her revered status in the community. Condemning her solely on the action, with no attempt to find the intention of the act itself, alongside her refusing to give a false confession as a witch, and continuous use of pretend spectral evidence utilized by Abby and her occult sealed her fate of hanging. An almost exact mirroring of how residents of a community would report individuals to the FBI as possible suspects of being communist supporters, through a means of a particular stance or action against what those community members would consider expected behaviors or ideologies, similar to their own. The increasing strain between neighbors and friends expressed in Salem throughout the actual trials caused the ordinary citizens to overlook the credibility of Martha Corey’s, and others like Rebecca Nurse’s virtuous past influences.
Tension, coincidentally, is a perfect environment for fear and hysteria to spread.

As seen in the beginning acts of The Crucible, Miller utilizes the character of Thomas Putnam as the forbearer of creating conflict and discontent with various people throughout Salem over greedilous land disputes. Mr. Putnam instigates a quarrel with John Proctor at the end of the council meeting about the ill girls and summoning Reverend Hale, towards John’s recently purchased land from the Nurse family. Announcing,”What anarchy is this? That tract is in my bounds, Mr. Proctor… It stands clear in my grandfather’s will…” (Miller p.154), with John equally retorting his argument of, “Your grandfather had a habit of willing land that did not belong to him, if I may may say it plain” (Miller p.154). Here Mr. Putnam is trying to challenge his authority against John’s in order to obtain land away from Mr. Proctor, constructing another rift within the village of Salem’s residences. Miller purposefully includes this dispute to demonstrate how highly rigid environments or circumstances can quickly escalate rash emotions connected towards a certain opposition. Drawing a parallel to how easily in a stressful situation, between both the Salem witch trials and the Cold War, produced by a fearful attack on normal security a person is used to, will surely provoke an equally strong reaction with little to no recourse. Evident in how the court proceedings went incredibly fast to convict if an individual did

not confess, especially to those conclusively declared by the public as obvious candidates like the beggar Goody Osburn.
Stereotyping based on social beliefs or ethnicity fabricates a good scapegoat to manage the fear of a majority.

The character of Mary Warren fuels the ideal that the devil can be found in the communities considered ‘less desirable’ citizens through broadcasting in court that Goody Osburn has afflicted her previously. When recounting her clam to John Proctor stating, “So many time, Mr. Proctor, she come to this very door, beggin’ bread and a cup of cider - and mark this: whenever I turned her away empty, she mumbled… and I thought my guts would burst for two days after” (Miller p.168). There also in lies the motif of individuals pertaining to a certain ethnicity or social standing as the enemy. Seen as in Salem the poor, downtrodden women of the village are without hesitation seen as prime suspects. Similarly as during the Cold War era anyone in the U.S. with Russian descent were scrutinized based off the fear of a possible nuclear war between the two nations. As in the Rosenberg couple’s endeavor, quick opinions of their guilt as not only communist supporters, but also as accused traitors of the state by giving Soviet ties information concerning the U.S. government. Anxiety accumulated over the years finally gave way to a scapegoat of sorts, with the average people to court officials pre deciding their plea of innocence as false to the little evidence that the court did have proving their relations with someone from the Soviet Union. It also did not help their case that the

husband was a known communist. Targeting individuals for their differences is what Miller hoped to highlight in order to bring awareness of instances where this does happen and to encourage those who do witness these circumstances, to try and prevent the trend from disseminating further. Miller also protray’s how fear induced actions have damaging effects on further dividing people from one another, creating a greater differential between opposites.
Mass induced fear always has a start of tiny factors that left unchecked, erupt into a terrible obstacles. In the case of The Crucible, being able to distinguish when prejudice backed conviction of certain individuals was Miller’s main purpose of writing The Crucible. In order to prevent ignorance of this dilemma from reaching his audience. With this issue being brought into focus, the reader’s ability to not blindly follow the whimsy of hysteria that others may fall prey to, is completely rested on the shoulders of the reader to realize this issue does happen and choose to avoid the bandwagon. Miller instills in an individual the value of an unbiased look on how easily issues that are left to fester unexplained, through the lack of communication or common sense, will most definitely not contribute to constructing better the relations between others.