Arthur Miller's "The Crucible"

Author(s): Henry Popkin

Source: College English , Nov., 1964, Vol. 26, No. 2 (Nov., 1964), pp. 139-146
Published by: National Council of Teachers of English

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/373665

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

National Council of Teachers of English is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to College English

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ARTHUR MILLER'S "THE CRUCIBLE" 139

thing; and if he were, the story could still social sciences can provide, nor is the full
not be read as an attack on science, for contribution of literature realized if it is
the author's concern is with a man who assessed merely as a social document.
Hawthorne's works have something to
misunderstands the possibilities of human
offer American Studies at the literal level,
perfection and errs in his noble but mis-
for he mentioned on his pages most of
guided striving. On the authority of these
stories and others like them, Hawthorne the topics which interested his contem-
has been made to oppose science and poraries, but for such factual information
other sources would be more rewarding
industrial development. Such an interpre-
than
tation misrepresents them and their Hawthorne's books. Hawthorne's
greatest contribution to the study of
author, and it illustrates an error often
made in our attempts to enlist earlier American culture is distinctive to him,
authors to bolster our own views about and it is a major one. It grows from his
affairs in our time. The danger of con-peculiar questioning of contemporary
fusing elements of the present culture affairs, the play of his skeptical, specula-
with elements of an earlier culture is a tive mind on events and attitudes around
hazard never absent from American him. His is the quiet voice heard beneath
Studies. the chatter of the enthusiasts, and the one
The full possibilities of American
which may sound the particular note
Studies are not realized from a required
simple to give its distinctive quality to
the the
gathering of factual records which culture of his time.

Arthur Miller's "The Crucible"

HENRY POPKIN

ALTHOUGH The Crucible is set in sev- Senator Joseph McCarthy built his
international fame on his presumed
enteenth-century America, Arthur Miller
intended it as a comment on American knowledge of subversion in government
life of his own time. For several years
and added a new word to our vocabulary
-"McCarthyism," meaning ruinous ac-
before the play opened in 1953, public
investigations had been examining and cusation
in- without any basis in evidence.
terrogating radicals, former radicals,Aand
few months before The Crucible
possible former radicals, requiring wit-
reached Broadway, McCarthy had helped
to elect a President of the United States,
nesses to tell about others and not only
about themselves. The House Committee and, two days before the premiere, that
to Investigate Un-American Activities President was inaugurated. The elections
evolved a memorable and much-quoted had made McCarthy chairman of an im-
sentence: "Are you now, or have you portant congressional subcommittee; his
ever been a member of the Communist power was greater than ever. The film
Party?" Borrowing a phrase from a pop-and television industries gave every sign
ular radio program, its interrogators of being terrified by McCarthyism-but
called it "the $64 question." by the atmosphere that McCarthy cre-
ated, more than by his own subcommit-
A former advisory editor to CE, Mr. Popkin
tee. Show business found itself of more
reviews the New York theater for the London
interest to the House Committee to In-
Times and Vogue and writes extensively about the
modern American and European theater. vestigate Un-American Activities than

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 140 COLLEGE ENGLISH

to Senator McCarthy's subcomm

will be easy enough to discover and to
Blacklists barred certain actors and writ-
expound still other parallels as we exam-
ers from working in the popular media. ine the play, but one preliminary diffi-
Actors who refused to give testimonyculty needs to be stated: the parallel
disappeared both from the large filmfails at one important point. There is such
screen and the small television screen, but a thing as Communism; there is no such
"friendly witnesses" continued to work.thing as witchcraft. This distinction indi-
On the other hand, the New York stage, cates that the psychological state of the
since it was and still is a relatively chaotic victims of the Salem trials is somewhat
enterprise, was comparatively unmanageddifferent from that of the victims of the
and untouched. Nevertheless, The Cruci- investigations of the 1950's. Of course,
ble was a bold as well as a timely play, people suffered equally in both centuries,
written at a time when the congressionaland, while it may seem callous to weigh
investigators had the power to do con- one anguish against another and to say
siderable damage. Senator McCarthy's that one man's suffering means more than
personal authority wilted in the follow- another's, it is necessary to observe that
ing year, but Miller was a somewhat the situation of our own time is more
unfriendly witness before a congressionalcomplex and therefore potentially more
committee in 1956. He described his own useful to the artist.
flirtation with Communism but refused
The distinction I am making is the
to give the names of Communists he had
same one that Aristotle made in our first
known. He was ultimately absolved treatise
of on literature, the Poetics. Aristotle
the charge of contempt of the committee.
writes that we are appalled by the suffer-
The Crucible dramatized the phrase
ing of the entirely blameless; such suf-
that was popularly being used to de-
fering, says Aristotle, is too disturbing
scribe the congressional hearings-"witch
to be a suitable subject for tragedy. In-
hunts." In the Salem witch trials, Miller.
stead, we expect our tragic characters to
chose an unmistakable parallel to current
exhibit some weakness, some sort of flaw.
events. He has never permitted any doubt
Scholars have disagreed for centuries as
that the parallel was deliberate. In his
to the kind of flaw that Aristotle meant,
introduction to his Collected Plays andbut it is safe to say that the tragic hero is
in his interpretative remarks scatteredsomehow imperfect and that his imper-
through the text, he calls attention to the
fection has some connection with his
play's contemporary reference and in- tragic catastrophe.
vites comparisons between the two The unfortunate condemned innocents
widely separated hearings.
of Salem did nothing to bring on their
The Salem witch trials are, equally, a
ruin, nothing, at least, that had anything
historical event. In 1692, in Salem, Mas-
to do with the charge against them. Let
sachusetts, twenty people were found
me qualify that statement: it is con-
guilty of witchcraft and hanged; others
who had been accused saved themselves ceivable that one aged eccentric or an-
other actually thought she was in com-
by confessing to witchcraft and accusing munication with the devil. That delusion
others. As in the unhappy occurrences is too special-not to say too lunatic-to
of the 1950's, naming others was taken be a very likely, interesting, or useful
to be a guarantee of sincerity and of a of mind for a serious character.
state
laudable desire to tell all. Also, the witch-
Miller seems to be of this opinion, since
craft scare was violent, alarming, the and only person in The Crucible who be-
lieves herself to be a witch is Tituba, who
brief, like an epidemic and, again, like
the Communist scare of the 1950's. It is not fully developed as a character and

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ARTHUR MILLER'S "THE CRUCIBLE" 141

politics,
remains a minor figure. but, in his case, we
Furthermore, can say that
she
confesses and is not executed;
character and fateshe need
roughly, very roughly,
not suffer any pangs fit of together, that there isover
conscience a meaningful
her presumed witchcraft. connectionIf between
shewhat the man did
thinks
she has been a witch, she and what must also think
later happened to him. Life is
she has atoned by confessing. not always so logical,
The as the Salem trials
others,
the true martyrs of Salem, tell us. The witchcraft
had the trials in Salem
con-
solation of knowing that were wild,
they unreasonable
were inno-offenses against
cent. Certainly, they were
justice; heroic
they present intrinsicindifficulties
maintaining their innocence for any dramatist at whoa wants
time to make an
when false confessionorderly was dramalikely out ofto
them.saveArt tends to
their lives. But to be heroic is not neces- be neater and, superficially, more logical
sarily to be the complex, dramatic char- than the history of Salem. In contrast,
acter who gives life to drama. the corresponding events of the 1950's
The events of the 1950's provided have a a cruel and inaccurate logic; their
more logical connection between char- injustice is, in a sense, logical, even
acter and fate. The American Communist though the logic is reprehensible.
Party existed, and, for a long time, its If we were not able to point out that
legality was unquestioned. It was per- the historical parallel in The Crucible is
fectly possible and legal to join it-for imperfect, we might still justifiably ob-
any of a variety of reasons, both good ject that the impact of a sudden and
and bad-for idealistic reasons, out of aundeserved punishment upon entirely
desire for power, out of an instinctive innocent people is a difficult subject for
interest in conspiracy, out of a general drama. Aristotle's criticism of the entirely
blameless hero continues to be valid. In
dissatisfaction with society, or even, as
many later said, in order to offer effectiveapparent recognition of this principle,
Miller has constructed a new sort of
opposition to Fascism. It was possible for
many, like Miller himself, to have someguilt for his hero, John Proctor. In the
association with Communism and Com- play, Proctor has been unfaithful to his
munists without joining the party. Great wife, and Miller goes out of his way to
numbers of those accused in the 1950's assure us directly that his infidelity vio-
came from the ranks of these party mem- lates his personal code of behavior. The
bers and their non-member "fellow trav- girl whom he loved, jealous and resentful
eller" associates. Still others among theof being rejected, accuses Proctor's wife
accused had no connection with the of witchcraft, and so Proctor, who has,
Communist Party; for the purposes in this
of peculiar fashion, caused his wife
our comparison, they are exactly like to be
theaccused, has a special obligation to
innocent victims of the Salem trials. save her. In trying to save her, he is
himself charged with witchcraft. So, he
I have set up these elementary cate-
does suffer for his guilt-but for a differ-
gories in order to demonstrate that the
actor or director who was blacklisted and ent guilt, for adultery, not for witchcraft.
But it must be remembered that a play
so lost his job in the 1950's was likely to
have made some commitment in the is not merely an exercise in ideas or even
in characterization. It is a creation that
1930's that affected his subsequent fate.
This was not necessarily so, but itmoves
was forward in time, catching interest
likely. He had not made a commitment and creating suspense. While the his-
to Satan, and few will now say that such context is useful to any prelimi-
torical
a man deserved to be banished from his nary understanding of a play, any full
understanding and any proper evaluation
profession because of his past or present

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 142 COLLEGE ENGLISH

must follow a close look

personal hostility at its
and helpfully bringingplo
plot presents to us
in some anexposition
additional ebb and fl
concerning
argument and incident, an
the land war, the rivalry alternat
over ministerial
crises, turning, in The
appointments, Crucible,
and the issue of Parris's
the issue of witchcraft.
salary. These are the real, underlying
issues that motivate the men of Salem.
The Crucible begins with a cris
moment of excitement that shows the Once the local prejudices have been
false witnesses in full cry-one child on established, we have reached the appro-
stage and another of whom we are told, priate moment for the arrival of the
both of them displaying the different but guileless outsider, the idealistic seeker of
equally convincing symptoms of demonic witches, John Hale. In theory, Hale is
possession. We note a number of fatuous perfectly equipped to combat witchcraft,
adult responses to the children's behavior, and he even enters carrying visible evi-
and then the adults conveniently leave dence of his qualifications, the heavy
the stage to the children, who effectively books that have enlightened him. In prac-
clear up any mysteries by frankly dis- tice, he is as helpless as a child, much
cussing their deceitful actions. They inci- more helpless than the children of the
dentally, and very usefully, provide us play. He is totally unequipped, precisely
with Abigail's special motive, her jealous because he is an outsider with a load of
hatred of Elizabeth Proctor. Directly irrelevant academic knowledge, precisely
upon this cue, John Proctor enters, and, because he has missed the informative
perhaps a bit improbably revealing too conversations that just precede his en-
many intimate secrets in the presence trance.of He has pursued the wrong study;
a child feigning possession, he and Abigail instead of demonology, he should have
tell us most of what we need to know applied himself to economics, the psy-
about their love affair and its present chopathology of children, and eaves-
consequences. In quick succession, then, dropping. Hale is the simple, eager man
we have seen the central disorder of the of good will, the human tabula rasa upon
play, demonic possession, and the expla- whom the experience of the play will
nation for it; in the children's malice, we write. His simplicity makes him the ideal
have also noted a particular form of audience for the wholesale charges of
malice that is to breed results to come- witchcraft that begin to be made as the
Abigail's jealousy. The main expositioncurtain falls upon the first act. As we
should expect, these charges proceed
has been effected, and the main lines of
action are ready. inevitably from the circumstances that
At once the skeptic, Proctor, clashesthe previous action has painstakingly
interpreted.
with Parris, the believer in witchcraft.
The argument between the skeptical and After some preliminary exposition of
the credulous, and the ensuing effort to
the cool relationship between John Proc-
convince the community dominate all of tor and his wife, the second act provides,
the play. Like other works by Miller, in order, Elizabeth Proctor's interroga-
The Crucible has something of the qual-tion of her husband, the Proctors' joint
ity of a trial, of a court case, even before interrogation of Mary Warren, and,
the formal hearings begin. Throughout, finally, the real goal of the scene-Hale's
the exponents of both views are arguing examination of the Proctors. One inci-
their cases, making their points, and, in-
dental effect of this repeated use of court-
room technique is to show us that Eliza-
advertently, revealing their real motives.
Proctor and Parris now engage in just beth Proctor's justice to her husband is as
such a dispute, showing us their own lacking in mercy and understanding as

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ARTHUR MILLER'S "THE CRUCIBLE" 143

witchcraft
the public justice of Salem. have crime
The begun by hitting out
blindly
of adultery that Elizabeth in all directions,
continues to but then, in
probe and to worry over has
accordance withalready
the painstaking prepara-
tions that
been adequately punished and informed
repentedus of Abigail's jeal-
for, but Elizabeth willousy of Elizabeth,
never permitthe accusations fix
herself to forget it. upon Elizabeth. Proctor tries to reverse
them by charging Abigail
Following the troubled exchange be- with adultery,
but, in consequence,
tween the Proctors comes the only court- he is himself accused
room procedure that brings out the truth, time, slander
of witchcraft. Up to this
has been spreading
the Proctors' joint examination in all directions, at-
of Mary
Warren. A suitable rigortaching
on itself
the atpart
random of to one innocent
the questioners and the threat of a whip-now it finds
victim after another, but
ping bring the whole its true and
truth outproper
oftarget.
herThe real, the
fast enough. Then Hale ultimate takesvictim
theininitia-
this play is John Proc-
tive, less successfully. He tor,
isthea one independent man, the one
sufficiently
experienced investigator skeptic
to who sees through
hunt out thea witchcraft
crime, but, without knowing it, he has instinctively,
"craze" from the first. As if
found the wrong crime-adultery, in self-defense, the witchcraft
not epidemic
witchcraft. He causes Proctor to miss the has attacked its principal enemy. This is
seventh commandment and evidently a climactic moment, a turning point in
takes that failure as a sign of the man'sthe play. New witches may continue to
general impiety when it is really a sort be named, but The Crucible now nar-
of Freudian slip, an unwilling confessionrows its focus to John Proctor, caught
of his infidelity. In addition, Hale rightlyin the trap, destroyed by his effort to
sniffs out the general atmosphere of guilt save his wife, threatened by the irration-
and notes "some secret blasphemy that ality that only he has comprehended.
stinks to Heaven." He is responding to The third act has an incidental func-
the chilly atmosphere that Elizabeth tion; it is climactic for Hale as well as for
Proctor maintains and to the shame that Proctor. Hale first appears as a zealous
it produces in John Proctor. His suspi- specialist; in the second act, he is shown
cion has an ironically appropriate result: going industriously about his work; in
it is Elizabeth herself who is the victim the third act, shaken by the obvious in-
of her own heavy insistence on the realityjustice of what he has brought to pass,
he denounces the hearings. That is the
of guilt. In a sense, Hale is right to arrest
her. She is guilty of pharisaism, which is crucial step for him, and, from that
a more serious charge than witchcraft or moment, his personal drama does not
adultery, and Miller gives the unmistak- take any new direction, just as the general
able impression that he considers pharisa- development of the play takes no distinc-
ism a very serious offense indeed. (Phari- tive new steps following these turning
siasm appears again and is again made to points for Proctor and Hale.
seem obnoxious in a later play of Miller's, In addition, the third act is a carefully
After the Fall, where it is once moreorganized unit of argument and counter-
the trait of a wife whose husband has
argument. Concerned to protect their
been unfaithful.) authority, the judges promise a long
The third act revolves about John period of safety for Elizabeth Proctor,
Proctor's effort to save his wife; whenand, when this stratagem fails, they start
bullying the turncoat Mary Warren.
the accusation is at last directed against
him, the principal forward action of Proctor
the counterattacks with the same low
play has come to an end. The chargestactics
of that his enemies use-charging

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 144 COLLEGE ENGLISH
Abigail, the primary accuser, applied towith the
obtain confessions. Proctor can
crimes that do her reputation be saved onlythe bymost
a dishonest confession
damage; they are specifically anti-Puritan
to witchcraft. Life is sufficiently dear
crimes, laughing during prayer for him toand makedanc-
the confession, but he
ing. These are curious accusations from
will not let it become a public document.
a skeptic, but he is learning, too late, to
The issue is, once again, his good name.
play his enemies' game. Abigail responds
Previously preferred over truth, his good
by attributing witchcraft to Mary War-
name is now preferred to life itself. This
ren. This give-and-take continues when
Proctor calls out "Whore! Whore!" issue seems now to dominate the play,
but, as we have observed, it has been
After three acts of fencing, the real truth
prominent throughout, for accusations
is out; the burden of establishing it rests
of witchcraft are harmful to the reputa-
with the one person whose truthfulness
tion as well as to the individual life. The
can be fully guaranteed-Elizabethcitizens
Proc- of Salem have been concerned
tor. All attention goes to her as she is
with scoring points against one another,
asked the critical question. And, for once,
in a moment of high excitement and sus-
with establishing their own superior
virtue and the depraved character of their
pense, this model of truthfulness lies
enemies. To use the word "depraved"
because she values something more than
is to remind ourselves that this state of
the truth-her husband's good name.
affairs is well suited to the Puritan theol-
The value Salem attributes to a good
ogy, which held that divine election was
name has been indicated previously in the
the one balm for innate human depravity.
play; it becomes critically important in
Reputation served as an indispensable
the last act. From the beginning, Salem
guide to the state of grace, for it was an
has been presented as a community in
outward sign of election. As a result,
which mutual evaluation is a generally
Proctor is not only expressing a charac-
popular activity. Prying, slander, and
teristically modern concern for his good
recrimination are unpleasant but persua-
name, a concern equally important to the
sive testimonials to the value that attaches
twentieth-century protagonist of Miller's
to a good name. Living in this environ-
next full-length play, A View from the
ment and sharing its values, Elizabeth
Bridge; he is exhibiting a typically Puri-
Proctor must value reputation even moretan state of mind.
than truth. This decision has disastrous
Proctor dies, then, for his good name;
results, for Mary Warren, facing serious
but to return to the troubling issue, his
punishment as a turncoat and possible
good name was not, in the most serious
witch, must defend herself by making a
sense, threatened by the charges brought
new charge-against the man who got
against him. His good name was, in fact,
her into this sorry mess, John Proctor.
being threatened by his fear of death and
The path of the accusations has been
by his knowledge of his own adultery,
circuitous, but Proctor is, in effect, being
but it was shaken only in the most super-
punished for his hostility to Salem's
ficial way by the charge of witchcraft.
obsession with sin-in particular, his
Proctor is not merely innocent; he is an
wife's obsession with adultery and the
innocent, and his guilt as an adulterer is
community's obsession with witchcraft.
irrelevant, except insofar as it supplies
We may suspect a tacit hint that the two
Abigail with her motive for slandering
fixations are closely linked. his wife. We can see why Proctor's
In the last act, public opinion has
adultery had to be invented; surely it
came into existence because Miller found
shifted: Andover is in revolt, even Parris
himself compelled to acknowledge the
is shaken, and more pressure is being

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ARTHUR MILLER'S "THE CRUCIBLE" 145

most students
Aristotelian idea that the of The Crucible
blameless, un- will feel
that he has
spotted hero is an inadequate made them quite wicked
protagonist
for a serious play. enough. For one thing, he has established
This problem may be their depravity illumi-
further by inserting a number of
nated by reference to some of to
clear references the investigators and
Miller's
blacklisters of his own time. He has made
other works. In his first two Broadway
successes, a relativelyProctor ask, significantly:
unsullied hero "Is the accuser
(played in each case byalways holy now?"
an actor To the automatic
named
trustworthiness of accusers he has added
Arthur Kennedy) is present, but he does
not have the leading the advantage
role. The of chief
confession (always
efficacious
character in each of these for former
plays, AllCommunists),
My the
necessity of naming
Sons and Death of a Salesman, the names of fellow-
is a guilty
conspirators,
older man, who has lived by the the accusation
wrong of "an invis-
ible crime"
values. In this last respect at(witchcraft-or
least, he a crime of
resembles Hale of The Crucible, but he anyone
thought), the dangers threatening
who dares
is more complex and more to defend the
serious. Now,accused, the
prejudicethe
however, in The Crucible, of theyounger,
investigators, the absence
of adequatein
unsullied hero (again played legalthe
defense for the accused,
orig-
and the threat
inal production by Arthur that those who protest
Kennedy)
will be charged
moves into the foreground. Of with contempt of court.
course,
Most of these elements constitute what
Proctor is deeply conscious of his infi-
delity to his wife, but might
this be called
fact a political
does notcase against
affect his fundamental freedom from the accusers and especially against the
magistrates,
guilt; in a sense, he is unsullied, signifi- Danforth and Hawthorne.
cantly less guilty than the sinful older Miller builds an economic case as well,
men of the earlier plays. We are obvi- suggesting that the original adult insti-
ously expected to apply a modern "psy- gators of the witchcraft trials were
moved by greed, particularly by a desire
chological" judgment to him and say that
for the victims' lands. The whole case is
he was driven to adultery by a cold wife
stated only in Miller's accompanying
and by the irresistible attraction of the
notes, but much of it is given dramatic
conscienceless girl who seduced him. Abi-
form.
gail is not made "a strikingly beautiful
girl" (in the stage directions) for noth-The viciousness of the children, except
ing. We must exonerate Proctor, just for
as Abigail, is less abundantly explained.
we are required to exonerate a similar are evidently to assume that when
We
they make their false charges they are
character in a later play by Miller, an-
other man who stands between a cold,breaking out of the restrictive forms of
proper, pious, Puritan behavior to de-
complaining wife and an irresistible child-
woman-Quentin in After the Fall. mand the attention that every child
(Eddie Carbone in A View from the requires. The same rebelliousness has led
Bridge is another married man fascinated them to dance in the moonlight and to
by a child-woman, but he is exonerated join in Tituba's incantations. The dis-
in another way: he is "sick.") covery of these harmless occupations has
led then to their more destructive activ-
Miller expresses regret, in the Intro-
duction to his Collected Plays, that he ity. Curiously, Miller chooses not to
failed to make his villains sufficientlyshow us any good children-a category
wicked; he thinks now that he should to which the Proctors' offspring surely
have represented them as being dedicated belong. We hear of "Jonathan's trap"
to evil for its own sake. I suspect thatfor rabbits, but these children are as

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 146 COLLEGE ENGLISH

absolutely banished from

"alienated" by quaint, the
unfamiliar ways st
the protagonists' of speech.
children
Certainly, the peculiar
in speech
Shaw
dida. Most modern dramatists are less of The Crucible is not a necessity, even
self-conscious about presenting children
in a play set in the seventeenth century.
(Christopher Fry's fifteenth-century
than Shaw was, but Miller makes a similar
Englishmen in The Lady's Not for Burn-
omission in After the Fall. At a climactic
moment, Quentin is confronted with his
ing speak a language closer to our own.)
The
written statement that the only person in purpose of the quirkish English of
the world whom he has ever loved is his The Crucible is not only to give the
impression of an antique time, although
daughter, and yet this child is never seen
in the play. that is part of it; the purpose is to alienate
Over against the bad individual, theus, to make us unfamiliar in this setting,
vengeful adults, and the lying children, to permit distance to lend its enchant-
Miller sets the basically sound commu-ment to this bare, simplistic confrontation
nity, in which the saintly Rebeccaof good and evil, and also to keep us
Nurse's benefactions are known even to from making too immediate, too naive
an aindentification between these events
the stranger Hale. At best, Salem is
bad, quarrelsome place; the good commu- and the parallel happenings of our own
nity is more warmly depicted in Miller's time. The issues are too simple, much
more simple than the modern parallels.
earlier plays, but even in Salem it exists,
and it furnishes twenty honest souls who Language imposes a necessary complexity
will not confess to witchcraft, even from to without.
save their lives. The underlying presence Any final comment must dwell upon
of the good community, however mis- The Crucible as a play of action and
ruled it may be, reminds us that Miller, suspense. It falls short as a play of ideas,
even in face of his own evidence, pro- which is what it was originally intended
to be. It falls short because the parallels
fesses to believe in the basic strength and
do not
justice of the social organism, in the fit and because Miller has had to
adulterate-the pun is intentional-Proc-
possibility of good neighbors. If he crit-
icizes society, he does so from within, tor's
as all too obvious innocence to create
a participant and a believer in it. a specious kind of guilt for him; he is
The deliberately antique language easily exonerated of both crimes, the real
one
surely reflects Miller's self-consciousness and the unreal one, so easily that no
ideas issue from the crucible of this
regarding his emphatically heroic hero
and the extreme situation in which he
human destiny. And yet, The Crucible
keeps our attention by furnishing excit-
finds himself. Issues are never made so
ing crises, each one proceeding logically
clear, so black and white in any of Mil- from its predecessor, in the lives of people
ler's other plays. And so, naturally, thein whom we have been made to take an
statement of these issues must be colored,
interest. That is a worthy intention, if it
must be, to use Bertolt Brecht's term,is a modest one, and it is suitably fulfilled.

This content downloaded from

47.11.195.73 on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 05:45:08 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms