Victoria

__Topic 1- How I [Arthur Miller] use stage directions in The Crucible to communicate the tension and conflict in John Proctor’s and Elizabeth Proctor’s relationship.__ The relationship between John Proctor and his wife Elizabeth Proctor is a vital part of the play “The Crucible” and to fully comprehend it the audience has to recognize the conflict and the tension between the two characters. To demonstrate these particular aspects of their relationship I have used descriptive and precise stage directions during their confrontation, pages 49-52, that give the readers a deeper insight in the relationships’ complexity. The stage directions allow the audience to distinguish the discrete factors which cause the tension in the two characters’ relationship and which may not be obvious in the dialogue. First off, the stage directions suggest that the argument between Elizabeth and John is a repeat of a former conflict that triggered the strain on their relationship. Elizabeth’s hesitation to prod or push her husband, John, implies that she has been in the situation before and knows to be wary of her husband’s temper, “ // quietly, fearing to anger him by prodding //    [Elizabeth says:]…” The fact that there have been previous disputes tells the audience that the relationship has been unstable for a while and lingers on a peak; meaning that the situation can quite suddenly change from being relaxed and content into an argument. The stage directions further amplify the conflict in Elizabeth's and John's relationship by demonstrating Elizabeth’s yet unforgiving and accusing manner after John’s betrayal. Although Elizabeth is wary of angering John and seems to have quite a fragile personality, her character has a lot more depth than what might be found solely through the dialogue. The stage directions describing her reaction to John’s confession of being alone with Abigail clearly convey her displeasure, “ // she has suddenly lost all faith in him //  ” and “  // a little loftily //    [Elizabeth says:]” Her inability to forgive John for his betrayal hinders their relationship to overcome it's difficulties and to develop. Lastly, the stage directions demonstrating Proctor’s avoidance of the subject of his betrayal resurfacing raises the readers’ awareness of the tense relationship. In the beginning of the discussion I included stage directions such as, “ // with good feeling he goes and looks up at the sky through the open doorway //  ” and “  // with a grin //    [Proctor says:]” to demonstrates Proctor’s forced optimism around Elizabeth. The reader will be able to tell that this is a forced act because soon after I include stage directions such as “ // He //// [Proctor] //// turns to her //// [Elizabeth] //// and watches her. A sense of their separation rises // ”, which illustrate the real state of their relationship. The stage directions also show how Proctor almost challenges or threatens Elizabeth to mention his disloyalty when the discussion has developed closer to the subject, “ // his anger rising //    [Proctor says:]” and “  // with a violent undertone //    [Proctor says:]”. These stage directions clearly demonstrate how Proctor has changed his method of keeping from the subject of his betrayal from adopting an optimistic mood as a distraction to bluntly threatening Elizabeth to bring it up. The fact that he has to go to such extents to try and keep the conversation civil and casual clearly demonstrates their destructive relationship. In conclusion, the precise and detailed stage directions I have included into the play amplify the conflicted relationship between John Proctor and his wife. They illustrate the tension in both Elizabeth’s and Proctor’s behavior towards each other and hint towards the causes of this conflict. Without the stage directions the conflicted nature of their relationship, which is an essential factor to the plot of the play, would have been lost and unrecognizable to the audience.

__Topic 2- The catalyst of the mass hysteria.__ It is hard to identify one catalyst that can be seen as the principle trigger of the sequence of events in the Crucible. There are numerous factors that built up the tension in Salem from which the story developed but which was the trigger that let loose the hysteria? It is obvious that Abigail took on the role to lead the girls into the role-play that they used to manipulate the village; therefore, I believe, that whatever triggered her actions is also the catalyst to the hysteria. I believe that there were two main catalysts that unleashed Abigail. First off, Proctor’s rejection of Abigail is clearly one of the catalysts. It is clear from the first words that Abby speaks to Proctor in the play, “//I’d almost forgot how strong you are, John Proctor//” that her feelings for him are not neutral. When she realizes that Proctor will not take her back and deny whatever it was they had, “//we never touched Abby//”, she realizes that more drastic measures have to be addressed to convince him. Throughout their conversation we can see how Abigail’s mood changes from confident to angry and lastly to hysteric, “//John, pity me, pity me//” as she realizes Proctor is truly denying her the one thing she desires; him. Proctor’s rejection triggered Abigail’s hysteria, and therefore simultaneously triggered the rest of Salem’s hysteria. Secondly, Abigail’s fixation on protecting her own reputation in the town acts as a second catalyst. Living in a town such as Salem your most powerful weapon yet most significant weakness is your reputation. Naturally, Abigail, as all others in Salem, is forced to protect her own reputation, “//My name is good in the village! I will not have it said that my name is soiled//!”Therefore, when she was put in the spotlight concerning a matter such as witchery, she was quick to turn the attention from herself, “//Not I sir – Tituba and Ruth//.” In protection of her own reputation Abigail made her first accusation of witchery. When she realized the manipulative power in her accusation Abigail also realized the possibilities accompanying it and started the pretence that brought the hysteria upon the village. The other factors that contributed to the hysteria such as; the conflict over land between farmers, the revengeful and accusing character of the society, the tangible tension between characters with high status in the village and those with most respect, are not catalysts but ensured, once triggered, the expansion of the initial worry into hysteria. The true catalysts/triggers of the hysteria were those which let loose Abigail and her “dissembling” character on the town.  __Topic 3- How I, as a director, would convey an underlying sense of tension and hysteria in Act One pages 8-11, from “Abigail: Uncle, the rumor of witchcraft…” to “Abigail: She hates me, uncle, she must”.__ This is the opening scene of the play and the audience encounters a powerful introduction to the characters: Reverand Parris and Abigail. The conversation between the two characters in this scene contains an underlying sense of tension and hysteria that is hinted at. If I were to direct the play I would have tried to emphasize the underlying tension and hysteria further as it is these two features that come to rule the sequence of events and it would provide a catching introduction to the play. To convey the hysteria in the scene I would emphasize Parris’ and Abigail’s obsession with protecting their reputations from any connection with witchcraft. When Parris turns on Abigail after she suggests that he should go talk to the crowds in his parlor, I would insist on a note of desperation and anxiety in his voice when he says, “//And what shall I say to them? That my daughter and my niece I discovered dancing like heathen in the forest//?” This would show Parris’ hysteria as it encompasses the reason why he is driven to hysterics; he does not know what action to take to avoid soiling his own reputation. At the end of the conversation Abigail is thrown into a fit as Parris repeats what he has heard say about the reason Elizabeth fired Abby, “//She hates me, uncle, she must.”// I would insist on Abigail showing some sign of hesitation and worry as she processes what Parris is implying before she bursts out in this accusation. This would act as a sign that Abigail knows that Parris is talking about and retorts with such grave accusations in desperation to distract Parris, it shows Abigail’s hysteria at the idea of Parris knowing the truth. Furthermore, the conversation clearly hints on Abigail’s concealment of a key point to the story, which promotes an underlying sense of tension between the two as Parris is aware of her efforts. Throughout their conversation Parris hints on Abigail’s involvement in the plot and although Abigail denies it every time Parris never quite believes her. The tension builds as Parris pushes Abigail on and tries to force the truth out of her; the readers await her break down, the point that will clarify the mystery. To amplify this tension using the two characters body language. Throughout the conversation Parris needs to show eagerness, desperation to find out what was going on in the forest and must advance on Abigail, hover over her as interrogates her, “//I saw Tituba waving her arms over the fire when I came on you. Why was she doing that//?” In contrast Abigail should demonstrate her avoidance of the truth by backing away, retreating from Parris and averting his gaze as she gives him short, uninformative answers, “//It were sport, uncle//”. The contrast in the two characters’ actions produces and expectant tension as the audiences awaits Abigail’s surrender. It is especially important that the hysteria and underlying tension is clearly demonstrated in this scene as it is the introduction to the rest of the play which is based on these two aspects.

__Topic 4- A difference between the play “The Crucible” and it’s film-adaptation.__ I was impressed by how well the film adaptation of the play “The Crucible” kept true to the play in most aspects. The characters were extremely well-developed, the structure was generally the same as the play and the subdued tension and the hysteria was well-illustrated. However there was one addition to the film that had not appeared in the play; the “Hollywood-effect”. The film included some scenes that were not present in the play to make it more dramatic and “movie-like” and by doing so the semi-conservative and subtle atmosphere of the play, much due to the setting, was slightly altered. First off, the scene in which the girls are all dancing at the beginning of the movie was never included in the play, just talked of. By including this scene the producers of the movie use the common technique of revealing a truth to the audience which the rest or some of the characters in the play may not be aware of. By using this technique in the film-adaptation of the play the producers make the movie more exhilarating and emotive; the audience knows Abigail’s true intentions and what exactly was going on in the woods, which makes the naivety of the town and the girls’ pretence a whole lot more frustrating and nerve-racking for them. In the play, the author gains more from keeping the truth hidden from the audience and letting them know in a more subtle manner, what is not revealed to the characters in the book is not revealed to the readers either and vice versa. This builds up tension in the story and will make readers want to keep reading. Secondly, in the movie the scene where Abigail and Proctor talk for the first time is completely different from that in the play. In the play Abigail and Proctor converse in the room where Betty lies, and this is where the audience is first exposed to their history. In the movie the audience is exposed to Abigail’s and Proctor’s connection as soon as we see Abigail’s glee at simply spotting Proctor in the village. From this point suspense swells as the audience awaits the point in the movie when the two will meet and the source of Abigail’s glee is revealed. In difference to the play, the two meet in private, behind the ministry, and this clarifies the secrecy of their relationship; adding more of that dramatic touch producers are looking for. Furthermore, the producer used this opportunity to include an event that is always expected to occur in a good (Hollywood) film; a kiss. In the play this kiss never actually happened, considering the atmosphere of the play, more mellow than the movie, a kiss would have been out of place and unnecessary. The intensity and meaning of the scene is conveyed clearly enough without it, Abigail’s desire for Proctor is clearly shown when “//she clutches him desperately//” and “//she dares come closer, feverishly looking into his eyes//.” Lastly, the film also includes the scene nearing the end of the play when Giles is pressed with weights to death. In the play this is simply mentioned by Elizabeth and not actually described as a scene; an example of the more subtle atmosphere of the play. Giles’ pain and heroism could not have been conveyed through words if the author had decided to include the scene so essentially reading Proctor’s reaction to the news is more powerful, “[Proctor] //numbed – a thread to weave into his agony//”. In the movie however, the producers included this scene as it is an ideal way to arouse emotions in the audience; sympathy, frustration and anger. It is the typical, dramatic kind of scene that is used in “Hollywood” movies to amplify the “evil” or “cruel” part of the story. The movie did for the most part stay true to the play throughout, but it did include some changes to make it more dramatic and powerful as a film. By doing so I believe it lost a bit of the strict and semi-conservative atmosphere of the play but it was justified because without it the movie would not have been as entertaining.

__Topic 5 – Response to the statement:"The Crucible is evidence that Miller partakes of similar fears about wicked, angry, or wise women.”__ This quote “The Crucible is evidence that Miller partakes of similar fears about wicked, angry, or wise women” was taken from the abstract of the article “Re(dis)covering the witches in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: A Feminist Reading.” I strongly disagree with this statement. “The Crucible” is more of a representation of Miller’s admiration and understanding of the female character than his fears of it. There are numerous female characters in the play that are less than admirable but I do not think that this is an attack on women but simply Arthur Miller’s recognition of the wide range of female characters in the world. The frustrating, naïve girls, the revengeful and almost evil character of Abigail and the weak and easily-manipulated character of Mary Warren, are all examples of women that trigger negative emotions in the audience and to some extent justify the statement above. I believe that he uses these characters to show an understanding of the diversity of the female figure rather than a fear. Miller contradicts the stereotype of all women being the same weak, subordinate and domestic figures, and from this perspective he is supporting the feminists. The depth of character and potency Miller gives his main female characters are evidence of his admiration and respect for them. Elizabeth and Abigail are both well-developed, complex characters that display a depth and purpose that author’s in fear of such women would not grant. We see how both the characters develop into personas that are completely different from what our first impressions might have been. Abigail comes off as a typical, innocent girl worried for her cousin in the beginning of the play, “she is all worry and apprehension and propriety” but as the play develops so does her character and we witness many unexpected traits in her; creativity, intelligence, the ability to influence and lead. These are all admirable traits, and although Abigail uses them for dishonorable means in the play it is not evidence of Miller’s fear for such women since he would not have granted her such traits to start with in that case. Elizabeth is first identified as a rather weak character; a wife anxious to please her husband, “[Elizabeth] blushes with pleasure [when Proctor compliments her food].” As the play develops however, the audience witnesses more and more of the dignity, stealth and intelligence of her character; “The magistrate sits in your heart that judges you.”Furthermore, the statement states that: “Miller partakes of similar fears about…wise women”, yet the sole woman that Miller describes as wise in the village is Rebecca, who he is consistently referred to as an honest and admirable character. From the very first time that the readers are introduced to Rebecca’s character to the last she has radiated an air of dignity and justice, “[Hale] you look as such a good soul should.” As it is a “feminist reading” I believe that the author has purposefully focused on the fact that the majority of the people killed during the witch hunt were women, solely to interest and satisfy the feminists that nowadays are often so hypocritical that they refuse to believe anything good a man can have to say about a woman.

 Schissel, Wendy; Bloom, Harold. Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations: The Crucible, 1999, p165-175, 11p. oyed <[]

​Excellent points here Victoria. I like the way you have a good eye for detail and your understanding of the play is clearly profound. Your paragraphs are impressive, especially the final one focusing on the diverse role of women in Miller's plays. Quotations are well integrated and I am pleased you have a good eye for referencing. Make sure that your central thesis is clear and linked to all the way through and work on improving the sophistication of your writing and your exploration of literary features.

__Knowledge and Understanding - 5__ __Appreciation of Literary Features - 3__ __Interpretations of the Text - 4__