Oh, goodness. The first essay of the year.
I compared and contrasted accusers and the accused in the play, The Crucible.
Nelson 1
Maggie Nelson
Ms. J. Robinson
Honors English 3
3 October 2007
“Hard Proof”: Similarities between Accusers and the Accused in The Crucible
During an initial reading of The Crucible, the accusing and accused characters can easily be separated into two distinct groups, opposing and worlds apart in all spectrums of thought. However, after further scrutiny, these two factions appear to be much closer than they seem: in attitude, feeling, position, and even motives. Although there are a considerable amount of differences between the accusers and the accused in the play The Crucible, there are also a surprising number of similarities.
Both the plaintiff and the defendant in The Crucible are in a position of being trapped, although in rather different ways. The accusing girls were thought of as people with a special gift, with which they could spot those working for the devil. They wound this tale themselves, but once the thread was spun, there was not an easy way to break it. After denouncing his or her ways and not naming any more witches, one would not only be accused of witchery themselves, but others still hanging onto their lie would turn against that one person to keep it safe. Mary Warren knows well of the repercussions on a finally truthful accuser when John Proctor goads her to go to the court and rectify this lie told by her and her friends. She answers “I cannot, they’ll turn on me-” (38). As for the accused citizens, the court lays their trap. The choices are either to confess and spoil your name, or hang.
The Salem witch trials are almost unbelievable. How could noted government officials believe with such fierceness in witchcraft and the allegations of young girls? Why did
Nelson 2
seemingly ordinary citizens admit to committing supernatural crimes, and in some cases believe in their confession? The answer lies in a concept of mass hysteria, something that everyone involved-the court officials, the defendants, and especially the plaintiffs-got caught up in. Perhaps the accusers in court started this display to get attention, respect, or a few people’s names spoiled. But then the accused were confessing, and the accusers were fainting, shrieking, and terrorizing the court with their visions. And as the judges believed these things, the pretenders started to also. They must have pondered over the idea that maybe they hadn’t been faking their illusions, and this truly was real. Mary Warren illustrates this feeling when she tries to explain to Danforth why she could faint on demand in court but not at that moment: “I-I heard all the other girls screaming, and you, Your Honor, you seemed to believe them, and I-It were only sport in the beginning, sir, but the whole world cried spirits, spirits, and I-I promise you, Mr. Danforth, I only thought I saw them but I did not” (47). The defendants in these cases were equally affected. At the beginning, they knew they were not witches. But so many were confessing (people they knew, maybe even respected), that it began to seem like the right thing to do. They no longer felt alone in this ridiculous accusation. Others were coming clean, and these defendants might have thought that they should too, that perhaps they did have dealings with the devil, they just had not been completely aware of it. This effect of mass hysteria is shown by Tituba’s turn-around from a “good Christian woman” to someone crying out for the Devil to take her home. In this journey, she brought the same thoughts upon Sarah Good, her cell mate. Showing her transformation, Tituba tells her plans to Herrick, explaining, “We goin’ to Barbados, soon as the Devil gits here with the feathers and the wings” (54).
Nelson 3
The court not only created hysteria throughout the masses; it also was very effective in bending both the accusers and accused to its will. The accusers were praised by the court for doing God’s work. They dined with the noteworthy men in town, and thus became rather full of themselves, believing that it was them that worked to crush all evil out of the town, and therefore that they deserved respect. Most of all, this attention prodded them to accuse even more. Mary Warren, described at the beginning of the screenplay as “a subservient, naïve, lonely girl” (13), was greatly affected by this honor of the court, and let it go to her head, talking back to her employers and scolding them for treating her as their servant. After proclaiming that she saved Elizabeth’s life, she said, “I only hope you’ll not be so sarcastical no more. Four judges and the King’s deputy sat to dinner with us but an hour ago. I-I would have you speak civilly to me, from this out” (30). The accusers were also tempted with salvation by the court. They were told that they could be saved, and go back to God, and the court could help them. They need only confess and name names. Tituba falls under this very pressure when it is threatened that she will hang for witching the children. She goes from protesting, “No, no, sir, I don’t; truck with no Devil” (23), to saying that she had conversed with the Devil, and finally gives in to accusing others by insisting, “And I look-and there was Goody Good” (24).
Even though differences between the accused and accusers in The Crucible abound, there are also a considerable amount of similarities between the two groups. These parallels can be found through the characters’ motives, lack of choices in the court, and transformations through mass hysteria. They were trapped in the court, caught up by the madness, and goaded by promised salvation. And yet both groups were still known for their pride, walking tall whether it be to the jury booth or the stocks.
Nelson 4
Works Cited
1. Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. Austin: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 2005.
