Mara Gmez de Len Lpez Masks and limits In Arthur Millers The Crucible Homo homini lupus est

Arthur Millers The Crucible is a play about identity and social relationships. How we present ourselves to others may be blurred by our actions and decision. What we choose to keep to ourselves, and what we tell are our means to mold ourselves as human beings. Through a web of lies, Miller portrays human nature at its worst, hinting also at the possibility we have to save others and save ourselves. The timing of the play is meant to create a feeling of ignorance in the spectator. The play begins in medias res. In the first scene, we have a catatonic girl, Betty, in bed that is being looked after by her father, Reverend Parris. The spectator is left to Parris and Abigails (Bettys cousin) conversation to try to conjecture what happened to Betty. The conversation pervaded with contradiction, we cannot easily trust what is being said. Parris claims he saw a handful of girls, including Abby and Betty, dancing in the forest suggesting they were conjuring spirits. However, Abby denies they were practicing witchcraft. We can infer Parris is not so keen on Abby because he is fishing for a confession from her and later on, he even interrogates her about her dismissal from the Proctors house. To this, Abigail answers she was put out because Mrs. Proctor is a cold, sniveling woman (Miller, 24) who happens to hate her. She says Mrs. Proctor has been gossiping bad things about her: I will not have it said my name is soiled! Goody Proctor is a gossiping liar! (Miller, 12). Up to know, one could believe that Abby is being truthful. She even declares that there be no blush bout [her] name (Miller, 12). However, later on in the same scene, when the dancing girls are left alone in Bettys room, we learn that they had actually conjured spirits and that

Mara Gmez de Len Lpez Abigails reason for doing so was her love towards John Proctor and the need to get rid of his wife, Elizabeth. Now, as our doubts about what happened in the forest dissipate, we start to wonder what happened between Abby and John Proctor. When Abby and John are alone in Bettys room, through their conversation we learn that he has given her soft words, and has looked up her window since she left. But has anything really happened between the two? John claims: But I will cut off my hand before Ill ever reach for you again. Wipe it out of mind. We never touched, Abby. Abby answers Aye but we did to which Proctor affirms: Aye but we did not (Miller, 23). Had he reached for Abby before? Is Abby playing mindgames? This dialogue is a mere reflection of the unimportance of truth in this play. What Miller suggests is that during that time as much as during McCarthyism in the USA, it does not mater what you do but rather what you or others say you do. And he writes this brilliantly: when diabolism rises [] actions, are the least important manifests of the true nature of a man (Miller, 35). Curiously enough, Miller writes about this diabolism in one of the lengthy stage directions of The Crucible in which he mentions Communism. Given the Nature of the text, it has been suggested by scholars and (quite openly) by Miller himself that the play was more about the current situation in the USA at the time than about witchcraft. In 1953 North Americans were going through another type of hunt, the hunt for communists. What Miller asserts in his writings is that we live in a State in which there is always the duality of good and evil. There is always the need for a devil or an enemy that may easily possess some of your own allies. He says it very clearly, for communists there is always the threat of the capitalist succubi (Miller, 34) and vice versa. Thus, political opposition [] is given an inhumane overlay, which then justifies the abrogation of all normally applied

Mara Gmez de Len Lpez customs of civilized intercourse (Miller, 34). That is to say, when evil is beyond human is it suddenly justifiable to eliminate it though means otherwise immoral, such as death penalty. I believe it would be grand everything was truly about opposition and ideals. However, Miller lets us see an even more terrible side to human nature. People are willing to destroy others for rivalry, for envy, for hatred, because a pig died. Truly, humans know no limits, and Abigail Williams is no exception. Precisely what Abby claimed Elizabeth was doing to her is what, in turn, Abby ends up doing to Elizabeth: soiling her name. She makes up the rumor that Elizabeth sends her spirit to ail her at night. When John proctor learns this, he is furious because he knows that the girl is lying, she told him herself. The problem is he cannot say this openly because he would then admit he has been unfaithful to his wife, having been alone with Abby. Now Elizabeth is charged for witchcraft, out of all people. As she is being taken to court, she tells Proctor, when the children wake, speak nothing of witchcraft - it will frighten them. (Miller, 77). This is only an example of everything the characters say because that is what they want others to believe is truth. As opposed to Abbys, Elizabeths lies are always indented to protect someone. The clearest example is when in court, Proctor has finally confessed to adultery in order to save her. The ministers, wanting to prove this, bring Elizabeth in to admit his husband has been unfaithful, as she is supposed to know. Elizabeth lies to cover her husbands name, his dignity, and thus not knowingly condemns him to death. Here is the living proof of how lying is not evil in itself but rather what drives that lie to be, may or may not be evil. It is relevant that Abigail had ruthlessly lied and even claimed thered be no blush about her name when there clearly was because names are central to the play. Names are of utmost importance in terms of identity. We have our name as a tag to identify what we see

Mara Gmez de Len Lpez inside ourselves and what others see in us. It is what comprises everything we are. Unluckily, names are also what make people identify us. And people can easily go around making up stories, soiling other peoples names. And if names can be so easily soiled, it is because our actions can be easily misinterpreted or invented. As I said before, the truth about our actions is no longer relevant. The interpretations of others of our actions are what matters, and law is compliant with those interpretations. This happens to the degree that the ministers, once realizing the absurd of the situation and the possible innocence of the Proctors, they cannot back down because doing so would bring the darkening of their names and the ruin of others trust in them. Proctor has made up his mind to confess he has seen the devil (which was the only way to save your life), but as he is trying to confess, he is asked to accuse others. This he cannot do, because he, as opposed to Abby, is not driven by self-centered thoughts (anymore). They think to go like saints. I like not to spoil their names. (Miller, 143) he says, meaning the others have chosen not to confess, not to give in and lie about what they know is truth. Proctor is further humiliated when he is asked to sign a paper that will be posted on the walls of the church. He backs down. Not his name. Why? Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name! (Miller, 141), he would say. Our names are the only thing we truly have, it is the face we show the world. This mask we put on can be shaped according to our actions, to the lies about our actions, and through others lies about them. Without our mask we are nothing, but to some of us, it is of capital importance to have our mask clean, dignified. And when I say capital, I mean capital. John Proctor (in the end) was willing to sacrifice his life to let his name live with dignity.

Mara Gmez de Len Lpez If anything, I find The Crucible to be a play clouded by uncertainty. Constantly, we have a gap between what is being said and reality. Lies give birth to more lies, some of them white, some of them black, as we have seen. But still, I believe Miller makes a point of proving that one cannot lie about ones principles. Moreover, I think The Cruicible is a terrifying journey into the minds dark alleys. When Miller wrote about diabolism I believe he meant that the true devil to human kind is human kind itself. In times of the Salem witch trials as much as in the times of McCarthyism, people are willing to take advantage of political conflict to solve their day-to-day banalities. I think that here lays the true gruesome reality of Men: we are willing to kill for headstrong ideas (such as the prevalence of Capitalism or the prevalence of religious beliefs) as much as for trivial things. Both are as blinding and as dangerous.

Works cited: Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. (1953). PDF; Retrieved Sep 22 2013 from: http://asbamericanlit.edublogs.org/files/2011/10/21078735-The-Crucible-ArthurMiller-2hmdzot.pdf