Status Updates From The Crucible

After reading the scene that is removed from most editions and productions, I wonder if things would have been different if John had not met with Abigail the night before his confession and warned her what he was going to do. She had time to conspire with the other girls and plan out how to do their little synced up acting tricks. Would it have been less believable if she was caught unawares?

I’m not sure if Miller intended this but it’s hard for me to not read this as a condemnation of all institutionalized religion. Because if a belief in God can be manipulated to this extreme in order to accuse anyone of committing crime, simply by putting on a good enough theatrical act and having no proof whatsoever, then that religion creates a society where there can be no truth and no reality and no morality.

John hates himself because his wife is in danger partly because of him. If he had never strayed and done whatever he did with Abigail, she likely would have never accused Elizabeth of witchcraft. And now if he wants to expose Abigail for her lies, he’ll have to come out with his secret as well, exposing his adultery to the whole town. I wonder if he’ll really do it.

It’s crazy how poor a job Cheever does at justifying why Elizabeth should be arrested. He avoids the question when Proctor asks for proof and then he fails to give an explanation for why a poppet is a signifier of witchcraft. He’s not even trying! He knows that once the mob has set their sites on one person, they must come before the court. Miller meant it when he said civility is abandoned in these proceedings.

“There is a misty plot afoot so subtle we should be criminal to cling to old respects and ancient friendships. I have seen too many frightful proofs in court-the Devil is alive in Salem, and we dare not quail to follow wherever the accusing finger points!” Yep, he’s gone. They’ve got him! What a stupid Minister. This line was good though, it’s memorable and definitely speaks to the mob mentality mindset.

Of course the one commandment John can’t remember is the one about adultery! I feel bad for Elizabeth, she seems like a decent person and John hates to face the reality of his sin. The scene unfolded in an interesting way - them tiptoeing around each other and trying to please one another, then it deteriorates into resentment and argument, then they have to unite again to defend their family name.

It makes sense that these young girls like Mary Warren would relish their newfound power, despite the fact that violence and punishment doesn’t seem to be in her nature. But in this society young girls are expected to be obedient and submissive, perfectly faithful to God, and even endure whippings from their employers. For the first time, Mary Warren has a sense of authority, only at the expense of other women.

Act 1 is over & they’ve named names! I wonder if the names are people that the girls already resent or dislike. Some of them seem to be people that the Putnams already dislike, so the girls thought they would be easy targets. I felt so bad for Tituba, she really had no other choice because her life is valued even less than the girls, she definitely would have been hanged. Will Abigail name Mrs. Proctor?

“I never called him! Tituba, Tituba…”
It’s funny how Abigail was threatening to kill the other girls if they gave up anymore information about what they were doing in the woods and yet she keeps letting more information slip 😭 Girl is not very good under pressure and can’t resist interrogation at all. I suppose they’ve probably instilled a lot of guilt and shame in her about lying though.

“She goes out; they feel resentful of her note of moral superiority.” It makes sense that there are political conflicts and land ownership disputes that have been brewing in the community. Especially since Rebecca will be one of the people accused of witchcraft. She holds a position of respect and authority in the community, only this frenzied string of events allows them to take their grievances out on her.

These excerpts that provide context, character backgrounds, and, in this recent case, the political and psychological theory of witch trials, are very interesting, but I'm a bit confused by them. Specifically, how would they function in the context of a play? Is dialogue paused and a long monologue given? This doesn't seem very practical when you have an audience. But I think it works well in the medium of a book.

"Political opposition, thereby, is given an inhumane overlay which then justifies the abrogation of all normally applied customs of civilized intercourse. Once such an equation is effectively made, society becomes congerie of plots and counterplots, and the main role of government changes from that of the arbiter to that of the scourge of God."

I’m glad I watched Robert Eggers’ The VVitch because it’s helping my imagination when it comes to the accent, rhythm of speech, the costumes, and even the characters appearance. I can’t help but imagine Anya Taylor Joy as Abigail and the actor who played her father as Parris. It makes perfect sense to make your own cast when reading a play anyways! I imagine this play had to have influenced Eggers somewhat.