The plot of The Crucible takes place in a strict religious community where scientific explanations do not exist. When one of the young girls in the village becomes ill and strangely possessed, the townspeople suspect witchcraft. The elders of the community use their authority to coax confessions of witchcraft out of the girls involved under the condition of immunity from persecution. The leader of the confessors is Abigail, who uses her immunity to accuse her former lover’s wife of witchcraft.
The parallels between The Crucible and the Red Scare of the 1950’s bring light to the unconstitutional lawlessness committed by Senator Joseph McCarthy. The House of Un-American Activities Commission (HUAC) led by Senator McCarthy, was a committee designed to identify and persecute Americans who were members of the communist party. Arthur Miller himself was called before HUAC and testified. In fact, his role in the Red Scare contributed to Miller’s indignation about being condemned for crimes never committed. Arthur Miller’s purpose in writing The Crucible is to demonstrate how the mass hysteria during the Salem witch-hunts directly correlates with the Red Scare of the 1950’s.
Understanding why Miller writes about the mass hysteria and paranoia of the Salem witch-hunts can partly come from reflecting on his life during the Red Scare. Although Miller himself was not a communist when he was subpoenaed in 1956 by HUAC, he refused to name names when the HUAC asked him about people who attended the same meetings as he once did (Moss 8). “I declined to make any such statement, which I found demeaning; what right had any organisation [sic] to demand anyone’s pledge of loyalty?”(Miller, “Are You Now” n.p.). The HUAC asked Miller very specific questions about the others who participated in what McCarthy and his followers perceived as disloyal to America. Because Miller refused to name names, he was indicted and found guilty of contempt of congress on May 31, 1957 (Moss 8). Miller writes of his emotions from 1948 to 1951 as “the sensation of being trapped inside a perverse work of art, one of those Escher constructs in which it is impossible to make out whether a stairway is going up or down”(“Are You Now” n.p.). This quote alone describes the feelings of people accused of crimes that were never committed during the communist witch-hunts. Miller’s need to write a play with parallels to the Red Scare comes from that feeling.
The hysteria begins in The Crucible when Reverend Parris’s daughter, Betty, is afflicted with a seemingly incurable, odd-mannered illness. Parris had seen his daughter and Abigail Williams, Parris’s niece and the obvious protagonist of the play, dancing with his slave, Tituba, in the woods during the night. Abigail comes to Parris and tells him “the rumor of witchcraft is all about”(Miller, The Crucible 9). Parris worries about his daughter, but it seems that he worries more about what the village will think of him if they discover that Betty may be bewitched. Even in the first moments of the play, paranoia rears its ugly head. Parris explains to Abigail, “. . . if you trafficked with spirits in the forest I must know it now, for surely my enemies will, and they will ruin me with it”(Miller, The Crucible 10). Parris decides to send for Reverend Hale, who “found a witch in Beverly last year”(Miller, The Crucible 13). When Hale arrives, at first he is skeptical in believing that Satan has possessed the young girl, but he tells Parris and the others that there are definite ways of knowing if she is in fact possessed. Hale reassures Parris that “[he] shall find [Satan] out if he has come among [them], and [he means] to crush him utterly if he has shown his face!” (Miller, The Crucible 37). Giles Corey is among those who are present when Hale arrives. Pretty soon the lure of believing the girl is possessed starts to overcome him. Corey is speaking of his wife when he states, “I’m not sayin’ she’s touched the Devil, now, but I’d admire to know what books she reads and why she hides them” (Miller, The Crucible 38). This sequence of events is where mass hysteria in The Crucible begins.
During the HUAC hearings, Arthur Miller was asked about the meetings he attended that were believed to be pro-communist. The investigator asked Miller, “Who was there when you walked into the room?” (qtd. in Bentley 135). Miller did not comply even though “he knew that his refusal to name names in 1956 would be to invite charges of being unpatriotic” (Bigsby xxiii). Miller did not give in to the investigators tactics and stuck to his belief of a just society.
In The Crucible, Tituba, whom the girls were dancing with the night before, is accused of summoning spirits and is asked to confess which is quite similar to what the men accused of associating with communists were asked to do in the 1950’s. Reverend Hale explains to Tituba, “You must have no fear to tell us who they are, do you understand? We will protect you. The Devil can never overcome a minister” (Miller, The Crucible 43). Reverend Hale is asking questions along the same line as the investigators during the Red Scare.
The HUAC offered the same absolutism when it convicted Arthur Miller of contempt of court for not disclosing the names of those he saw at the so-called un-American meetings (Moss 8). To prove they were cooperative and therefore among the courts, the accused had to confess either the crimes they were accused of, or give up people who are possibly against the court. When Miller writes about the HUAC hearings, he explains, “Should the accused confess, his honesty could only be proved by naming former confederates” (Miller, “Are You Now” n.p.). So not only did they need to confess themselves, to prove they were guilty, they needed to charge others with crimes. Miller writes that the HUAC policy resulted in “dozens of humiliating anti-communist pledges being required by terrified college administrations”(“Are You Now” n.p.). Thus, people only turned in others to prove their own innocence.
The mass hysteria that went along with the red scare is analogous to the mass hysteria that went along with the Salem witch-hunts, which is exactly why Miller decided to write about Salem. “His subject was mass hysteria: he wished to show how it could be fomented by self-appointed (and self-seeking) saviors; what its social and psychological consequences might be; and how it must be averted”(Moss 37). Miller wanted to show the ramifications of mass hysteria and how to avoid it in the future.
Eventually, in the play, the witchcraft snowball starts rolling down a hill and picking up more and more people to accuse as time passes. Abigail, who it is established, had an affair with Proctor’s husband, John, accuses Elizabeth Proctor of being a witch. John Proctor knows that Abigail only accuses Elizabeth because she wants to see her dead, so that she may pursue John. When Hale goes to the Proctor home to ask questions, the questions do not seem to be directly associated with witchcraft, but rather the Christian character of the household. Hale notes that Proctor has only been to church “Twenty-six time in seventeen month, sir. I must call that rare. Will you tell me why you are so absent?” (Miller, The Crucible 61). When Proctor is questioned further in the play, he speaks ill of Reverend Parris, that being why he has not attended church regularly. He is quick to point out that “it may be I have been too quick to bring the man to book, but you cannot think we ever desired the destruction of religion” (Miller, The Crucible 63). Proctor also firmly states, “there be no love for Satan in this house, Mister” (Miller, The Crucible 64). Proctor, knowing what may come of it, stands up for his principles and does not waver. This type of questioning of a person’s character is in the same vein as the questions asked during the HUAC hearings and caused paranoia in America.
Although Hale wavers ever so slightly in his conviction that the trials are fair and true, he knows that if he is to speak out against them, he may be accused. When it is found that Giles Corey’s wife will be tried in court for witchcraft, the only defense Hale can come up with is “until an hour before the Devil fell, God thought him beautiful in heaven” (Miller, The Crucible 68). It is learned that a needle has stabbed Abigail, and that Goody Proctor is in possession of a doll with needles that has been given to her by their servant, Mary Warren. Elizabeth is then charged with witchcraft. Abigail’s only method of revenge while still proving herself innocent was to accuse Elizabeth Proctor.
When HUAC asked Miller to turn in his friends, they presented him with an opportunity to stay true to his principle. When asked if people he knew were communists, he replied, ” . . . I am trying to-and I will-protect my sense of myself. I could not use the name of another person and bring trouble on him . . . “(qtd. in Bentley 135). Miller also stated, “All I can say, sir, is that my conscience will not permit me to use the name of another person”(qtd. in Bentley 137). Leonard Moss writes, “Ironically, state authorities, by insisting that [Miller] inform on others and confess sins against the community, presented him with a challenge to ‘conscience’ directly analogous to that which had confronted the protagonist of The Crucible“(Moss 7). Miller decided to stick to the morals and values he held dear, and refused to cooperate with HUAC.
The court in The Crucible holds its own absolutes. A person is either with the court or against it. Deputy Governor Danforth states it plainly by declaring, “a person is either with this court or he must be counted against it, there be no road between”(Miller, The Crucible 87). This policy forces men and women who are charged with witchcraft to give up their supposed counterparts, which do not exist in the first place. The result of this is paranoia and hysteria. James Martine writes, “Miller’s play about the events at Salem [provide] a stark reminder of the dangers of infectious paranoia and suggestible hysterics in a broad social and political setting and [strike] its own effective blow at McCarthyism” (10). Christopher Bigsby explains, “What lay behind the procedures of both witch trial and political hearing was a familiar American need to assert a recoverable innocence even if the only guarantee of such innocence lay in displacement of guilt onto others”(xi). The Salem witch trials depicted in The Crucible are directly linked to the HUAC hearings because of the absolutist tactics of both court proceedings.
John Proctor’s character and principles and how he persists in carrying them out directly pertain to Arthur Miller’s role in the HUAC hearings. John Proctor is a man who is imperfect. He commits adultery with the antagonist of the play, Abigail Williams, which makes him more human to the reader. Procter attempts to clear his sinless wife’s name by forcefully bringing Mary Warren to the court to explain to Danforth how Goody Proctor came to have possession of the doll supposedly used to inflict pain on Abigail. He rightfully confesses to the crime he did commit, adultery. Budick writes, “Indeed, as Miller himself argues, ‘guilt’ of the vague variety associated with Proctor, was directly responsible for the ‘social compliance’ which resulted in McCarthy’s reign of terror in the 1950’s . . . “(Budick 132-133). The court calls in Goody Proctor to testify to her husband’s fidelity. She does not know that John has confessed and lies to the court saying he never committed adultery. Although his testimony and confession of adultery backfires on him, and he stands accused of witchcraft, he does not falter in his principles. When Danforth asks him, “Will you confess yourself befouled with Hell, or do you keep that black allegiance yet? What say you?”(Miller, The Crucible 111). Proctor replies,
A fire, a fire is burning! I hear the boot of Lucifer, I see his filthy face! And it is my face, and yours, Danforth! For them that quail to bring men out of ignorance, as I have quailed, and as you quail now when you know in all your black hearts that this be fraud-God damns out kind especially, and we will burn, we will burn together! (Miller, The Crucible 111).
Even when Proctor is faced with certain deaths for crimes he never committed, he is unwilling to confess to save his life. Days later, in his jail cell, witnessing people leaving to be hanged, he asks Elizabeth, “I have been thinking I would confess to them, Elizabeth. What say you? If I give them that?”(Miller, The Crucible 125). This demonstrates that Proctor is not perfect. Elizabeth tells him she would not judge him if he confesses. When asked if he confesses he does not say yes, but states, “I will have my life”(Miller, The Crucible 127). Danforth has Proctor’s confession ready to be signed, and this is the deal breaker to Proctor. When he is asked, “Did you ever see anyone with the Devil?” Proctor replies, ” I did not”(Miller, The Crucible 130). Proctor refuses to sign the confession. His explanation is
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, The Crucible 133).
Although Proctor was hanged and Miller was merely found in contempt of court the similarities between the two are blunt and striking.
Hysteria and paranoia can fuel many fires. The Red Scare of the 1950’s and the Salem witch trials portrayed in The Crucible are two cases rampant with suspicion and panic. Arthur Miller writes The Crucible to keep the detrimental effects of mass hysteria in the conscious minds of Americans and people everywhere. The moment that they begin to forget their mistakes is the moment they are doomed to repeat them. Arthur Miller used his own infuriation at injustices that occurred in his life to relate to everyone what has already happened and what must never happen again.
Bentley, Eric. Are You Now or Have You Ever Been; The Investigation of Show Business by the Un-American Activities Committee, 1947-1958. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.
Bigsby, Christopher. Introduction. The Crucible. By Arthur Miller. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc., 1995. vii-xxv.
Budick, E. Miller. “History and Other Spectres in The Crucible.” Arthur Miller: Modern Critical Views. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987. 127-144.
Martine, James J. The Crucible: Politics, Property, and Pretense. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993.
Miller, Arthur. “Are You Now or Were You Ever . . . ?” Guardian Unlimited 17 June 2000. n.p. 1 November 2001. .
Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc., 1995.
Moss, Leonard. Arthur Miller. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1980.How people react to the injustices in their lives can not only shape how others around them react, but can encapsulate an entire era of history in a single work of literature. The playwright Arthur Miller (1915- ) was confronted with an injustice in his life and turned his outrage into The Crucible. The Crucible takes place in late seventeenth century Salem, Massachusetts, at the beginning of the infamous witch-hunts. Arthur Miller was not alive during this period in history, but he uses this historical witch-hunt to illustrate the parallels between Salem and the communist witch-hunts of his time.
