"The Crucible" by Arthur Miller

97%, pretty much flawless, gonna be a long one

I leech off of drama, alright? That's like my main source of comfort in life. Yesterday I went to watch a football match and the most interesting thing happened was a fight breaking out on a table next to where we were sitting. Sounds bad, I know, but I've always considered myself a bit of a drama mama so I was absolutely thriving. So when I heard in 2018 that we'd be covering "The Crucible" as one of our required reading plays for GCSE Drama, I was so excited. Arthur Miller plays the role of Regina George and the play, "The Crucible" is his burn book. And we got to act it out and write about it? Needless to say, I got an A. 

First and foremost, I adore Arthur Miller. He's up there with people like Ken Kesey and F. Scott Fitzgerald who saw injustice in the world and, instead of just watching it, used their talent to (very sneakily) bring light to it. You could argue that these three men changed the world with their writing, and for that I admire them deeply. McCarthyism is one of those topics that you kind of had to experience to resonate with, but it completely makes sense to even the most shallow of people why it was not such a good thing. I suppose it doesn't relate to the modern day any further than the phrase "snitches get stitches", but it doesn't take a genius to work out why works like "The Crucible" and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" were written. I'll get onto the complete works of Fitzgerald and Kesey later, but it's Miller's time to shine here. 

To my best understanding, Arthur Miller wrote "The Crucible" because something about Salem, Massachusetts just seemed super 1950's America, and I guess he's right. I would say I'm not gonna bore anyone with the "I did a year of an English Literature degree and now I'm smart and can talk about symbolism" talk, but actually I also got an A in that. So I'm gonna keep going. See it matters that Miller wrote about McCarthyism, however indirectly, because how else would we know just how paranoid the people of America became? - well, those that weren't Russian spies. If you don't know what McCarthyism is, what I'd say is... "oh my god, how??", uh, but then I'd say that it was basically a phenomenon of mass paranoia caused by the concept of the U.S government suppressing communism and leftist views. People were encouraged to report 'un-American' behaviour to the authorities because they must be Russian spies in that case. People were persecuted in mass for being what they deemed as 'communists' and basically no one was safe because snitches did not, in fact, get stitches. They just got the blame deflected off of themselves.

They just got the blame deflected off of themselves.

This brings me onto "The Crucible". See, after that history lesson (I failed history awfully, by the way. Not an A, so don't believe a word I say), I'm going to talk about why all of this matters. Miller had to write about it, because paranoia never comes from a place of make-believe, especially in mass, and it happens more often than you'd think. Miller once wrote that paranoia "always secretes its pearl around a grain of fact" and that is so true. The play is about a series of residents of Salem, Massachusetts in 1692 who accuse each other of not following the church and, therefore, witchcraft. No, witchcraft doesn't exist, at least not in this universe, but the whole point was to solidify the notion that, when faced with danger, people would rather save themselves at the cost of others than put a stop to it. 

I think that "The Crucible" is revolutionary. I'm gonna put that out there, it's on the internet now. And I will get to the point eventually, but let me gush a little more. It's so short and yet so complex, it's a stage play but it can be read and has an incredible film adaptation starring Winona Ryder. And it was a privilege to study. I don't remember what I wrote in my exams, nor my coursework, but I can't imagine it was as sincere as this is. I recently purchased the book on Amazon, I fancied reading it again. And I did, and I just got done with it. I think I appreciated it more this time around. I could write pages and pages on it, but here are my main take aways.

Society is so much better off when people aren't so much in people's business. I've always said this being the recluse I am, and I'm so glad the only person in my business is myself. I don't really get up to anything, but can you imagine living in a world where everyone around you is a snitch? I think "The Crucible" - and I'm going to keep saying the name of the play because it deserves its title - reinforces the idea that, without privacy, society will just descend into chaos. Something a lot of people seem to take from "The Crucible" is that you should never jump to conclusions. I believe in giving people chances, you know. And maybe that opens me up to being manipulated and treated like less than I am worth, but Miller has had a great impact on my life and I intend to use his teachings whether they make much sense or not to the outside world. Reverend Parris jumps to conclusions about the girls dancing in the forest and, while not being wrong, he single-handedly condemns the whole village to a witch trial because of what he thought he saw. I'm as much a drama queen as the next person, but that man needed to take a chill pill. 

So, if you were to take my advice whether you should delve your brain into the world of Arthur Miller, here would be my advice. Go into it with a clear mind. You're going to be stressed, and there's more to keep up with than watching the Kardashians. But it's worth it. "The Crucible" is a story of absolute corruption within a society which does not truly believe it is on the correct path - but nobody says a word. The beauty of "The Crucible" is that it portrays the theme of hysteria in such a pure way, there is no hidden meanings for what is happening. It's easy to understand and analyse, and it makes it easy to sympathise with the reasoning for which it is written.

One thing beautiful, and one thing Miller himself wrote twenty-five years ago, was that the play sheds light on "a fascination with the outbreak of paranoia". It's enough to make anyone think. Overthink. The cogs of the mind keep on turning. Miller keeps on inspiring. It's been seventy years, and Arthur Miller has passed on now. Though it's not what initially the play was written for, I think it speaks volumes that it is still culturally significant. No, we aren't experiencing a Red Scare. No, we don't have threats of communism looming over our shoulders like an inescapable fog. But there's something innately human about paranoia. The play - "The (freaking) Crucible" - draws us together to realise that it's everywhere. There's paranoia all over us all the time. And "fascination", indeed.

A final note. Go read it. Go watch it. Go perform it. Keep it living. Much as we have for seventy years. There's a reason we still reference it today. Five stars, for absolute certain.

Consulted: (because I do my research)

"The Crucible" by Arthur Miller

"Why I wrote 'The Crucible'", Arthur Miller in the New Yorker in 1996.