The Crucible Source Analysis
In Arthur Miller's “The Crucible” the last words uttered by the people at the end of the Salem witch trial were ones with no regret as they hung to death in front of the town. All of these people who were in fact innocent all faced similar problems due to the Puritan religion and government being, in essence, one in the same. Jealousy, revenge, and fear of the unknown sets the stage for how one persons should act vs how the people did act in the religious society.
With the Puritan religion and the government intertwined as deeply as they were one of them had to be dominant, in this case it was the religion which is what changed people to do what they did. In Source A Proctor doesn’t want to “blacken all of them [his friends] when this is nailed …show more content…
It’s hard to say the reason, but it can be assumed that Danforth is accusing someone of practicing witchcraft. Danforth is using his status as a judge to fuel people's revenge and fear by sending anyone accused of a witch to death. Danforth can only be a religious figure or a judge he can't be both because that manipulates his logic of what is right and what is wrong. In source C the author, who discusses the entirety of the play, has an interesting point of of mentioning “..[Puritans are] prone to a certain amount of intolerance towards any form of opposition or dissent… any form of individuality will be considered subversive and dangerous.” People in puritan society could not be different they had to be like everyone else drab and basic. There was a fear of anything that was original, or could, in there mind, be associated with the devil. This shaped how they acted in the presence of whom they thought was a witch. If someone was thought to be a witch they would be outcasted immediately, friends and family would abandon them because they were thought to be associating with devil, performing heinous acts against God. Source D is a good example of how persons should act vs how most people acted. The first line, “If ever two were one, then surely we” is example of how someone married should act, this woman's love for her husband is everlasting and she puts there love before anything else in her
With the Puritan religion and the government intertwined as deeply as they were one of them had to be dominant, in this case it was the religion which is what changed people to do what they did. In Source A Proctor doesn’t want to “blacken all of them [his friends] when this is nailed …show more content…
It’s hard to say the reason, but it can be assumed that Danforth is accusing someone of practicing witchcraft. Danforth is using his status as a judge to fuel people's revenge and fear by sending anyone accused of a witch to death. Danforth can only be a religious figure or a judge he can't be both because that manipulates his logic of what is right and what is wrong. In source C the author, who discusses the entirety of the play, has an interesting point of of mentioning “..[Puritans are] prone to a certain amount of intolerance towards any form of opposition or dissent… any form of individuality will be considered subversive and dangerous.” People in puritan society could not be different they had to be like everyone else drab and basic. There was a fear of anything that was original, or could, in there mind, be associated with the devil. This shaped how they acted in the presence of whom they thought was a witch. If someone was thought to be a witch they would be outcasted immediately, friends and family would abandon them because they were thought to be associating with devil, performing heinous acts against God. Source D is a good example of how persons should act vs how most people acted. The first line, “If ever two were one, then surely we” is example of how someone married should act, this woman's love for her husband is everlasting and she puts there love before anything else in her