Act I of the Crucible Essay Example for Free

Act I of the Crucible Essay In reading the overture, before any dialogue takes place, we are given a small glimpse into the world of the Salemites. Miller speaks briefly of the town and the surrounding wilderness. The placement of Salem, surrounded by the impenetrable forest already starts building tension. The simple fact that forest is present prevents escape from Salem and therefore the inhabitants of Salem are unable to physically remove themselves from their problems and conflicts within the community. The forest itself is described as: dark and threatening, by Miller. This introduces an almost intangible danger and constant threat to the play. This alone will make the Salemites feel trapped; this pressured feeling being reflected throughout the play. More significant is the way in which the forest is said to be: over their shoulders. This creates a feeling that the inhabitants of Salem are being overshadowed by this great threat. As the play is a battle between light and dark, good and evil, this is particularly meaningful as it shows Salem being overpowered by the darkness. It also adds to the feelings of threat and menace the Salemites feel because it implies an unseen something watching them. When viewed in a historical context the forest serves another purpose. At the time of writing McCarthyism was sweeping America. Although more obvious parallels are drawn later in the play I believe the forest represents the looming threat of being accused a communist sympathiser. The audience would empathise with the Salemites through this shared threat; this link would have been used by Miller to give the entire play more impact. Another way in which Miller creates a feeling of tension is through the language used in both stage directions and in the speech of the characters. Miller uses power words to create an atmosphere of tension throughout the play. On the first page with speech, page six, words such as: frightened, trouble and fury. It is evident from the start that Salem is not the perfect pilgrim village it is meant, and used, to be. The fact that something is wrong in this village, wrong enough to make a minister weep, and react with such violence grabs the attention of the audience instantly. The stage directions are particularly telling of the moods of characters. Page seventeen sees Abigail and Proctor alone for the first time and the tension between them is clearly visible. For example Abigail has stood as though on tiptoe, absorbing his presence, when someone is on tiptoe their entire body goes tense as though anticipating something. This may be a very literal way of showing us tension between Proctor and Abigail. Later, on the same page, Abigail springs into his path. Again the word spring suggests she has been coiled, tense, awaiting his movement and it is this anticipation that Miller uses to great effect when showing us chemistry between two characters. Of all things, perhaps the fear of the unknown is the most potent. Miller uses this from the start and builds tension around the fact that the audience has as little or less information about the preceding events as the characters. As both the audience and characters are apparently in the dark about events surrounding Bettys condition there is again a link draw up between the two, this is used to the same effect as the McCarthyism link. Speech patterns also show the stress of the characters involved. For example, most characters start to shorten their words and speak in a far more rigid fashion than usual when feeling threatened or angry. These monosyllabic phrases litter the play and show the audience the rising conflicts in the community. On page twenty-six this is especially apparent. He had no right to sell it, says Putnam to Proctor. All the words in this sentence are monosyllabic, sharp and to the point. It is these changes that show the audience how the characters are really feeling. Miller uses these phrases to both show tension and to create it between characters throughout the play. Repetition plays an immense part in The Crucible. Specific words such as evil, unnatural and most obviously Devil are repeated to the point where they are appearing almost every page. Only Proctor and Paris seem set against the idea of supernatural tampering and even when the village is faced with a mass of evidence which supports more mundane explanations of events the cries of witchcraft are still as loud. It appears as if the Salemites want to believe Lucifer himself is threatening them. There is probably a lot of truth in that statement. The Salemites had fled England but a few generations ago and had done so to avoid persecution because of their beliefs. Now the Salemites are trapped and alone. It is ironic perhaps that their flight to freedom has in reality increased their isolation. Now they have no one to fight either. They were truly alone; perhaps the manic belief in Lucifers conquest of Salem was a release, an enemy against which they could fight the good fight. Without the unconverted heathens England offered it what was left but fighting the Devil himself or looking to your neighbour for anything that could be seen as an unholy blemish? The Salemites belief in the Devils power in Salem may have been started by the girls but was carried onwards and taken higher by almost all of the inhabitants of Salem, possibly because they wanted to believe in the corruption of their village. This scenario, as presented by Miller in Act I of The Crucible is at the core of all tension throughout the play. Miller makes us see how incredibly dangerous society can be when in the grip of hysteria, the audience of then would have known all too well. Through uses of different devices Miller feeds and augments the underlying tension at key moments until we realise that some dreadful act must take place before the village will realises what it has done. What action could be interpreted as the Devils work in a society gone mad? As we see from Goody Nurses and Proctors hanging, anything.

The View from the Bottom Rail Essay -- essays papers

The View from the Bottom Rail The Lewinsky Scandal†¦ A perfect example as to why we cannot accept everything at face value before carefully examining it first. Everyone thought President Clinton was behaving himself in the White House, but, as it turns out, he was most definitely not. This can be the same for history. We must carefully consider different aspects of articles so that we do no make the mistake of believing everything we read. In order to fully understand an article, we must understand the author that wrote it. It is necessary to examine prejudices, sources, information left out, and missing background information before accepting an article. This method of critical analysis allows us to better understand the article and therefore history because we are more aware of the authors and their possible mishaps. â€Å"The View from the Bottom Rail†, an article in After the Fact, provides an opportunity to examine different aspects of analysis. If we look at it carefully, then we will be able to determine if the thesis was proven effectively. In â€Å"The View from the Bottom Rail†, the authors, James Davidson and Mark Lytle, proposed, â€Å"For several reasons, that debased position has made it unusually difficult for historians to recover the freedman’s point of view.† Within the article, Davidson and Lytle cycled through different aspects as to why it is hard for historians to determine the â€Å"view from the bottom rail†. They questioned the validity of many sources that, if accurate, would have contained the perspective of an ex-slave. These sources included both white and black testimony. In order to examine these sources, the authors traced the topics using microcosm. Because they were covering a topic and not an event, microcosm was the most appropriate method of examining the subject. Davidson and Lytle first introduced a source. Then, they pondered over the different ways that the source could be biased. They took small segments from the source and used those to demonstrate why the source could not be taken at face value. For example, when examining the proposed source of a slave master’s account, Davidson and Lytle examined one aspect of this to make a conclusion. They determined that, â€Å"With slaves so dependent on the master’s authority, they were hardly likely to reveal their true feelings; the dangerous consequences of such indiscr... ...s old. The authors do question whether her mental status was viable or not. However, further background information was needed. It was imperative for the authors to examine the validity of this source before using it. It is not know if the ex-slave was capable of recalling accurate details of her life. Since the authors’ argument was that the same slave told two different stories depending on the circumstances of the interview, how do we know if the stories varied because of the circumstances or because of a poor or maybe even imaginative memory? This background information would make the authors’ arguments even more convincing. However, if we assume that the ex-slave was capable, then the argument is flawless. Overall, the article was well written. Only minor aspects were left uncovered. In addition, not much background information was needed. Also, the authors’ only had sparse and subtle prejudices. A variety of sources was used effectively. In the end, the thesis was proven convincingly. Almost all audiences would be assured that, â€Å"For several reasons, that debased position has made it unusually difficult for historians to recover the freedman’s point of view.†

Family on Government and vice versa Essay

As far as the government’s functions go, it is the unit of the family that is able to gain the most benefits. I view the family as the most basic and the most unprotected aspect of society. It is the government’s ability to provide regulations, guidelines, and protection that the family is able to continue its development. It might be raised at this point that the individual should be considered the most unprotected unit of society. However, I persist in believing that it is the family. The individual can still become a member of larger societal units. In fact, the individual can even go so far as to become a member of government. It is because of this fact that the collection of individuals called the family is the most in need of the services offered by the government that presides over it. However, there are forms of government wherein it is the family that comprises it. In oligarchies and monarchies, for example, the royal family comprises the governmental unit. It is in these cases that the interaction is reduced to one of family with family, of ruling class family with non-ruling class family, of bourgeois family with lower class family. This can also be likened to the type of interaction described to exist between the family and the society to which it belongs. In other ways, the family is also able to affect the government. Because the family forms the entirety of society and because it is able to mirror the mechanisms of society, it is also able to mirror and spread the mechanisms of government. The family is in charge of the education of the younger generation with regards to the powers of the government, the need to follow the impositions of the government, and also the specific laws and regulations set forth by the constitution. The task of propagating the ethics and morals of a good citizen that obeys the government lie on the shoulders of the members of the family. The concepts of restriction of behavior, meting punishments for unacceptable actions, and of obeying authority figures are also first understood by the child in the confines of the family. (Hegel, 2001) Society on Government and vice versa The government is said to be the regulating institution of society. It represents the majority of the population and provides frameworks as well as maintains peace and order. However, as I have stipulated, I believe that the inherent state in nature is peace and not war. Why then would a government be needed to maintain peace and order between its constituents and even with other governments? The state of war is not inherent in nature. However, it is also very much present in observable society. Why is this so? I believe that war stems from the inability of society to meet the needs of its members. This is in accordance with the propositions of Habermas (1998). Because of the society’s inability to completely meet the needs of its members, there is unrest and turmoil. War and violent conflict arise from these feelings of dissatisfaction. It is only through a strong power of the will that dissatisfaction is allowed to exist in an individual’s consciousness. I believe that the ineffective structuring of society creates feelings of unrest and dissatisfaction. When those with more are given more and those with less are asked for more, society is placed at an imbalance. This imbalance is unnatural. It is not the natural order of things. There is disequilibrium in society and as a result, there are individuals who are abused and unsatisfied. Again, this is also in accordance with the views of Marx and Engel (1978) regarding ruling class and non-ruling class. There is no chance for equilibrium or stability to be attained because as Marx and Engel (1978) stated, the ruling class practices hegemony. They use their ideologies to maintain power over the lower class. It is only with active revolt from the lower class that the structure of society can be changed. Thus war becomes an option to those whose dissatisfaction has become so great that they can no longer live with it. Without the government, these feelings of dissatisfaction would reign across the world. There would, indeed, be numerous states of war across the globe. Peace would be hard to find and individuals would find it impossible to achieve their true personal goals in life. A government is needed in order to regulate the interaction of the ruling class and the non-ruling class. Without the government, society would be in a constant flux of change and revolt. It is the institution of the government that allows society to remain its peace and as such to progress. However, it may well be the case that the government is simply a tool of the ruling class to maintain power, a means to their option of hegemony. This is exactly why even though there are governments in place today, wars still occur. There is still a disequilibrium in the social structure. Also, the government is not representative of the majority. This is a fact stressed by Kant (1983) to be of the utmost importance in considering government models and systems utilized in a given state. There is, therefore, a type of government that will best serve the purposes of society and the individual. Although there are numerous forms of government, not all are adaptive to society and its members. The mode of government is a point of greater consideration than the type of sovereignty afforded. (Kant, 1983) Society, however, plays a greater role in government. It is more than just a place wherein the functions of government can be practiced. In fact, it is my belief that society and government act in much the same way that the President and the House of Congress act in a Republic government. That is that society and government act as checks and balances of each other. Although it is true that there is no clear definition of legal power that society has on a particular government – in the way that government has on society – it is also true that the dominant form of politics in a state are defined by society. Because most governments rely on society’s good will towards it, society is able to check and balance the processes of the government. In modes of government involving votation, society dictates the candidates to be deemed more capable and reliable to place in position. This is done through the ideologies espoused by society. Thus two different political parties can be chosen from but the thrust of the resulting government will be based on the value systems established by society on its members. For modes of government, on the other, hand that do not include an electoral system, society is able to operate as a larger checks and balances system. Because monarchies and oligarchies and other similar forms of government give the ruler the right to decree laws and statutes by himself, society plays a crucial role. Social agreement or social rejection may be the only difference between a ruler’s decree of implementing the death penalty, for example, as a punishment to a severe crime. Thus we see that society plays a large role in defining government actions even in these individualistic or familial forms of governance. On this point, however, the revision and reconsideration of laws in systems with electoral systems and with more formal methods of passing laws is also highly dependent on society’s moral and ethical stand. The three-strike law for example, wherein criminals convicted of a crime three times receive a heavier sentence or a longer imprisonment period, was not revised because the constituents of the State of California did not agree to the provision that only severe crimes would be subject to this law.

Achebe and Fanon on Colonization and Decolonization

Living in the same region for an extended period of time will endow the human inhabitant with a sense of pride in their homeland. When this idea is extended to a certain group of people living in the same area, pride turns into nationalism. The residents not only feel like they geographically own the land, but their history of culture in that given area lends them an emotional connection as well. When people of elsewhere come to take the land from the native inhabitants, many changes occur. In his book The Wretched of the Earth, Franz Fanon gives his insight into how the process of colonization and decolonization happens, and the resulting physical and mental effects on both groups of people. Telling this from a strictly historical and†¦show more content†¦As Fanon states, But the thing he [the settler] does not see, precisely because he is permeated by colonialism and all its ways of thinking, is that the settler, from the moment that the colonial context disappears, has no longer any interest in remaining or in co-existing (Fanon). While the tribe viewed the settlers as nothing more than an unwanted pest and let their guard down, the settlers established a more developed culture right next door and proceeded to take them over right in front of their eyes. As explained by Fanon, there comes a point where the natives either attempt the process of decolonization or give up, and in the case of the Umofia, because their physical leader Okonkwo was absent during the time to revolt, by the time he returned it was too late and the tribe had given in to the white man. Though the full process is not completed in Achebe s book, colonization happens, which, as stated by Fanon, is part of decolonization. Fanon makes the point that decolonization is the process of total upheaval, and more often than not it boils down to violence. He states, That affirmed intention of placing the last at the head of things, and to climb at a pace (too quickly, some say) the well-known steps which characterize an organized society, can only triumph if we use all means to turn the scale, including, of course, that of violence. (Fanon). In Things Fall Apart, though the violenceShow MoreRelatedThe Postcolonial Of Amitav Ghosh s Novels Let Us Begin3362 Words   |  14 Pagespostcolonial readings of Amitav Ghosh’s novels let us begin by understanding what postcolonial literature is. In this chapter, I will try to understand what the postcolonial literature does by theorizing the entire process of imperialization or colonization. In the following chapters I will try to understand the postcolonial perspective in Amitav Ghosh’s fictional works. As Peter Barry observes in his Beginning Theory, postcolonial criticism emerged as a distinct category only in the 1990s. It hasRead MoreHistory And Culture Of The Negritude Movement1658 Words   |  7 Pagesa sign of an awakening of race wistfulness for blacks in the African Diaspora and those in Africa. This new race wistfulness stemmed from the rediscovery of an original self (of the blacks), elicited a group condemnation of Western domination, colonization of the black people, enslavement, and anti-black racism. It seeks to dispel the stereotypes and myths associated with the black people, through acknowledging their achievements, history and culture, as well as repossessing their contributions toRead MoreOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.163893 Words   |  656 Pagestwentieth century as a coherent unit for teaching, as well as for written narrative and analysis. Though they do not exhaust the crucial strands of historical development that tie the century together—one could add, for example, nationalism and decolonization—they cover in depth the defining phenomena of that epoch, which, as the essays demonstrate, very often connect in important ways with these and other major developments. The opening essays of this collection underscore the importance of including