Monthly Archives: November 2019

If I’m A Witch, You’re A Witch

0
Posted on by

In this unit, we read and analyzed The Crucible written by Arthur Miller, a tragedy play that took place in Salem written and performed in the 1953. The play itself includes a lot of themes and connections between characters’ relationships and the story setting. Therefore, we gave extra effort to really go above and beyond. First, we had a dramatic reading summative that allows us to get into a character’s tone, emotion, actions, and communication. Then, we analyzed a prompt given to us by the TIEA format, which allows us to think deep and take evidence from the play write to support our message. Lastly, we composed a blog post that shows connections on a theme in the play write to either text, self, or world.

Dramatic Reading

TIEA

Blog Post
The Disjoint OR Mutually Exclusive Characters

The Disjoint OR Mutually Exclusive Characters

2
Posted on by

When two events are disjoint, they have no common outcomes and cannot occur together. Have you wondered how this definition plays a role in The Crucible?

For two disjoint events, the probability that one or the other occurs is the sum of the probabilities of the two events. In The Crucible, Judge Hathorne and the Deputy Governor, Judge Danforth, are the two characters that serves as foil for each other.

In Act 3 in The Crucible, Judge Danforth holds and displays the power and dominance he has in the court. However, this makes his anxiety clear that he centers on his reputation to the majority. Therefore, it makes his decision biased, or that his decision can be altered easily based on the majority’s opinion.

Judge Hathorne doesn’t worries about his reputation because he has the majority’s trust. The minority who does not agree with him doesn’t matter. However, he does not trust the accuracy of his opinions. As the service of foil, Danforth trust himself as a fair-minded, which allows the court to be processed. Even though the two characters have completely opposite character traits, it allows the play to rise in plot, but doesn’t cross the line. If they have the same character trait of Judge Hathorne, the purpose of the court serves nothing. If they have the same character trait of Judge Danforth, there will be arguments arising between the two judges and the dominance control over the court.

“Power and Dominance in the Court” by quimono via Pixabay

HATHORNE, astonished. She have robbed you?
PARRIS. Thirty-one pound is gone. I am penniless. He covers his face and sobs.
DANFORTH. Mr. Parris, you are a brainless man! He walks in thought, deeply worried. (117)

The emotion and context Harthorne and Danforth serves is completely different in the court. Hathorne doesn’t make much opinions about the case while Danforth bursts out his thoughts.

HATHORNE. Excellency, she is condemned a witch. The court have–
DANFORTH, in deep concern, raising a hand to Hathorne. Pray You. To Parris. How do you propose, then? (118)

The power and dominance of the court surely is being hold by Danforth, that he has the power to cut off Hathorne’s words.

The connection to characters that serves as foil to each other, isn’t necessarily disjoint about the characters, it’s about their character trait. To me, each and every family are disjoint because they each have different ways of doing things and things that they are used to do. Family members are complement to each other which also serves as foil to each other about their placement in the family. Some family members take up more and the others will receive less, but the probability that one or the others occur is the sum of the probabilities of the all the family members, 1.

The definition also allows the rule that one cannot entirely take over the other, in other words, to replace. If Judge Hathorne doesn’t have Danforth, he will have no control over the court, because nobody’s in control if Danforth’s gone. In another perspective, if a family member takes over another’s spot in the family, it’s not a family because someone is there but stands zero in the probability of 1.

MLA Citations:

Miller, Arthur. The Crucible: A Play In Four Acts. New York : Penguin Books, 1976. Print.

Hypocrites in The Crucible

2
Posted on by

Beliefs doesn’t only show the problem of witchcraft in the play but also are an important theme in the time period and in the city of Salem. As beliefs can represent a person’s value, people that value their reputation a lot will try to use the belief as a tool to make themselves look more noble and righteous.

In The Crucible by Arthur Miller, John Proctor is a hypocrite because he uses the belief that is popular to make his reputation look good. And to preserve and protect his reputation, he presented himself in the guise of others and often made basic violations in life. As Reverend Hale interviewed Proctor at late evening, to present his thought about religion, Proctor showed trouble in answering the basic 10 commandments. Moreover, describes this most important part of religion to be a small fault.

PROCTOR, counting on his fingers: Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods … With some hesitation: Thou shalt remember the Sabbath Day and keep it holy. He is stuck. He counts back on his fingers, knowing one is missing. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.

HALE: You have said that twice, sir.

PROCTOR, lost: Aye. He is failing for it. (Miller, 63).

Image by Jondolar Schnurr from Pixabay

After deep considerations about what is being violated, I agree with Proctor, what he said. As for what he did, is obviously wrong.

PROCTOR, as though a secret arrow had pained his heart: Aye. Trying to grin it away—to Hale: You see, sir, between the two of us we do know them all. Hale only looks at proctor, deep in his attempt to define this man. Proctor grows more uneasy. I think it be a small fault. (Miller, 64).

I do not agree with what Proctor did here, in other words, he has great reputation, only because he is known religious, which is a betrayal of his person. However, compared to other hypocritical characters such as Reverend Hale, the spiritual leader of the community, he violates the commandments by his greedy and selfish trait. Compared to what Proctor said, “it be a small fault” is what I agree on. If religion is so important and righteous, these conflicts and arguments wouldn’t occur. It is because these people are too dependent on religion so that all actions will be connected with religion and conflicts would occur. I suppose these characters will get better along without religious belief, and if not, referring back to what Proctor mentioned, don’t depend too much on it.

Works Cited:
Miller, Arthur. “The Crucible.” New York, Penguin Classics, 2003.