“the Crucible” Critical Analysis
Join now to read essay “the Crucible” Critical Analysis
Arthur Miller has argued for years about the historical truth surrounding The Crucible, and defined its trans-historical subject as a social process that includes the Salem witchcraft trials and the anti-Communist investigations of the fifties. Though The Crucible is unrelenting in its opposition to the authoritarian systems represented by Puritanism and McCarthyism, its use of historical material and the position on moral tyranny, which it projects, seems far more complex than criticism on the play would suggest. Miller’s play is not interested in proclaiming a moral verdict, either on historical or on contemporary events. It does not want to instill a moral by analogizing between experiences, on which we have already reached a consensus, and contemporary problems, from which we may not have the distance to judge. Indeed, as Miller himself has stated, “life does provide some sound analogies now and again” (Budick 127-132).
Miller’s play is an argument in favor of moral flexibility. The fundamental flaw in the natures of the Puritan elders and by extension of the McCarthyites is precisely their extreme tendency toward moral