Hi Everyone:
For our final post on the Crucible, you
can either a) share your thoughts on the play as a whole and how the
ending affected your experience of the play, or b) share your
impressions of the film. Were scenes dramatized well? Did some scenes
deviate from the play or were they faithful to the play? And what did
you think of the scenes that were not in the play but were in the film?
How did these scenes change your understanding of the play? This will
be due the evening of Wednesday, October 30th. Thanks, Mr. Telles.
In the Crucible film, many scenes where dramatized very well and caused the spectator to feel sad, happy, or even a sense of anger. When George Jacobs was on trial as a witch, it was certain that the majority viewing the film felt sad. As he plead to the Ruth Putnam about how he had been her neighbor for twenty years, and that he couldn’t have come into her room at night because he was unable to walk. I was very angry that Mr. Putnam was killing off his neighbors to buy their land, and try to make more money. Also, during the scene when John Proctor called Abigail a whore and Mrs. Proctor was brought in and lied for John, which caused his entire argument to be false and useless. After John said that he had confessed, you could tell that Mrs. Proctor knew what she did and what the repercussions would be. Finally, when Proctor was turned on by Mary Warren, and she spoke of how she saw him with the devil and that he was controlling her, he proclaimed “God is Dead!”. This was one of the most important parts of the novel because it showed how he had given up on the town and was ready to accept his fate and be killed. He had done everything he could to fight it, and in the end it wasn’t enough. These scenes were, in my mind, portrayed perfectly by the movie. I enjoyed the movie and felt it was directed well and held my attention better than most of the movies I have seen based on books I had read previously.
ReplyDeleteB) I enjoyed both reading the book and watching the film of "The Crucible". Speaking from personal preference, I thought the movie portrayed emotion and intensity of each scene in the play better than the book did. I found myself having to reread many different parts of the book because it didn't really sink in when I read it the first time. Some scenes from the film did, in fact, deviate from the play. For example, at the very end of the film when John Proctor, Martha Corey, and Rebecca Nurse were preparing to be hanged, the empathy was much more powerful than in the book. Everyone that was about to get their lives taken away from them were praying with each other out loud reciting the Lords Prayer. This did not happen in the book and I think it brought about more sympathy for the characters. Also, another example is when Mr. Jacobs was in the courtroom having been accused of witchcraft. As a viewer of the film, you could tell in his voice and the look on his face that he was an innocent, poor little man that meant no harm. In the book, I couldn't tell whether he really was an innocent man or if he was lying in the court. These scenes demonstrate how a film can drift away or go against its corresponding book. If I had to recommend the book or the film to a peer, I would definitely recommend the film because I was more intrigued and it certainly held my attention longer with no confusion. Experiencing the film enhanced my understanding of not only the play itself, but also the setting, what the atmosphere was like at the time, what the people were like, and also, what it could have been like in reality in Salem, Massachusetts in the late 1600's.
ReplyDeleteThe Crucible film was interesting to watch. The tension and horror and all of the different emotions displayed upon the character really did grasp the viewer and gave them a better perspective on the intensity of the drama.The scenes were definitely faithful to the play. For example, in court when Abigail decided to go against Mary Warren and pretend that it was her that was sending her spirit to her, you could clearly see the burst of confusion and agony upon Mary's face, which you could not in the book. The emotions and feelings portrayed in the movie made the fewer viewer feel more connected to the story than the novel did. One particular scene that I think that was not in the book but was in the movie was the scene where Abigail goes to Danforth and complains to him that Hale's wife also sent her spirit on her but Danforth refused to believe her. I found this interesting since Danforth believed all the other women that Abigail pointed her finger to, however, he did not believe that Hale's wife had sent her spirit upon her. This started to show that Danforth was beginning to be doubtful of Abigail. Other than that, the book and movie were the same. Altogether, the movie did increase my knowledge of the novel and it was enjoyable.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the book The Crucible I had some trouble understanding what was happening at times. The dialogue of the text was somewhat difficult for me to comprehend, but after reading scenes over, discussing the book as a class, and watching the movie, I was able to understand the book and what was happening much more clearly. However, I though the movie portrayed the book very well. All of the characters were interpreted just as I had imagined. I would have to say that the movie intensified and added more drama to many of the scenes. Fore example, the tension is built up very high when in court and Elizabeth Proctor is called upon to state whether John has committed the crime of adultery. While reading the book I knew that this was an important scene, but overlooked the emotion that Elizabeth, John, and even Abigail must have been feeling. The movie really made clear to me the intense emotion and fear that was being felt at this time. Also, when Elizabeth and John Proctor are alone together for the last time was expressed greater in the movie than the book. This was a sad and somewhat powerful scene when John and Elizabeth are discussing whether he should sign, give up this good name, and claim he is guilty along with Martha Corey and Rebecca nurse, or die an innocent man. John and Elizabeth show more affection toward each other than ever in this scene. It showed John’s true love for his wife and home much she means to him. Watching the movie helped me to comprehend the story much more. Overall, I think that The Crucible by Arthur Miller was an interesting and enjoyable book to read along with the movie.
ReplyDeleteB) I had many different thoughts on the book “The Crucible” By Arthur Miller. I thought that the concept and main idea of the book was very interesting. The history of the witch trials is a very confusing but at the same time interesting topic. However, the storyline and characters in the book got me very confused. My favorite part of the whole unit on the book was watching the film. I love reading a book and then watching a film, because you can finally picture what each character looks like after trying to make an image in your head for them. I also liked watching the film, because for me to learn something i have to see it from many ways. So after reading the book and seeing certain scenes in the movie, made me actually to start understanding the story. I thought that this film in particular followed the story for mostly everything while in other films based off of books usually do not. I liked how the movie put emotion behind each scene and made you actually get into the play and start empathizing with the characters while when reading you sometimes can not do that. One scene that i particularly enjoyed that was not mentioned in the the book was when Abigail goes to the jail to see John Proctor right before the end and she tries to convince him to come with her to Barbados but he says we'll meet again but it will be in hell. I feel like this scene could have added to the book, because it kind of gives some closer between them and shows how much in his face that he despises her for what she has done. After reading and watching The Crucible I have a very good idea not only of the book but of the history behind the witch trials and the setting of salem in the late 1600’s.
ReplyDeleteArthur Miller’s “The Crucible” was an enjoyable book. In my opinion, this was a very interesting book. While this was a very enjoyable and interesting book, it was at times confusing. There were so many characters in this book and most of their last names were very similar. For example John Proctor, Mr. Putnam, and Mr. Parris all have similar last names, so I got really confused. Another reason I didn’t like the book was because I hated how so many innocent people died without doing anything wrong. They literally were killed for nothing. That really angered me. The movie was a lot better for me. The movie was a lot easier to understand and even though the book was enjoyable, I liked the movie so much more. While watching the movie you could see and feel the emotion. I felt that I didn’t notice how intense the emotion was at times, when reading the book. Although some scenes were added in the movie, I felt that the additions were necessary for one to completely grasp what was going on and how intense this time really was. For example, a scene that was added and was necessary was when Abigail went to see John Proctor to tell him that she was leaving and that it would be so easy for her to free him so he could go with her. This scene shows that all of the accusations are false. Also, that all this hanging was for nothing. Nobody should have been hung resulting from these accusations, there was no real proof. It was just a bunch of girls accusing others who they knew were easy targets. When John Proctor says something like he’ll see her in hell, you fully understand his feelings towards her. He is very angry with her for what she has done. Also, he does not want anything to do with her. The scene when Abigail accuses Reverend Hale’s wife of witchcraft, is another significant addition. When Danforth tells Abigail that she is wrong and that this is not true, you understand that he knows that some, if not all of this is false. This made me very mad. He could ignore this information about Hale’s wife and prevent her from being hung, but he allowed all of the other innocent people to be hanged. Danforth was a hypocrite. Another addition that was necessary, was at the end of the story, when John Proctor is about to be hung along with Martha Corey and Rebecca Nurse and they all say a prayer. That prayer being said made it so much sadder. You see that they have tried everything they could without lying and that there is nothing more they can do. They have accepted that they are going to be killed and are preparing for what comes next. Another reason I understood the movie so much better, is because when watching a movie after reading the book you can actually see the characters and therefore are able to separate them and not get confused as to who is who. In my opinion, both the book and the movie were likeable. The movie was just a lot easier to understand and more enjoyable for me. The film version of “The Crucible” enhanced the book. Also, the movie did a very good job of portraying the book.
ReplyDelete“The Crucible” by Arthur Miller was actually enjoyable. At first I struggled to understand what was happening and to understand who the characters were. By the end of the book, I had caught on and started to like the book. It all began to make sense to me. The class discussions helped a lot towards appreciating the book and without them I would probably still be lost. They gave me a concept as towards characters motives behind their actions, and what their ultimate goals were. The end of the story was pretty good in my opinion as it expressed all the emotions being held in by John Proctor. He blew up on everyone and anyone restraining him and just let everything he felt out. This ended in him being hung, but he expressed his strength as he never fully gave in. The character sheet you handed out is what finally changed my perspective on the story. The names of the characters sound similar so I was getting them confused. I found the film actually not to be as enjoyable. Don’t get me wrong, it was good and all but it wasn’t put together nearly as well as the screenplay. I liked reading the small details and playing it out in my head rather than attempting to comprehend the actions happening in the movie. The actors did a fairly good job in the film portraying the characters. I missed school on Friday and sadly missed the second half of the film. As a result, I hadn’t realized much about what had deviated in the film from the book. All in all, the book was amusing and I found it to be worth the time we spent on it. Others who may disagree with this statement usually didn’t read the whole book or didn’t pay attention to the details so it was all just a big blur to them. When reading a book I like to go slow so I don’t miss the details which make it so intriguing. The Crucible was certainly entertaining.
ReplyDelete“The Crucible” written by Arthur Miller was overall an alright book. While reading the book it could get confusing at times about what was going on and keeping track of the characters. But the concept of it all was pretty interesting. Watching the film really enhanced the play. The film really lets you see who the characters are even if its not the way you imagined them to look. Like Giles, I thought he was going to look way different than he did. Watching the movie shows more emotion than just reading it. You can really see what is happening. A scene where you could really see what was happening was the scene when Proctor and Abigail are outside of the house and Abigail is trying to convince John that she knows he still loves her. Actually watching the scene where Mr. Putnam got stoned to death was dramatic. Another dramatic scene in the film is when John Proctor, Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey are about the get hung and they start to say a prayer as it is happening. I also liked the scene when they were all in the room screaming names of whose spirits they saw because it really showed how much they all turned on each other. A scene that was not in the book but was in the film that changed my understanding of the play was when Abigail visited John in jail telling him she stole money from Mr. Parris and that she wanted him to run away to Barbados with her and he refused. Another scene that changed my understanding of the play was when Abigail goes to Danforth and said that Hale’s wife’s spirit was attacking her and Danforth stood up to her knowing she was lying and told her that she must have been mistaken, as much as she tried to convince him. Overall I liked the film more than the book.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading The Crucible I was left with many unanswered questions in my head. The Crucible constantly left you with unanswered questions that intrigued you to keep reading. Towards the end of the book Abigail Williams decides to run away from Salem when things get tough. Questions I still have is where has Abigail gone? Who is she with? What is she doing? Abigail Williams was one of the most fascinating characters from The Crucible. She would always do something to surprise you. Abigail was a very mysterious girl that intrigued you with the actions she committed. I believe that there should be a sequel to The Crucible. It should follow up on Abigail and where she has settled and what her lifestyle may be like. Many people would take interest in the book because many people enjoyed reading about Abigail and her devious ways. Another question I have that may not be very important is what happened to the Proctor's. Once John Proctor got executed his family was left to survive on their own. He has two little boys that now had to grow up without a father influence. Finding out what happened to the children would be very interesting. Also, what did they think of their father? Do they believe that Proctor made a good idea by choosing to get executed instead of confessing to a sin and getting his name hung upon the wall of the church? The day that John Proctor was executed his sons and wife were forced to live on their own, so I believe that one question I still have about The Crucible is how did the death of John Proctor effect his loved ones. I found The Crucible to be a book that would always leave you asking questions.
ReplyDeleteArthur Miller’s, “The Crucible,” opened my eyes to a better understanding of the witch trials that occurred within Salem’s history. It is one thing to learn of the information and its events, but sometimes the reality of the time cannot be completely understood without a clear thorough representation of what happened. By telling the story of what happened with several personal experiences in the play, it was brought to light just how ridiculous that time was. It brought forth the number of precious lives and loved one that were lost to an unruly and superstitious court and the types of people that can take advantage of such a situation. These people reveal in everyday life what is truly evil or “corrupted” for that matter rather than the poor souls being accused. The play also brought forth the reality of the situation by its devastating ending. I expected all to end well with John Proctor living the rest of his life with his wife and the girls who pretended to be victims of witches to be convicted, but it portrays how life does not always have a happy ending as many people desire. The film further demonstrated the emotional tension that was presented during the occasion. It is one thing to read lines upon a page, but something much more powerful seeing them conveyed with such anger, passion, or hope. It was quite moving especially because the characters can be realistic to the point that a reader or viewer grows attached to them. I know I was. The book has several occasions that led me to ask many questions, however the added scenes within the film helped to decrease the number of inquisitions I had. In conclusion, experiencing “The Crucible” has opened my eyes to just how drastically Salem was impacted by the executions carried out unfairly for many years.
ReplyDelete"The Crucible" movie left quite an impression on me. I thought the scenes added to the movie enhanced the book and also helped clarify it. It was nice to put the names with the faces and see how the characters were portrayed. In my opinion, the movie really shows the characters emotions and makes the scenes more dramatic. I never realized how important and dramatic the scene where Abigail confesses her love to John Proctor is until I saw the movie. "The Crucible" movie really helped me realize the importance of each scene. One thing that was added to the movie was the scene at the end where Martha Corey, Rebecca Nurse and John Proctor are all praying. That part was so intense and heart wrenching as each were pushed to their death. The scene at the end really tied the whole book together for me and made me enjoy the whole experience.
ReplyDeleteA) After we had finished the crucible in class I was still a bit confused about some things that had happened in the book. For me it would have been easier to read if the book was not written like a play. My preference is that plays are must harder to read than just a regular novel. During the beginning of the book I was having trouble keeping up with everything that was going on. I was still confused with the characters so that made it harder for me to follow the story. Something that got me a little frustrated was the fact that Danforth believed everything the girls said and, the fact that the girls got off scot free. Why didn’t they realize or even think for a second that the girls were lying. Why would the girls be so honest and didn’t it seem weird that the spirits only attacked the girls in that group? I dislike Abigail the the most out of all the characters in the book though. I hate how she thinks she could control all the girls and the court, also she is the biggest snitch and started the whole thing just because of a guy that she “loved”. Out of everybody I would have much rather saw Abigail get hung. I thought it was wrong how Procter got persecuted and hung just for going against the courts rules. If they were all such religious men then why would God witnessing the confession be enough, they do not have to destroy the reputation of a whole family because of one person. There were many questions I had about the book and overall I thought it was an ok book but I thought it was much better after seeing the movie and the visual aspect of everything.
ReplyDeletePersonally I had mixed feelings about the book “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller. Overall I think it was a good book because I found the topic and the events in the book interesting. This was a piece of history that is very close to home. It was cool to me that this was based on true occurrences that took place very close to Gloucester. The way that everyone attacked each other and exposed their fellow townspeople intrigued me. These people would do anything to avoid having the spotlight on their own lives and their own secrets. The reason I didn’t like the book was because with all the action and all the characters it was confusing at times. There was a lot to follow involving several characters. I found myself lost at times which made my understanding of the whole story a little shady. The end of the play really drove home a few points. One was the power of one’s words and the impact they can have. When one person accuses someone of witchcraft, even with no evidence, the whole town now accuses them of being a witch. In result of the accusations you either admit to being a witch and have your name be nailed to the church doors for all to see or you are hung if you do not confess. Another point I picked up at the end of the book is the pride these townspeople posses. These innocent people would rather have their lives taken from them to prevent them from being blacklisted. as John Proctor cried at the end of the play “Because it is my name and I cannot have another in my life!... Leave me my name!” He cannot live a lie so he rips up his confession and allows the town to watch him be hung.
ReplyDeleteB) The movie the Crucible was actually much better then I expected it to be. The movie was very good at answering questions that I had on the book. The book to me was very confusing and hard to follow. In my experience, the book opened up my eyes to what was actually happening and I understood what they were saying in the book at that point. I am a visual person and the movie was so good and clear. It really helped me picture the characters better and get a sense of what they were like. The movie really stayed close to the play and didn't deviate very much with new scenes. There may have been a few, but not many. All the characters in the movie were really good at their roles.
ReplyDeletePersonally I thought that both the book and the play were over-dramatized, but that made it kind of likable. The feelings of anger, sorrow, regret, and lust were drawn out to the point that you could not mistake them for anything else. I liked the fact that even though the characters were corrupt in what they were doing, they were doing it for a reason. Each and every character had a moral or value as to why they were doing what they were choosing to do. Abigail was doing get rid of an obstacle in her path to love and lust. The Putnam's wanted land and closure. Even John Proctor gave into the lies over pride. Another thing I liked about the crucible was that it was written in play format. The play format made it so that everyone had a chance to read. It also made it so that we had a chance to wear the characters shoes as we read the book. What I didn't like in the movie was that I imagined a lot of the characters to look and sound different. I imagined Martha Corey with a mousy, quiet voice.... I am also curious as to where the girls went. Can there be a Crucible two?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed watching the film "the crucible " alot more then reading the book. The scenes in the film were dratized very well one scene that was very dramatized is at the end when all the girls run in the lake and mary warren accuses provtor of witch craft. The way the charecters looked and the way they talked also helped understanding when this story took place and how people went about life back then. one scene that was in the film and not the book was when abagail comes to proctor in jail and tells him that she is leaving for a ship and has stolen money and she wants him to come with her. In the book we were just informed that she had dotched town with mercy lewis. The film was more iteresting and seemed to keep my attention alot better them the book did.
ReplyDeleteAs a whole, the plot of the Crucible did not address certain points clearly. There were many characters, all who had a problem with one thing or another. Reverend Parris and Proctor did not get along while Abigail had it out for Elizabeth. This did play into the storyline as they all had some reason to accuse one another, but this also made it hard to read. The plot wasn’t explained much until the end of the book. For the first couple of parts, it was hard to understand why everything was happening. It also did not really address the citizens’ thirst for power and how that had affected the witch trials. Thomas Putnam, for example, used the trials in his favor. He accused those who had property near him so that he could obtain their land. Watching the movie did help my understanding of the play. However, I think that the scenes that were changed from the book went against Arthur Miller’s intent. The scene with Abigail visiting John Proctor is an example of this. The jail scene between the two showed the feelings that Abigail still had for him. I think that the books version expressed how she would stop at nothing to get what she wanted which was what Miller was trying to get across. But besides this, the movie did a good job getting the central theme across.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the crucible was a really good play. It had a good structure to the story and it was also very exciting. I liked how the book told the events in Act according to where the characters were. The characters really made you walk in their shoes and allowed you to see where they were coming from. This was the case, especially, in John Proctors standpoint. He was a very interesting character considering what he had gone through with Abigail, the ring leader in the witch trials. John brought me into his perspective of the trials and events at hand by his strong dialogues and good use of words. I really liked the plot and I thought it was fascinating how close we are to the setting of the story, Salem. The ending of the play also really surprised me. I was convinced that John Proctor would confess and avoid the rope, however this was not his decision. Instead, he defended his name by refusing to give in and allowed the court to take his life. On the contrary, there were some things I did not like so much about the play. It was kind of hard to follow and there were so many characters it was difficult to keep track. I often confused the people in the play and the book did not give the characters much description. I movie, on the other hand, was very clear, to the point, and much more intriguing.
ReplyDeleteI personally love the book, The Crucible by Arthur Miller. I feel that, although it is not entirely historically accurate, it is a great representation of the confusion and intensity of that time period. The relationships that Miller creates between each of the characters, I feel, accurately shows the “behind the scenes” action of the Salem witch trials. Being an actress myself, I can’t help but get wrapped up in the whole story and imagine how I would put on this play if I were directing it. I love how the characters feed off each other and I love the language and phrasing that Miller used throughout the play. I think it would be really fun to play Mary Warren in a production of this show, or maybe Abigail Williams. The ending of the play, as much as Proctor’s decision frustrates me, I thought was very climatic and well thought out. The trials are all wrapped up in pride and greed, and the fact that Proctor would rather die than have his name put up on the church door, is a huge example of that. It really is terrible that in that time, and even to a certain degree now, people are so afraid of what others might say about them or think about them, that they would rather end their life then wait for the whole situation to blow over. The trials were a brief period of hysteria and if everyone had just confessed and gone home, I think that the whole experience would have been forgotten about eventually. Now, although I know this wouldn’t have happened, I wish that the townspeople and judges who actually believed there were witches could realize how idiotic they’re being in believing spectral evidence. But, that’s a whole other rant, which I won’t get into. All in all, I really enjoyed reading The Crucible and hope that later on in my life I can be involved in a production of it.
ReplyDelete“The Crucible” by Arthur Miller, was a very interesting story. When we first started reading the book I didn't expect to like it. There were too many characters and their relationships with each other were difficult to follow. However as we got more into the story I found myself enjoying it and understanding the meaning of the book. To me the book wasn't really about hysteria, but more about how easily our own issues with each other can spiral out of control. In the end when John Proctor was deciding whether or not to sign a false confession, it actually made me wonder what I would do in his situation. The book really got to me on a personal level when he is choosing between honesty and his life. When he chooses to tell the the truth I felt mixed emotions. I was so happy that he chose to remain true to himself and his beliefs, but at the same time so disappointed that he was dying for telling the truth. The way the story ended really made me consider if the truth was worth dying for. Even though “The Crucible” wasn't a completely factual story, it changed my opinion on the Salem witch trials. Before reading the book I thought of the trials as a bunch of crazy people who lost their faith in God and didn't know how to handle it. Now I see that the trials were more about each individuals conflict with society. I actually did enjoy reading “The Crucible”, it was interesting to see the characters relationships with each other. It also caused me to question my own values and beliefs about what it means to be honest with yourself.
ReplyDelete"The Crucible", by Arthur Miller, was in my opinion was a very good book. Even though I do not always enjoy reading plays this one stuck out to me. On the other hand, however, I had oposing feelings about the movie. After watching it I felt like things were shown very different then how I imagined them and also there were very few actors that I thought fit the parts. The movie was much too dramatice for my liking and at times seemed very unrealistic. An example of this when the girls are all acting as if they see spirits among them when they are trying to blame other people for witchcraft. One part of the movie that I enjoyed were the added scenes, I thought they added a good touch to the movie like in the scene were Abigail goes to John and asks him to leave town with her and in the final scene when everyone is praying out loud before they are hung. All in all it was an okay movie and a very enjoyable book
ReplyDeleteIn "The Crucible", Arthur Miller shows how hysteria can drive a village to the brink of destruction, much like the anti-communism government of the mid 1900s. I am a big fan of satirical stories, especially satirical comedies, but I had a few problems with this one. The biggest problem was the writing style. It was mostly a play, but at a few points it was normal commentary. I feel like this confused me, and if it was that important, than he should have kept the writing uniform throughout the story. The characters were hard to follow, but Arthur was able to get you to really like or hate the characters. He was able to take a very well known time in history and apply it to his time, which is great. I liked the story, as confusing as it was, and the characters were well designed, as well as the plot. Other than the way the book was organized, which was confusing, it was pretty good.
ReplyDeleteThe play as a whole was really good the ending was unexpected though. I never would have thought that John Proctor would be caught up in the trials as much as he was. I thought that was a really sad ending, when John was hanged. Danforth should have not hung all those people after Abigail left because that's when he realized that all of the witchcraft stuff happening was her fault. I felt that Elizabeth should have talked John into giving them his signed confession because now no one will be able to raise her baby, because she'll get hanged after she gives birth to it. I feel like Parris should have kept a better eye on Abigail, so that she didn't just take off, she could have stopped all the hangings if she just confessed but she ran away so she wouldn't get in trouble. In the end no one with a lot of power in the town was said to have been doing witchcraft, I wonder why that is. The ending was good but I would rather have it been Abigail that got hung then John.
ReplyDelete“The Crucible” written by Arthur Miller was a very difficult book to understand. In Act 1 it was very easy to understand, but as the book gets to Act 2 and 3, that’s where I get confused the most because everything’s starting to happen at once so I didn’t know what was going on in those two acts. So I went back and reread some of the scenes that I did not comprehend, and I also jot down some notes that are extremely helpful to me in order to understand the book better. I found the characters were not easy at all because there were too many characters to remember especially in Act 2 and Act 3. The ending of the play gave me these mixed feelings about the characters. I didn’t know why Abigail Williams left with Mercy Lewis, and I know that even though John Proctor wanted so save his name but doesn’t he want to live a normal life with his wife? Or maybe move to somewhere else? Overall, “The Crucible” was an okay book, the language that it was used was confusing, but it takes time to understand the book.
ReplyDeleteSorry, posted this on the wrong blog. RZ
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the Crucible, I found that some of the scenes and important actions that occurred were disjointed to the rest of the play. I believe the cause of this lapse in information was caused by a minimal description and understanding of the characters. Without a comprehensive background of the characters, I struggled to connect the text to characters. This poor connection hindered my ability to follow the plot and I began to get lost. As the plot further progressed, I was not able to fully recover the necessary information. Now gathering new, recent information from the play, I had a feeble base of prior knowledge that was not able to fully support the growing plot. Unfortunately, I became overwhelmed and any forward progress only revealed contradictions to early statements and beliefs, which were made by characters whom I never knew. In all, my experience of the Crucible was tainted by a lack of knowledge which grew and was never solved.
As for the ending of the play, it was a disappointing blow which saddened my lasting looks and pondering reflections. But to its defense, the scenes and actions that took place in the ending parts of the play are historically-based. Hangings did occur during the Salem witch trials, but what made the play sad, was John Procter's and others' innocent pleas. These pleas ultimately sent them to the rope and could have been averted by pleading guilty. I was mad that John Procter did not lie and receive life, and at a state of emotion, Procter was killed and my madness turned to sadness. I wish the characters were smarter and realized God would not condemn them to hell for any lie if they truly had faith in Him.