Analyzing Individual and Society Dynamics in Arthur Miller’s Crucible

This essay explores the complex relationship between the individual and society in Arthur Miller's play, 'The Crucible.' It highlights Miller's focus on portraying the equilibrium between these two forces, drawing inspiration from playwrights like Ibsen and Brecht. The analysis emphasizes how Miller constructs characters as social beings, influenced and often constrained by their societal context. The play's setting in a theocratic society, grappling with witchcraft, underscores the tension between individual conscience and collective hysteria. The essay examines how characters like Abigail manipulate language and social dynamics, leading to the persecution of innocent individuals. Ultimately, it argues that Miller critiques a society that stifles individuality and promotes conformity, while also exploring the multifaceted nature of the individual-society relationship. The essay concludes by noting the potential for character stereotyping but emphasizes the play's broader message about political freedom and social responsibility. Desklib provides a platform for students to access similar solved assignments and study resources.

INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIETY IN ARTHUR MILLER’S PLAYS –
CRUCIBLE
0

Arthur Miller is a popular playwright and has been an important person in the field of American
theatre of 20th century. Among many themes in his plays, the conflict between the society and an
individual has been a constant one that can be traced in many of his plays. Crucible is one such
play that clearly depicts the relationship between an individual and the society through its
character sketches. This study has focused on the role of the society and the individual in his
plays with special reference to Crucible. For that reason, this study has illuminated the
importance of both of the above mentioned aspects in Crucible and his other plays.
Arthur Miller is a renowned face of American theatre that is famous for having distinct set of
beliefs regarding the approach of writing a play. According to Burns (2014), Miller thinks that a
play needs to show equilibrium between the society and the individual through its words. For
that reason, Miller’s plays have a balanced outlook on collective and separate fragments of life.
In other words, in his plays, the polity and the individual personality get special focus. On the
other hand, Miller is one of those playwrights who have a special interest in solving social issues
by spreading a moral message through his plays. For that reason, most of his plays deal with
social problems of American society.
However, individual behaviors have been given a special focus in his plays that have been seen
from a psychological Eye. In opinion of Aziz (2014), Miller has been inspired by writers of
many social plays including plays of Ibsen and Brecht. Thus, he has blended symbolism and
realism in his plays for depicting importance of both the society and the individual. Ibsen’s
realism has helped him in portraying the inner conflict between the above mentioned aspects.
There can be many perspectives to understand his plays but it can be mentioned that all of his
plays has a social veil that cannot be pierced.
In this context, this can be mentioned that Miller constructed his characters as social beings that
have no significance without the existence of their society to which they belong. On the contrary,
society has been shown as a dictator of individual choices and fears (Aziz and Al Qunayeer,
2014). For this reason, most of his protagonists have fore grounded a kind of social responsibility
through their individual consciousness. This consciousness enables the character to confront with
his social responsibilities and guilt (Sharma, 2013). For example, John Proctor has shown this
kind of conflict of social responsibility and conscience in the play namely Crucible. Moreover, it
has also been noticed that the plot of his plays are weaved in a way that the people with poor
1

sense of social responsibility are punished at the end (Sarangi, 2013). This is because Miller tries
to show that there are vital consequences if someone does not give heed to social responsibilities
of his own. Unlike other contemporary plays, protagonist of Miller’s plays has a purpose in their
lives. For example, Willy Loman, one of his characters, shows a purpose of providing for his
own family (Rong and Zhaoming, 2013). Thus, it can be said that the role of the society and the
individual is prominent in all of his plays in one way or another.
Miller, in Crucible, portrays an image of a village where the villagers show a shared fear against
Witchcraft. Moreover, the plot exposes that witchcraft has masked itself in the people of the city.
For that reason, Reverend Hale has been chosen in order to find out the real residence of the
devil himself (Jayachandran, 2015). In addition, a court has been asked to abolish every
corrupted affair that is related to witchcraft and with the devil. In this regard, it is important to
note that the setting of this play is in a theocratic society in which both the state and the church
have been considered as the same in respect of power. In opinion of Bellacosa (2016), the society
or the community of Crucible is concerned about individual accounts of sin. For that reason, the
focus on independent cleansing of an individual for the sake of the community is seen. In other
words, this play deals with the simultaneous functioning of both a society, that has become
hysteric, and about an individual who gradually uncovers his own pure self. Thus, both of them
play an important role in this play that includes a moral dilemma and uncontrolled hysteria of a
society.
Among many motives, language plays an important role in this play for curving the portrayal of
moral dilemma of individuals and of the society. For example, after Abigail realizes that her
actual power lives in her words, she starts controlling her surroundings and her community
through language. In other words, she accuses others of witchcraft so that she can manipulate
them the way she wants. According to Sanzone (2013), her distorted use of words has become
successful in increasing the already existing hysteria in the citizens of this place. In addition,
especially girls have been noticed to be manipulated by her talk. The whole society has been
seen to be controlled by a single girl who climbed the ladder of puritan society in order to control
and manipulate an entire community.
As a result, many innocent people died just because the whole society believed what she said.
This shows the connection between an individual and a society where both of them has a strong
2

influence on each of them. As mentioned by Kumar Sharma (2013), it is Abigail who did
manipulate the community in a way that the community shut all its communication with the
people who were falsely accused of witchcraft. The reason behind her success lies in the true fact
that a puritan society is horrified for anything that defies God. Thus, the accused people did not
get any chance of expressing themselves because Abigail’s words have been seen as God’s
words in the ears of community people. This is so because she spoke for the people of the
community by accusing others and by pretending to be holly. On the other hand, it can be stated
that the nature of the society helped her to get a full control over them as she knew the ways by
which the community can be ruled over.
Thus, this can be said that Crucible shifts its focus from the public to the personal. In this
context, it can be added that the innocent individuals have not been allowed to express
themselves because of the society that restrains their individuality and accuses them wrongfully.
On the contrary, this same society lets Abigail express herself because that suits the inner nature
of that society. According to Demirkaya (2015), each character has a set of moral dilemmas in
this play who have become victims of social restrains. For that reason, each one of them shows a
growth as the play progresses. However, the triumph of a single character has been shown in a
personal level who decides to retain his own motives and not to be in a society where falsehood
has gained the position of a high rank institution. Here, one thing is important to note that the
role of society can be seen from various angles. For example, while some innocent people were
attacked by the puritan society it is also true that Abigail succeeded in asserting her will in the
same society. Thus, the relation between society and individual is multifaceted and not linear.
Social pressure has been seen as an important motif in this play that sets the main base of the
play. For example, it has been seen that members of the community have been forced to live
their lives in a particular way that restricts their potentiality of being happy. In opinion of Qin
(2018), Proctor has been portrayed in a way that shows the fact that each individual has own sets
of beliefs and values that is different from values of other individuals in a society. Thus, it can be
said that Miller wanted to establish the fact that a society can become oppressive if the
individuals do not apply their own thoughts and conscience as individuals and not just as social
beings.
3

In this context, this can be added that this portrayal of society and individuals can be critiqued
because character stereotyping has been seen in the character sketches of this play. For example,
it can be argued that women are portrayed either as dutiful wives or as deceitful temptresses.
This implies that the potentials of individualism have been blurred sometimes in order to give a
social message to the audience. However, both the society and the individualism have been used
so that the condition of Americans can be shown who used to have very little amount of political
freedom just like the powerless witches of the community of Crucible.
4

Reference list
Aziz, A., 2014. Theatre as truth practice: Arthur Miller’s The Crucible-a play waiting for the
occasion, Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society (LUCAS),
Faculty of Humanities, Leiden University, 23(2), pp.34-51.
Aziz, A.G.A. and Al Qunayeer, H.S., 2014. Social hysteria versus individual dilemma: A
pragmatic study of character relationship in Arthur Miller's The Crucible. European Scientific
Journal, ESJ, 10(35), pp.23-54.
Bellacosa, J.W., 2016. Devils and Angels of Judicial Integrity. . John's L. Rev., 90(3), pp.1.
Burns, M., 2014. Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: Fact & Fiction (or Picky, Picky, Picky...). 17th
Century Colonial New England with Special Emphasis on the Essex County Witch-Hunt
of, 1692. 12(1), pp.21-62.
Kumar Sharma, P., 2013. The Crisis of Moral Values: A Study in Arthur Miller’s The
Crucible. International Journal of Organizational Behaviour & Management Perspectives, 2(1),
pp.230-232.
Rong, O. and Zhaoming, Q., 2013. " Death of a Salesman" in Beijing Revisited. The Arthur
Miller Journal, 8(2), pp.57-76.
Sanzone, R., 2013. The Abnegation of Responsibility in Arthur Miller's The
Crucible. Agora, 22(2), pp.2.
Sarangi, I., 2013. The Unexplained Hysteria in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. The
Criterion, 12(2), pp.1-6.
Sharma, P.K., 2013. Emergence of Middle Class Protagonists in the Plays of Arthur
Miller. BARNOLIPI Journal, 2(5), pp.64-73.
Demirkaya, N.Y., 2015. Scapegoating Non-Conforming Identities: Witchcraft Hysteria in Arthur
Miller’s The Crucible and Caryl Churchill’s Vinegar Tom. Journal of History Culture and Art
Research, 4(2), pp.123-135.
5

Qin, Z.H., 2018. On the Elements of Masculinity and Femininity in Arthur Miller’s
Dramas. Sino-US English Teaching, 15(4), pp.202-208.
Jayachandran, M., 2015. Conflict between the individual and the society a study of the select
plays of eugene o'neill, Tennessee williams and arthur miller. Journal of History Culture and Art
Research, 2(1), pp.26-52.
6