The Role Of The Individual In Society In Arthur Miller's The Crucible

Discuss the role of ‘The Individual in Society’ in Arthur Miller’s writing, with specific reference to The Crucible.

Miller's Beliefs about Playwriting

Arthur Miller is a popular playwright and has been an important person in the field of American theatre of 20^th 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 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.

Conflict between Society and Individual in Miller's Plays

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 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.

The Importance of Social Issues in Miller's Plays

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.

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.

References

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.

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.