Skip to main content

What is the evidence of sacrifice in Arthur Miller's The Crucible?

Evidence of sacrifice can be seen in the suffering of specific characters in The Crucible.


The suffering that characters endure reflects the sacrifices they make for their beliefs. Giles Corey sacrifices greatly for his beliefs. He is convinced that people like Putnam use the witch trials as a way to advance their own agenda. He sacrifices for his outspoken nature, evident in how he calls out for "more weight" while being pressed to death. 


In a similar manner, Elizabeth Proctor sacrifices for her husband. To protect his reputation, she lies in court, sacrificing her name. She then refuses to beg him to reconsider his confession because of how it shows his "goodness," something she will not take away from him. Elizabeth sacrifices her happiness as a married wife because of the love she holds for her husband. 


Proctor makes the ultimate sacrifice for his beliefs. In Act III, he knows Abigail and the girls are lying. His commitment to truth and stopping the suffering they are inflicting causes him to implicate himself in court. He goes to jail in the name of his beliefs. In Act IV, Proctor sacrifices again. Unwilling to "sign himself to lies" and ashamed at his momentary willingness to do so, Proctor sacrifices his own life for the truth. As a result, Proctor stands up for truth in a world that does not value it. 


Characters like Giles Corey and Elizabeth and John Proctor have to sacrifice mightily for their beliefs. Their desire to be decent in an indecent time compels them to forgo a great deal. Through these characterizations, Arthur Miller suggests the commitment to our values and the sacrifice they entail become more important when situations are difficult. The need to sacrifice in trying times underscores our commitment to ideals, something that represents the ultimate currency in a world of shifting values.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more