Hysteria and the Consequences of Mass Paranoia in The Crucible Essay

The Crucible Effectively Demonstrates the Development of Hysteria and the Consequences of Mass Paranoia. Discuss this with Reference to the Play and the Time in Which it is Written. 'The Crucible' was written in 1952 by Arthur Miller and was first performed in 1953. It is about a village called Salem in America, set in the 17th century, where a suspicion of witchcraft and association with the Devil has arisen. This theme of accusation and paranoia is comparable with the period of McCarthyism in the United States of America, where many people were accused of communism and anti-Americanism. The play was written at about the same time as the events in the 1950s and in many ways reflects the villagers' anxiety towards their situation. The community of Salem is a strongly religious one and the villagers all attend the Christian church. The minister is the most important person in the village, as he holds a high position in their religion, therefore he is expected to give a good example. The village is surrounded by forest and the nearest town is a few miles away. This creates a strong bond in the community as each individual has to work hard in order to endure the trials of being part of an isolated society. The playwright shows the setting and era in the style of the characters' speech - it is in the fashion of late 17th century American, when the play is set. The Caribbean slave, Tituba, also has her speech modified to suit the Barbados dialect: "My Betty be hearty soon?" is the opening line of the play. The first act starts in the house of Reverend Parris, where Parris is praying, in a confused state, for his unconscious daughter. Tituba, his slave, enters and the ensuing 'conversation' reveals that... ... has an easier job creating the right effect for each scene, so it is more believable for the audience and they have a better understanding of it. The Crucible demonstrates how easily people can be manipulated by belief, and how belief in something can effectively blind people, making them think irrationally. The characters are plausible and consistent, and the audience can see how they develop throughout the play. All the events are believable (if not probable) and the language used is convincing as 17th century American. The audience can empathise with the characters, particularly with John Proctor, as they see early on the problems he has and understand the dilemma he faces in Act IV. I think the play should be thought of not as a piece of drama, but as a piece of literature illustrating how people's trust can be exploited to an individual's advantage.