TCT's The Crucible

OVERVIEW

The Crucible was first produced at the Martin Beck Theatre in New York on January 22, 1953. The play received mixed reviews, with some critics dismissing it as an "anti-McCarthy tract". True, Miller wrote The Crucible at a time when the United States was wracked by the hearings conducted by Senator Joseph McCarthy, who claimed that the country had been subverted by "twenty years of treason" and communist infiltration during the administration of President Roosevelt. Although McCarthy never made public his list of "known communists" in the State Department, his hearings and the related atmosphere throughout both the public and private sectors, resulted in many people being blacklisted and losing their jobs and positions in the community. Miller's condemnation of Senator McCarthy's "witch-hunt" took the form of this play, based upon the Witch Trial which occurred at the end of the 17th Century in Massachusetts.

The play ran for only 197 performances after it first opened, and enjoyed an Off-Broadway revival some years later with a run of more than 500 performances. However, its importance cannot be related to the number of performances it has enjoyed, its critical success (or lack thereof), or its relationship to the McCarthy era. Indeed, for many young people today, the "Red Scare" of the 1950's is virtually unknown. What then, accounts for the play's continuing success and popularity both as literature and in the number of performances produced each year by many schools and community theatres.

One answer to this question appears in the Preface to Leonard Moss' Arthur Miller. "It is quite understandable that Miller should be regarded as a writer with a message, whether affirmative or negative, humane or socialistic," writes the author in the Preface. But, Miller is at his best in creating tension and conflict in plot, narrative and character. When he writes to convey an obvious message, the message may be too obvious to constitute good art. "In his best writing, however, that thesis is implied in the psychological consequences of fanatic self-assertion, not prescribed in moralistic" pronouncements on 'the right way of living'." We would suggest that this is particularly true of The Crucible. As a play condemning the suppression of liberty in the name of a sacred cause, The Crucible may appear to be a heavy-handed, simplistic rant against the misuse and abuse of power. When the playwright seeks to convey a "message", his art suffers for it. Miller's saving grace is his ability to show us a character's inner struggle and the consequences of that characters choices in the outcome of the drama.

If Arthur Miller had stayed true to the factual events which occurred in Salem, his play would not have the staying power which it possesses. While the story of the rights of an individual versus those in authority presents a compelling and universal theme, it is the inner struggle that a guilt-ridden protagonist, John Proctor, undergoes that lifts the play beyond its political theme and transforms it into a work for the ages. When reading the play, or attending a performance, it is suggested that you watch the development of these characters closely and try to understand the options presented to them and the reasons for their actions -- actions which ultimately lead to tragedy. In the end, this is what defines The Crucible and places it in the company of other great tragedies. It is not the setting or theme of the work, but the actions of good, but ultimately flawed characters that lift the play from being a simple story to one that compels us to think.