Witchcraft

How and why does the relationship between change over the course of The Crucible? In Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible, John and Elizabeth Proctor are introduced as a young, married couple whose relationship had a tense undercurrent. Their actions and reactions towards one another prove that they are at odds with each other. John and Elizabeth seem to be trying to smooth out the bumps in their relationship, but they only seem to succeed in driving themselves further apart. Now at a time when communication is crucial, John and Elizabeth learn the mistake they made is not getting to know each other better.

Act two is when Elizabeth is introduced properly in the crucible. Elizabeth and Proctor have what seems to be an awkward conversation with no sentence lasting more than a few words. The short sentences Miller uses to create the conversation between Elizabeth and Proctor such as “What keeps you so late? It’s almost dark. ” And “Aye, the farm is seeded. The boys asleep? ” use lots of questions adding suspicion mainly seen in Elizabeth’s speech. This shows the reader there is a lack of honesty in their relationship because if they had complete honesty in the relationship there would be no need for questions.

The questions might be a way of them trying to smooth the bumps out in their relationship, attempting to bring honesty back in but neither of them seem to be opening fully, shown by the short sentences. Any attempt to open up to the other person is quickly stopped by some sort of interruption “Now look you – ” “I see what I see John. ” Elizabeth suspects a lack of honesty “John, you are not open with me” however Proctor continues to deny it. This all builds up tension and bottles up feelings in the relationship implying that they will burst out later on in the play.

This makes the reader feel sympathy for Proctor and Elizabeth because on one hand Elizabeth simply just wants to know the truth so they can get on with their lives and on the other Proctor doesn’t want to hurt Elizabeth’s feelings by telling the truth. Elizabeth is accused of being a witch. It is believed Abigail accused her so as to get to John. Hale is introduced into Proctors house. He has come in search of evidence to back up the accusation. Hale asks a series of questions involving religious references and also asks Proctor to recite the Ten Commandments.

Hale being in the Proctor’s house seems to create tension in the house. When faced with the proposition of being questioned about the Christian faith Proctor answers “Why, we – have no fear of questions sir. ” This seems quite a shy answer. It lacks confidence and almost seems as though he is nervous about answering or he may even fear the questions about to come before him. This creates sympathy for Proctor by the reader because he is trying to patch up his relationship and now has to deal with accusations of being a witch on top of everything else. Elizabeth is taken to court due to her accusation and is then taken to jail.

After months in jail, Elizabeth Proctor was called into the courtroom to answer a series of questions that could determine the fate of her husband, herself, and . Elizabeth Proctor was asked to accuse her husband of lechery. The hesitation in Elizabeth’s response to this question was not a surprise. She was fighting a battle inside of herself that only she knew the depth of. It was up to her to make a decision that she knows would change her life and the lives of others. To the question of lechery put before her, Elizabeth Proctor chose to answer “no”.

Elizabeth answered “no” for a number of reasons. The biggest was the respect she had for her husband. She wanted John to reveal his sin on his own. She felt it wasn’t her place to reveal the wrong in his life. Elizabeth also believed that she was part of the reason John chose to have an affair with Abigail. Before John was to sign his confession, Elizabeth asked him to forgive her for being a cold wife. Elizabeth truly believed she was the reason behind John’s affair with Abigail. This proves that Elizabeth really did love John although there were times hen it wasn’t evident in her words and actions.

She respected and trusted him to such an extent that she allowed him to decide when he would let the community know of his sin. John Proctor also loves his wife deeply. This is shown through his actions at the end of the play. With the decision he is about to make at hand, he asks Elizabeth “what would you have me do? ” It is her desires that he is concerned about because he realizes this decision will affect her too. After ripping up his confession, John grabs Elizabeth and gives her the last kiss of his life. It was not passion that drove him but pure love.

Through this kiss he let Elizabeth know everything that he had been keeping in his heart during his time in jail in more. Through this kiss, Elizabeth knows that John loved her and cherished her more than before. It is evident throughout the play that displays of affection aren’t very common in the Proctor household. That is common in many marriages and households today. It is also common that it isn’t until something drastic happens that those who love each other find out how much they really mean to each other. This is what happened in the Proctor’s situation.

John and Elizabeth didn’t realize what they meant to each other until they were thrown into jail and John was on the verge of losing his life. John and Elizabeth Proctor realize their love for each other at the end of the play. Although they both realize they won’t be able to share it, they are overjoyed with this new discovery. Elizabeth realizes that John loves her and John realizes that Elizabeth loves him and that he does indeed have her forgiveness. This gives him the push he needs to make the right decision. In the time when John and Elizabeth’s relationship must be strong, they pull through and come out the victors.

The Crucible The playwright, Arthur Miller, uses the character construction in the play to position the audience to accept the dominant reading of the play, which is the concern and dangers of religious fanaticism. The play, The Crucible, is set in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692. It is based upon the actual events which led to the ‘Salem witch trials’, a series of hearings to determine which individuals were in fact practicing witchcraft.

The play also conveys parallels to the McCarthyist era, during which the playwright was questioned as he had attended Communist meetings, and modern day anti-terror laws, which prevent people of certain backgrounds and cultures to enter countries, as they are immediately sent to prisons, based on appearance and other individuals opinions, that are certainly not based upon facts. The audience is positioned to relate to the concepts in the play, as well as sympathising with characters. Miller does this as it is a way of getting his message to the audience.

The dominant reading of the play is religious fanaticism; this is displayed as the town of Salem is ruled by a theocracy. However, the perfect town is hardly that, filled with corruption, betrayal and a never-ending blame game, which evidently causes masses of people to be tried in court resulting in many of them being hung. This concept of doing anything to achieve what you want draws parallels to a number of occurrences. They are, the real Salem witch trials upon which the story is based upon, the McCarthyist era and the modern day anti-terror laws although not directly addressed, the likeness is overwhelming.

The anti-terror laws allow, mostly, innocent individuals to be held in prisons around the world simply because they look a certain way or are of a certain race. The comparison drawn is that one does not need evidence, merely a person’s word, true or false. Miller displays certain parallels and concepts to show that religious fanaticism is not always guaranteed a peaceful society, in fact it ensues the opposite. The hero in the play is John Proctor; he is a good man who has unfortunately made one regretful decision, consorting with his previous housemaid, Abigail Williams.

Proctors’ wife, Elizabeth, questions his motives and whereabouts, sometimes leaving Proctor feeling undeserving as he has told Williams to leave him alone since the event. He is the hero of the play as he, unlike many other characters, does not feel pressure to succumb to the unreasonable accusations of witchcraft. When Elizabeth Proctor, John Proctor’s wife, is about to be taken away for witchcraft Proctor is portrayed as caring and selfless, as shown in this quote by John Proctor, “We are what we always were in Salem, but now the little crazy children are jangling the keys of the kingdom, and common vengeance writes the law!

This warrant’s vengeance! I’ll not give my wife to vengeance! ” (p72). Elizabeth replies, “I’ll go John. ” (p72) John responds with a quite precise answer, “You will not go! ” (p72) This quote shows that Proctor, no matter what unjust decisions he has made in the past are nothing compared to the passion he feels for his wife, and that he would do anything for her. Furthermore, it allows the audience to see that one person does know what is happening, that most citizens of Salem have succumbed to the childish antics of teenage girls.

At the end of Act IV, Proctor is asked to sign a piece of paper confessing that he had consulted with the devil, and that he was practising witchcraft, this quote displays his courage, “I have confessed myself! Is there no good penitence but it be public? God does not need my name nailed upon the church! God sees my name; God knows how black my sins are! It is enough! ” (p123 – p124) This shows that Proctor is willing to save his family by confessing his sins, furthermore he does not want his family to be shunned by Salem.

This positions the audience to sympathise with Proctor allowing the audience to like him, and view him as Miller had intended, a hero. Proctor also helps Miller to display the dangers of religious fanaticism, and what can become of a society if theology is so profusely followed; that is, a corrupt and spiteful community, where each individual has their own wellbeing, before they begin to think of any one else. Abigail Williams is a licentious individual who will stop at nothing to secure her previous paramour, John Proctor.

She believes that the previous sexual encounter between her and Proctor means he still and always will, love her. Williams is portrayed as the enemy in the play, no doubt that she is more conniving than any other character, as shown in Act I, when she threatens the other girls involved in the so called ‘witchcraft’, she states, “And mark this. Let either of you breathe a word, or the edge of a word, about the other things, and I will come to you in the black of some terrible night and I will bring a pointy reckoning that will shudder you.

And you know I can do it…” (p26) This quote clearly shows what Williams is capable of, and that she wants the other girls to know that she will do what is necessary for her to achieve her goal of retaining Proctor. Williams also conveys how deceptive she truly is when talking to her uncle, Parris, about why she was fired by Elizabeth Proctor, from the Proctors’ service in this quote, “She hates me, uncle, she must, for I would not be her slave. It’s a bitter woman, a lying, cold, snivelling woman, and I will not work for such a woman! (p20) This clearly shows that she does not care who she hurts or whose reputation she blackens, as long as her name is good it does not matter. Miller uses Williams to show that religious fanaticism does not always ensure a civilised humanity. Thomas Putnam is a greedy man who, like Williams, does what is in his power to retrieve, what he believes, is rightfully his. In this case it is supposed, by Giles Corey, that Putnam compelled his daughter, Ruth, to accuse many people in Salem, including George Jacobs, Giles Corey and Goody Osbourn.

Goody Osbourn was the Putnam’s midwife many times, and they believe she killed their children, also George Jacob’s was an innocent man accused by Ruth Putnam of sending his spirit to her at night. Giles Corey correctly identified Thomas Putnam for wrongfully accusing persons of witchcraft in order to gain their many acres surrounding his already significant property. The following quote in Act I is stated by Putnam to Parris, “When Reverend Hale comes, you will proceed to look for signs of witchcraft here. ” (p23).

This quote shows that Putnam wants the witch-hunt to progress; progression of this will grant Putnam time to declare more of his rivals, in return he will receive their land. The character analysis of Putnam shows that he is also spiteful and like Williams, his own well-being and desires are all that concern him, displaying the disconcerting corruption in the ‘perfect’ society that is Salem. In conclusion, Arthur Miller does in fact use the character construction in the play to position the audience to accept the dominant reading of the play, which is, the dangers of religious fanaticism.

Miller does this by depicting the characters in a certain way, such as John Proctor who is portrayed as a hero for he would rather die to keep his name, than live a lie and be shunned by society. It also conveys that the dominant reading, of dangers of religious fanaticism, does not always entail a perfect life. Thus, Arthur Miller succeeded in what he set out to do which was, create a play that is not only successful but conveyed an idea of great importance, that is to display the parallels between the 1692 Salem witch trials and the McCarthyist era, and how easily it is for corruption to surface and become everyday life.

RELAMPAGOS, Nicola Liane C. POSADAS, Klarizze FINAL PROJECT: The Chronicles of Narnia The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe is the first book in the Chronicles of Narnia series written by CS Lewis. The book series was such a great success that in 2008, the first book was turned into a film. What many people may not realize is that CS Lewis wrote the book series with a specific goal in mind: to showcase the word of God to different parts of the world through an artistic lens. This paper will focus on the theological nature of CS Lewis’ book based film, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe.

This will include a number of noticeable parallelisms, allusions and symbolisms found in said work. Although The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe was originally a published book, this paper will focus on the film adaptation of the book. One of the noticeable symbolisms in the movie would be found in the main characters of the film: Aslan, the Witch and the children. Aslan was portrayed as the original king of Narnia and when Narnia was held deep in the clutches of the White Witch, Narnias looked to Aslan as their redeemer.

Aslan was also the one who died so that Edmund may live. He was the only one who was capable of defeating the White Witch. Aslan in the film was an artistic representation of Jesus Christ. The parallelism found in the resurrection of Christ, his absorbing of our sins and overcoming death is seen in the depiction The Witch, on the other hand, represents Satan. It was the White Witch who covered Narnia in snow: no sign of life, simply cold and dead. The Witch is consumed in her own vanity and the longing to fully overcome Aslan and rule over Narnia forever.

It isn’t clearly stated, but it is seen in certain parts of the movie that The Witch feared Aslan: when the Witch spoke out of turn after their agreement and Aslan roared at her and she quickly sat down in fear of him. Much like the Witch, Satan will always be inferior to God but will always try to put himself about Christ but will never achieve such. Lastly, the four children (Lucy, Edmund, Peter and Suzan) are human beings. They represent four different kinds of people who have different encounters with God.

For Peter, he is the skeptical type of Christian. One who is doubtful by how God can use him to help build God’s kingdom, yet at times he forgets that it is only Christ who can defeat evil and not by his strength alone. Edmund is the type of Christian who has sinned and fallen short many times along the road before choosing to love and follow Christ. While Suzan is the type of Christian who has consistently doubted whether or not Christ, even really exists before fully trusting God with the things that don’t seem to make sense.

Lastly, Lucy represents the Christians who just love, follow and dedicate their lives to Christ without hesitation and without doubt. Lucy’s childlikeness showcases how Christians should love and trust Christ with our lives. Since the four children can be seen as symbolisms of human beings, their relationship with Aslan shows a lot about the grace, mercy and overall character of God. One of the main examples where this is seen is the grace that Aslan showed to Edmund who was a traitor.

Despite Edmunds’ choice to prioritize Turkish delight over his family and his right as one of the king of Narnia, Aslan still accepted Edmund into his army and not only that Edmund still inherited the kingdom of Narnia not by his own works but by Aslan’s choice. Much like the plot of the movie, Christ will continue to accept sinners into his family despite what they have done in the past. As Aslan said, “What’s done is done, we need not speak to Edmund about what has happened anymore” this has a similar message in Philippians “I focus on all my energy on one thing: Forgetting what lies behind and focusing on what’s ahead”.

Also, Edmund’s choice to pursue Turkish delight over his unmerited right to be a king of Narnia, is similar to the story in the Bible of how Esau gave up his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of stew. Both Edmund and Esau’s common mentality was the seeing the situation only at the present and forgetting the eternal value and purpose of their lives. But despite Edmund’s decision, Aslan accepted his presence with open arms, which is a similar characteristic to the story of the Prodigal Son.

True sacrifice is an act that any human being can never really fathom, due to the only considered true sacrifice that was only made by God Himself by offering his own son to the world that is bound to perish in eternal debt of sin. In the movie, true sacrifice was first depicted through the following event, which was the acceptance of Edmund despite of his treason towards Aslan and his own brothers and sisters. Without the mistake that Edmund committed earlier in the movie, true sacrifice would have not been clearly depicted.

The scene where Edmund was enticed by the Witch’s offer of Turkish delight and then the throne shows a great parallel of how the world committed the very first sin, the original sin. Adam and Eve were tempted by the devil, who took the form a snake and they were blinded by the temptation of knowledge that was offered by the apple. Same goes to Edmund, he succumbs to the lavish offers of the Witch that led to his treason towards his siblings. In the end, Aslan accepts Edmund despite his betrayal and also became the emancipator from the Witch.

This selfless act then led to the suffering and supposed death of Aslan. The altruism that Aslan performed is an exact parallel to the suffering of Christ, which was the crucifixion. With such altruistic acts of both Aslan and Jesus Christ, it is believed that their sacrifices are yet to be unvarnished. No one in this world is capable of such because only the savior can absorb the sins of the world. In the movie, Aslan was put to death and was humiliated in front of the presence of many followers of the Witch by cutting off his mane, which is parallel to Christ’s crown of thorns.

The Witch wanted to show her iron fist by showing the execution of Aslan in public, which only goes to show that she fears Aslan. She needs the approval of many, for her to feel superior over him. Although she thought she had succeed with the humiliation and execution, little did the Witch know that Aslan was to come back to life and save his followers despite their treason. The representation of Christ’s suffering and resurrection was fairly accurate; the breaking of the stone table which Aslan’s body was left behind is aligned to the opening of Christ’s tomb.

In addition, Aslan was first seen back to life by the girls, which in the film were Susan and Lucy, and just like Christ who appeared to the women first (Mary and Mary Magdalene; found in Matthew 28:9). The movie then proceeds to the war between good and evil, which illustrates the consistent internal battle inside every human mind. When Aslan came back to life, he did not eradicate the battle between the Narnians and the forces of the Witch. But instead, the battle continued on even to the point that the Narnians began to face defeat.

This shows that although the Jesus Christ overcame death, there will still be an internal battle between good and evil within us. In the film, Peter and Edmund try to lead the battle against the forces of The Witch and even tried to kill her but their attempts only would lead to death. It is only when Aslan comes into the picture, that he is not only able to breathe life back into the dead but also defeat the Witch. This is an artistic depiction of how human beings cannot overcome death by their strength alone. It is only Christ’s power that Satan is fully defeated.

Therefore during spiritual battles within humans, one was surrender and acknowledges that he cannot do it by themselves and it is only by God’s help that we can overcome evil. Lastly, Aslan’s words after he defeated the Witch were a direct parallelism to the words that Jesus Christ utters when he defeated death on the cross: “It is finished”. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe film holds a great number of theoretical references but the major and more obvious events would be the characterization of Asaln, the Witch and the three children, Aslan’s sacrifice and battle between the two forces.

Ancestral Influence in Hawthorne’s Writing Can the sins of ancestors pass down upon the next generations? Hawthorne believed that it was possible and he expresses his beliefs through his writings. Hawthorne was well aware of his ancestral consequences of wrongdoings and he held the sense of guilt of his ancestor, so many of his writings were gothic, dark, and dealt with evils. Nathaniel Hawthorne’s historical background of living in Salem and his ancestral connection to Salem Witch Trial influenced him to question the fate of the family carrying the sin of past mistakes in his novel, the House of the Seven Gables.

Nathaniel Hawthorne was born in Salem, Massachusetts, and he is the descendent of John Hawthorne, a judge of the Salem Witch trial. During the witch trials, hysteria and delusions clouded everyone’s eyes and unjust persecutions spread and killed many of the innocents. Judges at the times had the power to persecute the witches, however, the whole incident was a horrible delusion (Wright). This ancestral wrongdoing has hunted Hawthorne throughout his lives. Hawthorne lost his father from the yellow fever when he was four and his mother obliged to live with her parents because they were financially troubled.

He lived very isolated because his mother kept herself isolated as well. Hawthorne believed that the depressing circumstances of their family were caused by the curse of victims from Salem Witch Trials (Hawthorne xvi). This belief of Hawthorne clearly is reflected in the characters of the House of the Seven Gables. Similar to Hawthorne, a Salem family of Pyncheons has believed and suffered from the curse passed down from Matthew Maule, an innocent victim of Colonel Pyncheon. He was accused of witchcraft and was executed due to the unjust claim of Colonel.

Before Maule’s death, he proclaimed, “the God will give him blood to drink,” which came true shortly after when Colonel Pyncheon dies in the same manner as described by Maule. In the future generations, the decedents of Pyncheon family that have been living in the house was as if trapped in it, they were bonded with the house surrounded with dark aura. Colonel was a dark, wicked, greedy man and his decedents are haunted with the consequences and the evil deeds of their ancestors. Similar to the Salem Witch trials, greed and lies covered the sins of both crimes and it haunted to future generations. Hawthorne xvii). Both stories closely resemble each other because Hawthorne has been greatly influenced from his cultural background and ancestral histories. Both Hawthorne and Pyncheon were the descendent of the Puritan. Because Hawthorne is influenced greatly with the Puritan beliefs, the novel, The House of Seven Gables, is expressed with full of puritan ideals, curses, and sins (xiii). Hawthorne, from his view of the witch trials, also criticized that Puritans were too self-righteous and lacked of human heart (Hall).

The setting for the novel was taken place at Salem, where the House of the Seven Gables exists, and it was also was where Hawthorne was born and raised. Maule also came from the name, Thomas Maule, a criticizer of the witch trials. The House of the Seven Gables too, was actually molded from his cousin’s, Susannah Ingersoll, house in the Massachusetts. It is also an actual incident that occurred during the witch trial that one of the victims of witch trial, Sarah Good, had told Reverent Noyes, the sinful accuser, that, “if he took her life away, God would give him blood to drink! Many of the settings and characters were created from Hawthorne’s surrounding influences and people (Hawthorne xiii – xx). Hawthorne uses curses as to symbolism of his past and present, influencing in many of his writings. In the preface, he stated, “The wrong-doing of on generation lives into the successive ones, and divesting itself of every temporary advantage, becomes a pure and uncontrollable mischief” (Chandler 46). He believed that the sins and evils have passed down from the past and is binding them from happiness.

It is said that Hawthorne even changed the spelling of his name, possibly to escape the shameful act of his processors. His novels gives traits of Hawthorne’s will of retribution and search of the remorse for the past mistakes of his ancestors. In The House of Seven Gables, he exploits that the past sins can be transmitted through generations and that just like the physical traits, and how the cursed family struggles to overcome this problem (Hawthorne xv-xvi). Hawthorne, in his novels, describes themes of the psychological moral struggles people go through in their existence.

There was a moment in the book where Hawthorne showed the slight hope in concurring the sinful past. It was when a young man called Holgrave tells Pheobe Pyncheon about a story of Maule who intended to control Alice Pyncheon, a beautiful innocent girl, for the sake of his ancestor’s revenge. Maule hiponized Alice and gained control of her, but in the end, his action led Alice into death, and Maule greatly regretted his action. As he finish telling the story, the atmosphere they had was similar of what was in the story; Holgrave had the power to control Pheobe because she was almost hypnotized situation by his stories.

However, despite his longing and awkward relationship with Pyncheons, Holgrave chose the way to love and care for Pheobe instead of controlling her with his power. This progress, Hawthorne showed that it was possible to break and escape from the bond of the evil doings of their ancestors (Bell). In the end of the novel, Pheobe Pyncheon, a member of Pyncheon family, Holgrave, a descendent of Thomas Maule, falls in love. This was the moment when the curse of the Pyncheon was lifted from all the characters in the book.

They got married and it will be a great progress to get over then coincidence between Matthew Maule and Alice Pyncheon. From this passage, Hawthorne probably believed that the curse of ancestral sins and evils can be cured by the love and forgiving of the people. It is perhaps his marriage with Sophia Peabody and his love for her that led him thinking less of the deception of his ancestor and which led him to write the happy ending for the novel (Hawthorne 263-276). The novel ended with atonement and start of restoring the love that was lacked in the house (Brodhead 70).

In the House of the Seven Gables, Nathaniel Hawthorne discusses the influence of ancestral consequences of wrongdoing upon the future generation. Hawthorne felt guilt and responsibility from the sins of his ancestors, and was haunted by them throughout his life. He believed that the sins will pass on through generations and he wrote this novel with this theme in his mind. However, the novel ended with happy ending where people found love that overcomes the hate and evil of the dark historical sins.

Some people will go to extraordinary lengths to achieve a sense of belonging; whether it to be a group, culture or city, some people will try anything. Techniques such as stage directions, hamartia, and dialogue are used in the set text Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” to display belonging and not belonging. Other techniques such as symbolism and camera shot are used to exhibit belonging and not belonging in the supplementary text Your Favorite Martian’s “Zombie Love Song” film clip.

In Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”, stage direction is used to demonstrate belonging and not belonging. This technique is used throughout the text to show both belonging and not belonging, stage direction shows the audience, what the characters are doing, such as their movements and emotions about what has happened. Without stage direction the characters would appear motionless and with a blank face. Examples of this technique can be seen throughout the text, but only some demonstrate belonging or not belonging.

An example of when it is demonstrating not belonging is in the first scene of Act one when Tituba is about to talk, in parentheses it says that she is already moving backward, like she already knows she isn’t wanted. Another example of how stage direction is used is when Abigail and John are alone together, in Betty’s room. In the beginning the stage direction leads us to believe that they belong together, then it quickly turns around and it is evident that they do not through the use of stage direction. These examples are how stage direction is used to demonstrate belonging and not belonging in Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”.

Hamartia is used in Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” to reveal not belonging. This technique is used throughout act one and two to show that John Proctor doesn’t belong with Abigail, hamartia shows the audience the fatal flaw within John’s personality that consequences in him not belonging. An example of how hamartia is used to reveal not belonging is also when John and Abigail are alone together. John’s flaw is that he has lusted after Abigail, and because of this he now feels like he doesn’t belong with either his wife or Abigail.

This is apparent as he shy’s away from Abigail when she tries to get closer. Another example is when he is at home with his wife and straight away we can tell that they do not feel at ease with each other because of his lust for Abigail. These examples are how Hamartia is used to reveal not belonging in Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”. In Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”, dialogue is used to expose belonging and not belonging. This technique is obvious through the entire text as this is what and how people talk to each other.

Dialogue shows the audience how the characters feel about each other through their words and particularly how they say them. An example of how dialogue exposes not belonging is also when Tituba is first speaking, Parris yells at her “Out of here! ” and she says something back then he yells again “Out of my Sight! Out of my – “. The next example of how Dialogue exposes belonging is also when john and Abigail is alone. The dialogue of the two characters highlight their belonging together, when only looking at what their saying.

They stop belonging together when he says “child” then an argument starts which displays a sense of not belonging. These examples are how Dialogue is used to expose not belonging in Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”. Symbolism is used in Your Favorite Martian’s “Zombie Love Song” film clip to display belonging. This technique is predominant in the middle of the text when the two characters are chatting online. Symbolism shows the audience, when referring to this text, how the characters interact with each other before they actually meet in person.

Examples of this technique can be found when the characters are chatting online, the use of hearts to symbolise love is evident. Another symbol is when they use themselves as emoticons and dance with each other, this symbolises that they can be together when one character is not even breathing. Also there is another example of symbolism is when, while chatting online, the zombie is chasing two people and then stopped when seeing the girl, and then gives her a flower which turns her into a zombie which symbolises that they should be together.

These examples are how symbolism represents belonging in the supplementary text “Zombie Love Song” In Your Favorite Martian’s “Zombie Love Song” film clip camera shots are used to present not belonging. This technique is used throughout the text but does not present not belonging until later in the text. Camera shot shows the audience what is happening, without proper camera shot the audience could miss out what is happening, but since this is a cartoon it has perfect camera shot. Not belonging that is presented by camera shot is given by examples when the female character is running away.

When she opens the door to find a zombie, the camera is zooming in to give a close up of the zombie’s face when it smiles, the camera goes back to the girl’s face when she screams and runs away. While she is running away the camera zooms out from a mid-shot to a long shot to emphasise how far and fast she is running away. She runs to the back door and the zombie is there, the process is repeated twice to emphasise how much the zombie doesn’t belong. These examples are how camera shot represents not belonging in the supplementary text “Zombie Love Song”.

In conclusion belonging and not belonging is represented in various ways in many different texts. Varied techniques are used to represent the belonging and not belonging. In Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” Stage direction and dialogue are the main technique used while hamartia is hardly used, only with one character and mainly only in the first two acts. In Your Favorite Martian’s “Zombie Love Song” symbolism is more predominant than camera shot in representing belonging or not belonging.

The Crucible A joint cast from Melbourne High School and Mac. Robertson Girls’ High School were recently involved in a production of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. The cast, led by Gilbert Stalinsfield as John Proctor and Greta Nash as Elizabeth Proctor, was able to captivate the audience for an the entirety of the performer. Director Anne-Marie Brownhill’s interpretation of the play, while short, allowed for each actor to contribute his or her own ideas to the story without removing the overlying theme of the empowerment provided through lies and playing on people’s fears.

Each actor showed a deep understanding of the plot and was able to convey the message about McCarthyism and the symbolism of the witch hunts for the way people were suspected and persecuted in the 50s when McCarthy was most influential. Miller’s work successfully illustrates the parallels between the series of events that occurred in the late 1600s known as the Salem Witch Trials and the events that had been occurring during the time that The Crucible was written in the 1950s. The combined cast from Melbourne High School and Mac.

Robertson Girls’ High School were incredibly impressive in their demonstration of these issues and the effects that these situations can have. Leading the female cast was Year 11 Alexandria Liistro. A shock choice for the role, Liistro understood her character and was able to portray the vindictive Abigail Williams to perfection. The seduction of John Proctor and lying to the judges appeared to come naturally in this wonderful performance, which employed the technique of realism to enable the character to be understood by the audience.

It was hard to find a member of the audience who, after seeing the play, didn’t feel a sense of disgust towards the way Williams had acted throughout the plot. Liistro seemed to play on this disdain shown towards her and her character by not only the audience but also the actors on stage. She truly showed the manipulative nature of Abigail Williams. The gentle giant James Ness was very cleverly chosen to play Judge Danforth, the deputy governor of Massachusetts that presided over the Salem Witch Trials in this play. Ness’ giant stature and booming voice commanded attention as he delivered a pitch-perfect performance.

The way in which Ness was able to control an entire act with his presence throughout the trials of Elizabeth Proctor, played by Greta Nash, made for very intense and enjoyable theatre. Ness was also able to convey the subtle compassion that Danforth has when he is offering Proctor the chance to save his own life by admitting to the heinous crime of devil-worshipping. The power in the delivery of every line by James Ness sent shivers through the audience and kept them interested from the first time he is seen on stage until the end of the play. The choice of costuming was very successful in portraying the true intentions of each character.

Abigail Williams was dressed in a black with a red headband, showing the evil that litters her soul, while the rest of the girls that were testifying against ‘the devil’ in court were wearing black with green headbands, showing the confusion and sickness that dominated their understanding of what they were doing. The green of the headbands worn by the group of girls were matched with the green light used in the first act when Betty Paris has fallen sick due to the witchcraft that has been performed. Both Proctor wore lighter colours dominated by white and light greys.

This choice of colour was to display the purity and innocence of these two people, despite what was happening around them. Secondary characters that cared only a little bit about the witch trials that were occurring but only for selfish reasons, like Giles Corey, were placed in costumes dominated by greys to show both the good and the evil in them. The set design and direction for this interpretation of The Crucible was very well thought out. The early acts of the performance are dominated by a very crowded stage by both actors and props. This adds to the effect of the confusion that is intended displayed throughout the beginning of the play.

As the acts continue, it appears as though there is more and more unoccupied space on the stage to allow for the real message of the play to be conveyed through the words of the story and the performance of the actors. The stage for the final act is completely bare and very few actors are on stage at once. This set being stripped for this section was so that the raw emotion delivered through the acting was more powerful and more easily observed and understood. The set appears to be a symbol for logic and altruism. As the play continues, so does the logic and altruism displayed by any of the characters.

Culture at its Best “Piccanin,” shouted Teddy, “get out of my way! ” And he raced in circles around the black child until he was frightened, and fled back to the bush. ” This scene from Doris Lessings “No Witchcraft for Sale” depicts a child being affected by the results of apartheid, a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race, in South Africa. Similar to segregation in America, apartheid separated the blacks and white into two different classes; the blacks being of lower class and whites having high rank in society.

Gideon, a cook in Doris Lessing’s short story and the main character, served the Farquar family all of his life. Even though this separation deemed whites as superior, this separation occurred because of cultural differences. As the story begins the audience is introduced to the Farquar’s family who has just brought their first child, Teddy, into the world. This family, the bosses or the masters lived on a compound and represent the oppressors. This family has a cook servant named Gideon who represents the oppressed.

Gideon and the Farquar’s young child Teddy have a strong bond from the beginning. Gideon acted as a father in many ways to the Farquar’s child. Their bond was so extraordinary in this story that is set in a time in South Africa when blacks were treated inferior to whites. Though it was evident Gideon and Teddy’s relationship was real it did not prevent the elements of what racism teaches. Little time was spent by Gideon caring for his family or even being there for his son. Gideon played tirelessly with Teddy catching him when he fell as he learned to walk and tossing him up in the air.

Gideon’s son could only watch from the edge of the bush and gaze in awe of the young white boy his same age. Each had a curiosity for the other. Teddy once put out his hand in curiosity to touch the face and hair of a black boy. Gideon’s bond is ironic because whites treated the black natives as if they were so much less than they were, yet the very person coaching a white child to lean to walk was a black man who earned the admiration of his superior and increases in his wages over other workers on the compound.

When Gideon says to Mrs. Farquar “Ah missus, these are both children, and one will grow up to be a baas, and one will be a servant” he accepts the fact that no matter how much love he has for the boy that Teddy will conform to the nasty ways of society. Gideon also gave the child his nickname “Little Yellow Head”. This nickname shows that Gideon had a level of love and adoration for the young white child. Although this relationship with the child was evident, is it possible Gideon showed the child so much affection to avoid punishment?

Gideon even realized that the child he had once held and nurtured would grow up to conform to society. This became evident on the day Teddy used his scooter to frighten Gideon’s son and when reprimanded about the mean act gave the defiant response, “He is only a black boy. ” This showed indifference to Gideon’s son as a person by regarding his act equal to what had been done to scatter squawking chickens and irritated dogs. One afternoon as Teddy was walking exploring the outdoors, a snake spit poisonous venom into his eye.

Everyone in the home knew that he could potentially go blind. The child writhed in agony as his mother tried her best to assist her son but she knew not of a cure. When she called for Gideon he sprung into action and ran off into the bush for some herbal medicine that was common among the other African natives to handle being poisoned. When he returned he held in his hand a root. Gideon chewed the root, spit its juices into the eyes of the boy without hesitation even with his mother crying out in protest and pressed it into the child’s eyes guaranteeing he would be cured.

As the reader, I could not help but to feel a certain amount of respect and love towards Gideon, as the Farquar’s did because of his rapid response to help the afflicted child. This quick response was borne out of love for Teddy. Not only were there elements of Gideon and Teddy’s relationship, but certain cultural differences kept the baas’ and natives separate. The natives lived off of ways of the land and kept secrets of remedies to each other. I believe they kept the remedies a secret in order to preserve their culture and practices.

The text reads “No one can live in Africa or at least on the veld, without learning very soon that there is an ancient wisdom of leaf and soil and season-and, too, perhaps most important of all, of the darker tracts of the human mind-which is the black mans heritage. Up and down the district people were telling anecdotes, reminding each other of things that had happened to them. ” In contrast the whites believed in medical advances and were skeptical about the accuracy of some of the natives “bush medicines”.

When the scientist states “We are always checking up on this kind of story, and we draw a blank every time” it proves his disbelief of the African remedies and that he does not trust that they will work. Also the scientist and The Farquar’s try to persuade Gideon to disclose the root by assuring him that the information will be used for the common good. This is a cultural clash because the whites are trying to advance their modern medicine as Gideon is trying to save his cultural practices. Gideon would not let the sacred root of the African witch doctors benefit humanity for a cost.

The friendship between Gideon and The Farquar’s is affected by his defiance. They begin to look at him with disdain and annoyance and Gideon displayed hostility, stubbornness and made contradictory statements about the location of the root. This cultural clash could also be connected to the power struggles displayed throughout the short story. The scientist and Farquar’s wanted power over Gideon so he would tell the truth about the root, but Gideon maintained control by leading everyone into the bush on a wild goose chase.

The text reads “He (Gideon) picked up, without an attempt at looking anything but casual, a handful of blue flowers that had been growing plentifully all down the path they had come. ” Gideon is mocking the scientist and Farquar’s will and intelligence as he had them walk 6 miles in the bush to search for this root when all he did was pick up a measly flower that had been growing down the whole path. He showed them and the readers that he was not afraid to protect his cultural practices.