The Dramatic Presentation of Truth, Justice and Morality in The Crucibl

The Dramatic Presentation of Truth, Justice and Morality in The crucible The melting pot is essentially a story about witchcraft, but the whizz key theme which occurs throughout the play and plays a fundamental character in it, is justice. A large proportion of the play is actually perplex in mash, the house of justice, which is a precise symbolic right smart of showing its importance. Normally in every day life, the judge of the court is the person who brings out the justice in the cases brought forwards, but in The Crucible it is not always clear if this is the case sometimes it even seems to be the other way round. Often there are times when crucial characters such as John Proctor ordain question settle Hathorn or Deputy Governor Danforths decisions and reasoning, and sometimes even the verdict, and the reader will see that in a lot of these cases, the two most fibrous and influential men in the town are often in the wrong. This does not say a lot for the justice system in place in Salem. A prime example of this is in bet Two, when the authorities are trying to arrest Elizabeth for having a needle in a poppet in her house, because of something Abigail Williams has said. John becomes angry and says, why do you never wonder if Parris be innocent, or Abigail? Is the accuser always holy at once? Were they born this morning as clean as Gods fingers? This is a very good argument, and unmatchable which the reader feels grateful to John for pointing out. It is a presbyopic running error in the play, that infuriates the reader, to think that the only people with adequacy power to put things right seem completely oblivious to the item that they are missing the blindingly ob... ...were hunted like the witches in Salem, and made to come to other communists to prove they had abandoned their left wing views. Many venomous to McCarthyism, but a few stood up for their beliefs - Arthur Miller being one of them. This is reflected in John Proctor throughout the play, and both men circumstances the same thoughts and morals. It is obvious that Miller authentically wanted to put crosswise the idea of being an individual, and standing up for what you believe in, and to show the jeering of how unjust the justice system really was in those days, and still is in some places. It is clear he was very passionate about these things, and it really comes across in this play - just the words are teeming to give a good impression of what he is trying to show, and builds up an image of each of the characters which the reader can really relate to.