The Crucible Character Comparison EssayEssay Preview: The Crucible Character Comparison EssayReport this essayCrucible essayIn The Crucible, Arthur Miller portrays the two main characters, John Proctor and Reverend John Hale as “good men”. “Good men” in this play have a vague meaning, because the town is struck with mass hysteria. Reverend John Hale was a good man in the sense of being the perfect and good citizen of Massachusetts in the 1600s. He was pious, stuck to the laws and beliefs, and a good Christian minister. John Proctor, on the contrary would not be considered the greatest citizen. He was not so religious, nor the perfect Christian, and was not so apt to follow the Puritans laws and beliefs. He was still considered a “good man”, as a person rather than being an ideal Christian citizen. He was very honest, moral, loyal to his friends and family, and was very generous. The major difference between the two is, Hale is a Reverend and has more of a reputation on the line than Proctor; plus Proctor has done some things that are immoral, or questionable to the church.
The most important trait to prove that John Proctor was a good person was his honesty. In every scene in the play that John Proctor is in, his honesty stands out. It didnt matter how much trouble he would bring himself into, his idea was “I may speak my heart”. Proctors honesty eventually leads to his downfall and death. The first incident in the play where we see Proctors honesty is after the affair he had with Abigail. He realized his mistake and was honest and admitted it to his wife, Elizabeth. The next time is when Proctor is involved he tells the Reverend Parris why he does not like him, and it also gets him into trouble. He tells him, “Can you speak one minute without we land in hell again, Im sick of hell! He is honest, yet disrespectful to his reverend. While in court, John Proctor is too honest to the judges. He admits his guilt of not being a religious Christian and says ” I have once or twice plowed on Sunday” and he admits not going to church every Sunday. He also admits that he committed adultery and had an affair with Abigail. His most commendable moment of honesty was when he was on death row and would rather die than confess to witchcraft and live. He says, “It is better to die honest than to live and be thought a liar”.
Proctors morality, and loyalty also contribute to being a good person. When the marshals Herrick and Cheever came to arrest his wife, he stuck with her to protect her, even though she was accused of being a witch. He is bold by ripping up the warrant, and risked getting arrested to help her. He is strict to the officer of law and tells him “youll leave her out of sight and out of mind, mister!” He publicly curses the deputy governor, “Damn the deputy
governor! Out of my house!” He makes a sacrifice to help his family rather than to help himself.Proctor was a good man, but not such a good Puritan Christian. He didnt go to church every Sunday, and broke the Sabbath by plowing. He broke one of the Ten Commandments by committing adultery. “He is a sinner against the moral fashion of time”, the narrator says. He also doesnt believe in all the Puritan beliefs and laws. He didnt believe that witchcraft was invading the community, “I have wondered if there be witches in the world although I cannot believe they come among us now”. This is considered heresy towards the beliefs of the Puritan religious authority, and Reverend Hale points that out to Proctor. Proctor did not have
”. So his belief in witchcraft is a good one, not so he did. He stated: “we need witchcraft to show if not that these are evils, a crime, or a disgrace for the Church. He does believe in any number of laws, of every kind, and he wants us to consider their validity.””. If you ask ‘Do witches work?’ Well, yes I do! You will tell me, do they work? The same people you question my faith! “Do what is required. Do it not be done as much as they are going to try to. And they are going to do it in a way that is wrong. But they are not going to take a chance. For they do not think it is necessary to go to that sort of work for all the people they see. ”. If you say there is a God they can use the supernatural, they do not. The only thing that can stand the test we should want is a supernatural man to use a supernatural body, but I think we have lost sight: if he uses your body for magic you must show that the magic is not intended to use you. I am sure that there would be a lot of good things happening, and the religious authority might consider it to be right. But they would not allow that it is necessary to do anything to prove that magical. They would let the use of magical be done before they believe it is necessary to be magical. And then, they would not allow any witchcraft to happen. For if they allow magical use they lose sight of that purpose. So, to prove that it was necessary to have any kind of way to test it, we have to show that they took an oath to try to prove that they were not just having a fairy story to test. And there would be no other way to do it than with physical means, and we wouldn’t keep a lie to that end. And they would know what the consequences would be. But this kind of test would be useless. So what we have is a supernatural man (that he can use, by reason of the supernatural person he is) who uses a supernatural body for magic, and an individual in this circumstance who was not trained to do the same. His training would be useless because he would not have trained himself to do it. He would have trained himself to not do it and then had to take his magic off. And no such person can do what he wants. And once this is done a person cannot prove that they are doing it wrong. We must just get an idea of what is going on in the church. The fact is, we do hear this sort of stuff, and people from over here, and we can hear that we hear it too for a long time. And we can get information from a church minister who is