Good And Evil In Arthur Miller's East Of Eden

Judge Danforth is also responsible for the Salem witch trials because his rulings to kill people came with no concrete evidence against them, only unreliable witnesses. Judge Danforth has a very cutthroat way for his rulings. One is either guilty or innocent, no opportunity for a second trial or a review of the case. He openly lets the court know this by saying "If you are not with the court, you are against it"(72). This almost proves that Judge Danforth is ignorant to hard evidence, only wanting people to admit that they are with or against him. Neither option is a just opinion, adding to the hysteria, lie so you can live and others die or tell your truth and die while others live. The people of Salem do not want to make this decision, thus leading to more innocent deaths of the people of Salem. If there had been a different judge in the Salem with trials they would have been over without a death and Abigail's deception would have been brought to light. Judge Danforth decides that many people are guilty, when in reality he should have said he was guilty.

The narrator of East of Eden notes that the contest between good and evil stems from the recurring nature of human history. There is a direct correlation to the story of Cain and Abel throughout the entire novel and it is also inferred that mankind has struggled with overcoming evil since the time of Adam and Eve. The narrator states that when someone looks back on their life “will have left only the hard, clean questions: Was it good or was it evil? Have I done well or ill?” In this quote the narrator is implying that determining

‘The Crucible’ is a great example of morally ambiguous characters. A plethora of characters with blurry ethics exist within the world of ‘The Crucible’, this makes it difficult to distinguish who is truly good and who is evil. Arthur Miller has a fantastic approach of how he displays his characters and their moral standpoints. Adultery, lying, and even the suspicion of witchcraft, within the community brings out the worst in the townspeople. John Proctor is an example of how thin the lines are drawn between a complete Saint and a damned sinner.

His reply is accompanied with a vindictive nature towards anyone who opposes the actions of the court or by extension, him. Therefore, his arrogance and pride restrains him from listening to others point of view. Lastly, despite hearing about the mass opposition and rebellion at the Andover witchcraft trials, Judge Danforth refuses to postpone the hangings and orders Reverend Parris that “Now hear me, and beguile yourselves no more… Postponement now speaks a floundering on my part.” (Miller 129). Danforth arrogantly waves off the request of postponement made by Hale and Parris. He thinks that the act of postponement of the hangings will raise the issue of his credibility as a judge. Danforth’s pride of his status as a judge denies him from giving it a thought that his actions can lead to the death of innocent lives. When pride and arrogance interferes with ones wisdom the repercussions are often destructive. Judge Danforth proves this through the medium of his actions which lead to the destruction of trustworthiness in the community and brought tragedy to Salem.

The Salem Witch Trials were a time of frenzied zealotry and paranoia, and in such times, most logic seems to go out the window. One fallacy in Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible is the fallacy of the false alternative. It is exemplified during the witch proceedings when Francis Nurse presents a paper of signatories declaring their good opinion of his wife. Danforth arrests all of the signatories for questioning. At Francis’ objection that he has promised that no hurt would come to these people Danforth replies “No old man, you have not hurt these people if they are of good conscience. But you must understand, sir, that a person is either with this court or he must be counted against this court, there be no road in between.” (Miller 87). The conversation is merely a variation on the classic false alternative, “You’re either with us, or you’re against us.” The trouble with that logic is that Francis was merely trying to defend his wife from almost certain death. He was not trying to attack the court as Parris states, nor was he really for the court. In disproving this logic we can look at Francis as a counterexample: Not against the court, but not supportive of the court’s actions

“Hale: Quail not before God’s judgment in this, for it may well be God damns a liar less than he that throws away for pride” (206). Reverend Hale’s eye-opening words make Elizabeth realize that John Proctor should do the right thing for God, even if that includes lying. This quote relates to the Salem witch trials because during this time, the court was getting involved with the town, so everybody had to constantly tell the truth. Overall, the play gives a feeling of the Salem witch trials by using facts and events relevant to the time period. On a similar topic, Arthur Miller feels that everybody is vindictive, manipulating, and betraying each other; therefore, Miller uses his troublesome experience to commemorate the demeaning investigations of witches. Miller’s high disapproval of the American government, especially how the court handles situations, is greatly represented in his play. The characters change throughout the story, and they start to realize that it is not all about what the government wants for their life. They soon enough start thinking and speaking for themselves which leads to big decisions and disapproval from the American government. In Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, he artistically manipulates the authentic facts of the Salem witch trials’ victim John Proctor to fiction in order to similarly represent his interrogation during the Red Scare while also putting a spin on the trials through his style, characterization and tone.

A theme is a unifying or dominant idea in a literary work. Steinbeck described the competition of good versus evil as the story of mankind itself. He believes that every generation to come since Adam and Eve will now be immersed with the struggle of good and evil due to Eve’s curiosity that led to sin, eventually banning both her and Adam from the Garden of Eden. In East of Eden, Steinbeck makes the contest of good versus evil apparent through his contrasting description of the setting, the characters’ opposing personalities, and society’s changing morals.

Often individuals over dramatize their opinion to convey their attitude. Similarly, Danforth often acts extreme in his attempts to rid witchcraft from Salem when he says, “If retaliation is your fear, know this- I [Danforth] should hang ten thousand that dares to rise against the law” (Miller 129). Danforth displays demagoguery while he explains to Reverend Hale why the executions must happen on schedule because he appeals to Hale’s passionate fear of witchcraft. Danforth’s response to Hale works in the scene to further build the audience’s perception of Danforth as irritable and urgent, yet precise, and support his determination as Deputy Governor. However, Danforth’s determination often misguides his rationality. Furthermore, Danforth supports the thematic topic of law in The Crucible and helps the reader understand the severity of justice Miller conveys throughout the play. Danforth’s role develops the play by illustrating the stubbornness of authority in Salem during the witch trials.

The idea of good versus evil is illustrated in several ways in John Steinbeck's East of Eden. This is seen through the external conflicts in the novel, the internal conflicts of the characters, and a universal understanding of the battle between good and evil.

The air is warm, sweat dripping down his face. He longingly looks towards his wife with tears in his eyes; knowing the end is nigh. And then, with a bang, a crack, a whimper; his soul left, hoping to be in a better place. This was one man of many who was hung for witchcraft during the Salem Witch Trials. They all were admirable and died for a cause. One of them was an influential man by the name of John Proctor. John Proctor is an admirable man in the play “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller because he is respectable, has a need to protect others in his life, and has integrity/honor.

Deputy Governor Danforth is a selfish, arrogant, and corrupt man who only cares about his own goods. His flawed personalities and hypocritical attitudes make him blind and irrational throughout the entire witchcraft, which directly causes the calamity of the town. Danforth feels embarrassing and doesn’t know what to do when Proctor brings Mary Warren’s deposition that shows his previous judgments are wrong. He is baffled and find a reason to defend himself, “ there lurks nowhere in your heart, nor hidden in your spirit, any desire to undermine this court? Are you in all respects a Gospel Christian? Not come to Church?”(94). Instead of taking a closer look at the details and the evidence of the case, he chooses to question Proctor’s credibility, and he believes people who confound his theory are challenging his authority and he will never let that happen. Furthermore, Danforth is somewhat terrified and worried

To add on to the last point, not only did Danforth not let people defend themselves, he also used misleading questions with little or no evidence. For example, In act III Danforth asks Giles Corey, “Do you take it upon yourself to determine what this court shall believe and what shall set

The novel, The Crucible was written in 1953 by Arthur Miller, which was based on the Salem Witch Trials existing in the late 1600s. In the play, Abigail and several other young women accuse innocent citizens of Salem for the action of witchcraft. During the trials, many individuals were unfairly persecuted; such as John Proctor. This event in history may be associated with the Red Scare, in which individuals were tried for their questionable influences of communism in the United States. When Miller compares the character of John Proctor to himself, the reader is able to relate the similar experiences that both men faced. The Crucible demonstrates the struggle against corruption involving the court, which lead to the death of many innocent individuals in Salem. The Crucible generates an allegory for Arthur Miller’s struggles with McCarthyism because of his similar experience relating to John Proctor’s battle against the Salem Witch Trials, and the relation between the actions of the court in both situations. Arthur Miller uses several writing methods in order to convey The Crucible as an allegory for his struggles with McCarthyism. Miller demonstrates how the Crucible represents an allegory for his conflict with McCarthyism by relating his experiences with the plot of the novel. Miller relates the novel to his struggles by stating, “Should the accused confess, his honesty could only be proved by naming former confederates.” (Are You Now… 34) Miller is explaining how the court

The play, The Crucible, is a fireball of guilt, evil, and good compiled into one magnification. It is a play with tremendous feelings, with many inside twists hidden in the archives of the true story. It is a play with emotional feelings; feelings of anger, hate, and evil, yet also feelings of goodness, and pureness. Undeniably, The Crucible is a play illustrating good versus evil.  The principal characters, Abigail Williams, John Proctor, Ann Putnam and Marry Warren all contain within them elements of good and evil.

They also believed that confessions of their sins saved them from themselves, a similarity with characters from The Crucible where blame placed on someone else constantly, to take guilt from ones self, Abigail began accusing others by saying: "I saw Sarah Good with the Devil! I saw Goody Osborn with the Devil! I saw Bridget Bishop with the Devil!"(2) Accusations needing to be on anybody but her, Abigail disregards others and accuses them. The Salem Witch Trials, encouraged people to make accusations against their friends and neighbours to gain their own freedom, in scenes as the ones listed previously Miller emphasises and dramatises this idea. Another example of a Puritan theocracy is the punishment of an alternative opinion, as John Proctor yelled in The Crucible, “I say-I say God is dead!”(3) He caused uproar within the community and inevitably the end of his own life. The town felt that because John Proctor believed in something against that of the Court’s which was God’s then he must be working for the Devil and must be killed. The referencing in the play to the periods of time where similar issues of right-wing, conformed views were present was not only linked to The Puritan society but also with McCarthyism, present in the 1950’s.