Have the Witch Hunts Really Gone Away?

Let me start by saying I know it has been a long summer with a lot of reading, thinking, and writing; but I am very proud of all of you for taking the time and energy while making the effort to communicate with one another on each book electronically. I am also very pleased with you for speaking your minds with your peers and with me; always know that I appreciate honesty and courage. We are almost finished, with one book left A Separate Peace. These last three books seemed to have run together concerning characters, plots, themes, and ideas. With that said, The Crucible is a book that, again, can be applied to our world today.

First of all, I don't know if you know much about the McCarthy era in the United States. I will try to summarize it for you as best as I can. During the 1940's and 1950's, the United States and its citizens were obsessed and overwhelmed with the threat of Communism growing world wide. Senator Joseph McCarthy took advantage of this situation and stated that Communists were infiltrating the country accusing many people in the U.S. of Communism. McCarthyism, as it was known, created greater political tensions in the country. A Blacklist was generated by Sen. McCarthy with names of people who were Communists spying in the U.S. Many of these people were famous, Arthur Miller being one of them. To make a long story short, McCarthy's accusations were untrue and he eventually faced consequences for his actions. If you really want to know more about this era, you can research it at pbs.org, American Masters, Arthur Miller, McCarthyism at www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/arthur-miller/mccarthyism/484/

Some people say Arthur Miller wrote this play as a reaction to McCarthyism because Sen. McCarthy was on a modern day witch hunt and included Miller in that hunt. We all know that the Salem Witch Trials happened; therefore, Miller decided to make the comparison and the play was the result. Now, I really don't know where to go from here because I love the history behind the stories we read, but I also know how important it is to read the text for the text's sake. History and literature are bedfellows and sometimes need to be presented together in order to understand what the author might have been thinking and experiencing during his or her time period. Because, really, I often wonder where authors get their ideas for their novels. Since I have already given a little bit of history, I better go to the text.

The Crucible is definitely a text that will live on throughout the past, present and future. We are always on a witch hunt whether it be in politics, with friends, colleagues, or family members. We accuse people without fully understanding the circumstances because 1)we don't want to get into trouble, much like the girls; or 2)we fear what we don't completely understand, much like the townspeople. I am disgusted with Abigail and I feel for Elizabeth. The other girls are just pawns in the story because they fear Abigail. However, this book shows us how powerful the power of suggestion really is. Abigail was able to control so much through her suggestions just so she would not get caught in the lies she told. This also brings me to the notion that there is a snowball affect when one lies. You have to keep telling more lies to keep up with the ones you have already told.

One thing that struck me most was the idea that good cannot exist without evil and heaven without hell. In my text, Miller offers narratives within the acts explaining why things are the way they are in the play. On page 31 he states "Like Reverend Hale and the others... we conceive the Devil as a necessary part of a respectable view of cosmology...certain ideas and emotions and actions are of God, and their opposites are of Lucifer." This offers us explanations for the things we have difficulty understanding or the things we fear. "It was meant to happen" is something many people say when they cannot figure out why it happened - blind faith? Then would Abigail be the representation of Lucifer and her counterpart Elizabeth? But how does Proctor fit into this? He might be the representation of man on earth torn between what is wrong and what is right - the old morality conflict.

Either way, this play definitely strikes a chord with many people - much like The Great Gatsby and The Scarlet Letter have - about morality, more so than The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Grapes of Wrath. This possibly may be because of the scandalous content each book addresses. We thrive on gossip and scandal, why else does reality T.V. Extra!, and Entertainment Tonight exist and succeed? It is easy to blame others for our actions, but it is much more difficult to be honest not only with others but with ourselves. The relationship Elizabeth and John have shows how important honesty is to keep the relationship strong; unfortunately, it was too late for them when they realized this.

Overall, this play is a great representation of not only American ideals, beliefs and 'historical' events, but of humanity and the struggles it causes for all of us.

Enough Already!

I love to hate this book and I hate to love it! I don't know if I want to be proud of Hester or slap her silly. I don't know if I want to feel sorry for Dimmsesdale or slap him silly. Do I love Pearl or do I fear her? And Chillingworth, well...

Let me start by addressing what I think is positive about Hester Prynne. Hester is definitely a strong woman. Considering the time period and circumstances, she is able to hold her own. She is a single mother raising a child (I don't care who or what time period, that is a tough job), and she sticks to her values. However, that last point is where my conflict with Hester lies. Hester strays from her marital vows (even if she didn't mean them), but she accepts her punishment for it without any complaints. I want to admire her, but I don't know if I can. I understand the human heart and its tangled emotions are very complicated, and that is why I sometimes feel sympathetic toward Hester. Ugh, what do I do?

Okay, here's how I see it. A beautiful, young, lonely married woman wants to be faithful but is seduced and must face the consequences and results of that seduction. She willingly does. She never gives up the father's name because she wants to protect him and his name; that could be considered an honorable and admirable act. She raises her child as if nothing bad ever happened and tries to live life in an honorable fashion after the fact. She is an enigma in my mind that I cannot solve!

Let's not forget the supporting characters, Dimmesdale and Chillingworth. Here are two men who are at complete opposite ends of the spectrum. Dimmesdale is living with the guilt of dishonoring Hester as well as God and the Church. He becomes physically ill and suffers because of his sins; yet he does not confess or admit to what he has done when that confession could cure his ailments for fear of losing his popularity among the Puritan community. He is definitely torn between what is the more right thing, in his mind, to do. Chillingworth is an old, despicable, gross man who is filled with vengeance. In the beginning, he was upset about his wife's actions; but, as the story progresses, it was no longer about having a broken heart and crushed ego as much as it was about seeking vengeance. No matter motives of individuals, everything became personal. Nobody, except maybe Hester (hence my torn reaction to her), was doing things for others; they were doing what would offer instant gratification at the time.

I don't think this book is about an adulterous affair as much as it is about human nature. Putting aside the language and Hawthorne's long sentences, the events, emotions, actions, and results are very real today. Did you know that adultery in Colorado is illegal and can result in jail time? The law is still on the record books, but why is it so difficult to enforce that law now in the 21st century? Imagine how many men and women would be wearing a scarlet letter A in our town let alone our state. But that is beside the point. I think Hawthorne captures the essence of the human heart in this novel. It is always striving to do what is best, but the little monsters of the mind get in the way. Hawthorne allows the reader to search within him or herself unconsciously to discover his or her feelings about matters of the heart that can be overtaken by the mind; hence, this novel is a very psychological novel. It is a difficult read for a lot of people not only because of the style, but because of the content. I struggle every time I read this book because I don't know how I want to feel upon completion.

I guess to put everything in a nutshell... I sometimes admire and despise Hester for not revealing the father's identity - it does show strength, but it can also show weakness because she is fearful of reactions, punishments, and ultimate outcomes. I feel sorry for Dimmesdale but hate him too because he tortures himself pointlessly - admitting the truth would have set him free and his suffering would have been minimized or gone. I can't even comment on Chillingworth because he is not worthy of the letters I type. His actions are manipulative, nasty, gross, and evil - much like he is as an individual. And as far as little Pearl - that's a whole other blog!

Honesty is What Counts

I must first start by saying The Great Gatsby is one of my most favorite books. I think I like it so much because of the time period in which it takes place. It is between wars, times and opportunities seem to be lucrative, the music was fun, and the fashion was beautiful. On the surface, everything seems to be so invigorating and carefree; but as we all know, under the surface things were not as they seemed.

The characters are intriguing, the settings are exotic, and the plot is thought-provoking. Fitzgerald does an awesome job using Nick Carroway to describe everything so the reader can really see what people, places, and situations look like; it's as if we are with Nick. The descriptive language is something that helps the book move rather quickly. One example of this is when Nick describes the party in Chapter III. It is a nice mix of narrative and dialog which keeps the reader's attention. Another example is the descriptions of East Egg, West Egg and the ash-ridden slums. Each setting reflects the characters who live in each. Nick and Gatsby are not flashy and don't really want to show off; therefore, they live in the less gaudy West Egg. Tom and Daisy love to show off and live is the very flamboyant East Egg. The Wilsons live in the valley of ashes where things are hidden, covered, and dirty - both Wilsons can fit into that description.

Fitzgerald sets Nick Carroway up from the very beginning to be a modest man. He talks about his father's advice, "Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone, just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages you've had." Because of this advice, Nick is able to empathize, or rather, not judge too harshly the people he encounters. He may not agree with what they do or say, but he never once criticizes anyone in the book. I am reminded of our VP Joe Biden when he said he never questions a person's motive because he doesn't know the whole story. That is really a good motto to live by, but it is difficult to not judge and criticize in the world we live.

Nick is a stark contrast to many of the other characters, except for Jordan. I might even go as far as saying Jordan is his female counterpart. Tom, Daisy, Myrtle, and Wilson are all very weak individuals. They are weak because they cannot be honest. The apartment scene in Chapter II shows the beginnings of this dishonesty and weakness. Everyone is lying to each other and lying shows weakness. It takes a strong person to be honest with others and him or herself. Nick is surprised by the actions of his fellow characters and their behavior, but the surprise seems to subside toward the end of the novel. Some of this may be because Nick is recalling and reflecting on the events. He is a third person narrator, but not the omniscient narrator we saw in The Grapes of Wrath. This might play a part in the way the characters are seen. Even though Nick doesn't judge, the audience is only privy to what Nick saw. If the story were told from Jordan's point of view, or any other for that matter, it would be a totally different story with totally different perspectives.

To tie this book to the others we have read, I see some similarities, the first being the difference in social class. This is something that will always exist; and if we look at literature, fiction or non, we can see this struggle throughout history. There will always be the have's and have not's, but it is up to each individual to determine what they are going to do about it. In this novel, the have's don't understand what it would be like to not get what their hearts desire. To the have not's, it seems they will do whatever to have something. We can see this with the party goers who don't even know Gatsby and Myrtle who desperately wants to have something (love, money, companionship, recognition). Another thing I see in all three books is the difference in gender. In Gatsby the gender issue immediately arises when Daisy says "I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool-that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool." This quote speaks volumes about Daisy as well as women at the time. These are only two issues that are timeless, and I think that is why these books are still read today. We can relate to these social issues no matter the time period; and relating to the audience and being honest with the audience should be every author's goals.

Surviving Man's Inequality...

I know this book isn't the happiest of books to read, but it is crucial to read in order to try to understand what so many Joad families suffered and continue to suffer today.

Inequality seems to be a topic that dominates the story. This inequality stems from social, cultural, and economic circumstances. The landowners and banks control California and its jobs. These 'rich folks' begin to observe the migration and influx of people wanting jobs and start to feel threatened. When one group out numbers another group, a power shift begins; and the landowners didn't want to lose power, so they treated the migrant workers like animals in order to keep control. I was reminded of the Ludlow Massacre in 1914 in southern Colorado when the steel and mine workers were forced to live and work in unlivable and unworkable conditions (If you are not familiar with this event, I recommend you research it a little bit). The unfair treatment of laborers is the reason unions began to form. Money, education, and sometimes family name/background (if not a combination of all three) allow people to move ahead and become successful; however, during the Dust Bowl, not many people had any of these things and were left to struggle to feed a family much like the Joads. Therefore, I think a major theme in this novel is the division among people socially, culturally, and economically causes the evils of inequality and inhumanity to take over the human race. Survival of the fittest, or the richest, is what drives the behavior of many of the characters; nobody seems to look at his or her fellow man or woman as a fellow man or woman.

An example of inequality is when the Joads stop to fill up the gas tank in chapter 13. The attendant is constantly asking "What's this country commin' to?" and refers back to the economic hardships of people who stop and trade just for a gallon of gas. "Them big new cars" don't stop at his station because "they go on to them yella-painted company stations in town." This is only one example of how big companies control the economy. This control is historical and is what causes small businesses and many farms to go out of business. The gas station attendant at one time was probably a very popular man because he was either the only gas station or he was friendly to customers or both. But once the big corporations come to town, things definitely change. Although, the attendant is obviously a good man because he does trade for gas. He has been taken advantage of and is upset about it, but he still helps the people. The ironic twist, though, is if he didn't help the people, he would go out of business and not be able to survive. It is a vicious cycle and sometimes we never know what people's motives are for helping others.

When the Joads finally arrive in California, they are faced with the harsh reality of the lack of milk and honey in the land of sour grapes. The inequalities continue as they move from camp to camp and hardship is around every corner. But, through the hardships, the family, specifically Tom, realizes how important it is to work for everyone, for the collective, in order to survive. When this book ended, I immediately thought of Ayn Rand's Anthem and the idea that in order for a society to be successful, individuality must be compromised for the greater good. What you do for yourself must also benefit your fellow human beings; gaining personal fame and fortune benefits nobody but yourself. This is a good idea when the situation is as desperate as the Joads and other families like them; it could bring a more peaceful and happy lifestyle, but can it go too far? Even though The Grapes of Wrath is far from a Utopian society, the theory is very Utopian. Do you agree?

This book is a tough emotional read only because it is based on historical events. Even though the Joad family wasn't real, many Joad families existed. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was a fun book to read, but I think we are far removed from the history and reality of it. The Grapes of Wrath, on the other hand, is an event that some people today, like our grandparents or great grandparents, remember because they lived through it. I know this book makes me thankful for what I have (an education, money, a family, a house, food, cars, the list can go on). I have these things, though, because I worked very hard for them. The 1930's were tough years for many people, even for the landowners and banks. It is difficult to sympathize with the wealthy people in the book, but look at the events of the 1930's and how it might have affected them. They were trying to survive as well. It really is survival of the fittest...hmm, I think I said that about Huck Finn too.