The Crucible - How does Miller effectively create a sense of tension and conflict between John and Elizabeth Proctor at the beginning of Act two?

Authors Avatar

                                               The Crucible

   Miller effectively creates a sense of tension and conflict between John and Elizabeth Proctor at the beginning of Act two. Act two follows directly on from a very highly charged and climatic note. At the end of act one Abigail and the girls accuse many people in Salem of being witches and a state of hysteria is reached. It is therefore a surprise that act two is not a court scene or trial, merely a domestic scene between John and Elizabeth Proctor. This variation is a good thing I believe as it helps to keep the reader interested and keeps the play from becoming monogamous.

   This is a very important scene. Miller I believe created this scene and the love interest between Abigail and John Proctor to make the ending of the play far more dramatic. If a significant rift is created between John and Elizabeth, then surely the ending will become more impressive, because as soon as they have conquered their problems and regained trust in each other following John’s fight to free Elizabeth, John is hanged. This scene is also important to help us understand Elizabeth’s dilemma in act three when Danforth asks her whether John had an affair with Abigail. John is unable to tell her what to say so Elizabeth has to decide for herself whether or not to tell the truth, she is unaware that John has confessed to the affair so denies it happened so as not to incriminate him. Act two helps us to understand that she most definitely did know about the affair and had not forgotten, so therefore is lying to protect John in act three despite their rocky relationship.

   The audience have already by act two heard only bad words about Elizabeth, so it is likely that they have come to the conclusion that she is not a very nice person. This is due to Abigail bad mouthing Elizabeth and saying that she is “…a sickly wife” and a “…cold snivelling woman”. Because we do not meet Elizabeth until later on in the play we only have the opportunity to form an opinion on Elizabeth’s character from what Abigail says about her, which is unfortunately all malicious and derogatory.  

   The language used by Miller in the crucible is archaic, rural American. Because the play is based upon events, which took place around 311 years ago, to make it seem realistic it is crucial that miller does use such language. An example of the language used, is when John says to Elizabeth, “Aye…its warm as blood beneath the clods”, this is definitely not an expression we would use today. Although nowadays we may not understand the language used by Miller perfectly it is important for him to use it in order for the play to become genuine and believable. In his autobiography Timebends, Miller discusses the language he found in the court records. He said that he wanted “to study the actual words of the interrogations, a gnarled way of speaking” Miller also admitted to unintentionally, “elaborating a few grammatical forms himself, the double negatives especially”, although Act two is not a court scene I believe that Millers research into the language of the inhabitants of Salem in the 17th Century helped the play to achieve its sense of authenticity.

Join now!

    It is important for Miller to create tension within the play to keep the audience interested; he uses this technique in Act two with great affect. The audience is already aware of the Proctors strained relationship following John’s affair with Abigail, and Miller highlights the damage that has been done by the affair perfectly in this scene to create a excruciating sense of tension.

    At the start of Act two Miller using stage directions and has John on his return from the field taste the meal the Elizabeth has been preparing, he is displeased with ...

This is a preview of the whole essay