The Crucible Character Archetypes vs. Real People

When first reading through Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” I thought that there was no way that someone could be as evil as Abigail, as clueless as Mary, or as interesting as John Proctor but after analyzing this play, I’ve realized that the archetypes of people that I saw in “The Crucible” were really not that different to celebrities, politicians, and your average human being.

Throughout the novel, John Proctor is a character that I thought was very interesting and not anything like a normal archetypal hero because of the decisions he made throughout the play such as his crimes, death, and the way he acted in court. Then, the more I analysed it the more I realized that he is a hero that also resembles an average person today. This is because of how he is capable of making mistakes and questionable decisions to reach his end goal just like your average person would.

Another character I found that was similar to politicians was Abigail Williams as in they both fit in the archetype of a trickster. This is a character that I thought was too evil to be found in the world today but if you look closely and forget about all of the witchery going on in Salem, Abigail seems like a horrible person that deceives people so that they will side with her and go against those who get in her way. I think that this makes her somewhat similar to a politician because of how some usually try to deceive clueless people so that people will vote for them and not someone else.

Finally, this brings me to my last point. While thinking about how some politicians deceive clueless people, I thought about how Mary Warren seemed like a character that was being deceived by Abigail. For instance, during the play, Abigail tells Mary to make a poppet for Elizabeth Proctor so that Elizabeth gets accused of witchcraft. Mary felt guilty about it but did it anyways because Abigail deceived her into thinking that she will get caught if she didn’t.

Therefore, this is why I think that the character archetypes we see in “The Crucible” are rarely any different from how people act in the real world.

The Literary Theory That Provided the Most Insight

After finishing the play “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller and trying to analyze it from three different perspectives, I believe that the archetypal perspective allowed me to gain insight that the other two weren’t able to provide me with. The way that I was able to connect this play with other plays allowed me to realize many things about the play that I didn’t think of beforehand. For instance, after comparing the two protagonists from “The Crucible” and “Hamlet”, I realized that Hamlet and John Proctor both have similarities that make them the hero archetype but differences that set them apart from the typical protagonist from other books/plays. This made me think deeply about the play because it made me realize why I thought John Proctor was more interesting than your typical hero archetype. In my opinion, he’s a lot more interesting because he’s known to make a lot of mistakes throughout the play and he doesn’t end up with the expected happy ending that other hero archetypes seem to have. For instance, he makes a mistake by cheating on his wife with Abigail. This is proven in court when he says, “ In the proper place - where my beasts are bedded. On the last night of my joy, some eight months past. She used to serve me in my house, sir. He has to clamp his jaw to keep from weeping. A man may think God sleeps, but God sees everything, I know it now.” (Miller 110). This quote reveals that unlike other hero archetypes, he is capable of making life changing mistakes. Likewise, this theory made me realize something about the world and the people in it. In the Crucible, Abigail is known to create chaos in the town by spreading lies and deceiving people. An example of this is when she tries to accuse Elizabeth of witchery, deceiving people into believing her lies by saying, “There be no blush about my name…hates me, uncle, she must, for I would not be her slave. It’s a bitter woman, a lying, cold, sniveling woman, and I will not work for such a woman!” (Miller 12). This made me think about how the world we live in isn’t that much different. This is because in society today, people (often in power) try to deceive people into believing lies for their own gain.

Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. Oxford University Press, 2019.

Archetypes Portrayed Throughout Arthur Miller's "The Crucible"

After reading “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller, I realized that there are many archetypal characters throughout the text. For instance, John Proctor is an example of someone who displays the archetype of a hero because of the journey he is on throughout the play to expose the witches that are creating havoc in Salem while also protecting himself and those around him. Also, Abigail is another person who displays the archetype of trickster. I think this because during the play, she deceives the entire town into accusing others of witchery when she herself is the real witch. Another point I thought about is how similar some of the characters are compared to other characters in different plays. In the book “Hamlet” by Shakespeare, I thought that both protagonists of the plays were very similar to each other (Hamlet and John Proctor). The reason why I think that is because both have similar motives. For example, in the third act of “the Crucible”, John Proctor tries to get revenge on Abigail for trying to accuse his wife by trying to expose her to the court for her witchery (Miller 110). Similarly, in “Hamlet”, Hamlet seeks revenge on the person that killed his father by saying to the ghost, “Haste me to know 't, that I, with wings as swift As meditation or the thoughts of love, May sweep to my revenge.” (Shakespeare 58). In my opinion, these two both show the hero archetype in a similar way because both of their goals in their plays were to get revenge on those who tried to harm them and the people they loved. Likewise, Abigail is similar to Claudius as both of their main purposes were to deceive everyone so that the main protagonist is unable to reach their goal of getting revenge. During the first act of the Crucible, Abigail refuses to admit to witchcraft so she deceives Parris into thinking that Elizabeth is the real witch by saying, “There be no blush about my name…hates me, uncle, she must, for I would not be her slave. It’s a bitter woman, a lying, cold, sniveling woman, and I will not work for such a woman!” (Miller 12). I thought that she was very alike to Claudius because of how he deceives Hamlet into thinking that he was talking only to his mother while hiding in the curtains (Shakespeare 171). This shows that these two characters display the archetype of the trickster as they both try to deceive those around them to make sure that the main character doesn’t reach their goal. As for archetypal symbols, there are little to none found throughout the entire play as it focuses solely on the archetypes of the character. Compared to other main characters from different books/plays, John Proctor has many differences that make him more interesting than the typical hero archetype. For example, in the play, he isn’t perfect and tends to make reckless decisions that results in his death whereas in other books, main characters seem to never make bad decisions and live to see a happy ending. Even though there are differences, he is somewhat similar to other typical heroes as he develops massively throughout the play to become a lot more brave.

Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. Oxford University Press, 2019.
Shakespeare, William, and George Rylands. Hamlet. Oxford University Press, 1993.

Anticipation on What Will Happen in Hamlet

During the first act of Hamlet, the character Hamlet went to go see the ghost that was first seen by Horatio and Marcellus. When they started talking to each other, it was revealed that the ghost was murdered by his brother. This caused Hamlet to say, “Haste me to know't, that I, with wings as swift As meditation or the thoughts of love, May sweep to my revenge”, meaning that he seeks revenge on them. After reading this part, it gave me an idea of what I’m going to anticipate later on in the play which is that the main character will either become the villain or he will end up dying in the end. The reason I think this is because in my previous years of highschool, I've read many Shakespeare plays and most of them had an ending similar to what I anticipate for this play. There is also something Hamlet says that could lead him to become a villain or even die in the end which is, “O all you host of heaven! O earth! what else? And shall I couple hell? O, fie! Hold, hold, my heart; And you, my sinews, grow not instant old, But bear me stiffly up. Remember thee! Ay, thou poor ghost, while memory holds a seat In this distracted globe. Remember thee!” and, “O villain, villain, smiling, damned villain! My tables,--meet it is I set it down, That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain; At least I'm sure it may be so in Denmark:”. This reveals that Hamlet is extremely angry and that he won't let anyone get in the way of murdering his uncle making it somewhat obvious that he will have to kill others that might interfere in his plan. It might go as far as everyone trying to stop him which will eventually get him killed. Even though there is some evidence that I might be correct, I have only read a few acts of the play and could be completely wrong as the story may change drastically as it progresses.

Adnan Syed: Innocent or Guilty?

Adnan Syed

Serial by Sarah Koenig is a podcast that gained popularity throughout the world about the murder of 18 year old Hae Min Lee in the city of Baltimore and who did it. The suspect Adnan Syed was then imprisoned for life after he was charged for first degree murder, but, the question now is did he really commit the murder? Or was he framed and falsely accused? Well, after listening to some of the podcast, I came to my own conclusion that Adnan is innocent and that someone else did it. This is because of three reasons.

First, there were way too many inconsistencies when it came to what Jay Wilds said during interviews and to detectives. For instance, when talking about where Adnan killed Hae, Jay mentioned four different places during each of his interviews which are best buy, the library, Patapsco Skate Park, and even went on to say that he had no clue where he killed her. That is not the only time he was inconsistent when speaking though. In two different interviews, Jay was talking about the people who dug the grave. In the first, he said it was just Adnan but on the next, he said that he was a part of it too. I think that there is a high chance that Jay is lying about Adnan as he is way too inconsistent with his answers. Therefore, I think that because of this, Adnan can be innocent and that maybe Jay is the real murderer.

Another reason is because of a person who is an important part to these series of events, Asia Mclain. According to Asia, she had a conversation with Adnan for 15-20 minutes until around 2:40. The problem with this is that Hae was supposed to be dead at 2:36. So how is it possible that Adnan murdered Hae if he was having a conversation at the exact same time? I think that Asia should be trusted as she has nothing to gain from trying to help Adnan get out of jail and that this could mean that he is completely innocent.

Asia's Letter to Adnan

Lastly, Adnan was considered a good kid by those around him. According to Sarah, "He plays the good Muslim son at home and at the mosque". This means that he wasn't problematic to the point of murder as he was a nice person in general. Also, someone like this doesn't seem like they would have the motives of murdering someone that they were close to.

Hae Min Lee and Adnan Syed

In conclusion, I believe that Adnan is being accused of murder and is innocent. This is because there is so much proof about his innocence that can't be ignored such as the inconsistencies and the people around him at that time.

Sources:
https://serialpodcast.org/season-one
https://viewfromll2.com/2014/11/26/serial-why-jays-testimony-is-not-credible-evidence-of-adnans-guilt/

Did Led Zeppelin's "The Lemon Song" Rip Off Howlin' Wolf's "The Killing Floor"?

Led Zeppelin - The Lemon Song

Howlin' Wolf - Killing Floor

In 1964, artist Howlin’ Wolf wrote the song Killing Floor. A few years later in 1969, Led Zeppelin wrote The Lemon Song. Due to many similarities in the two songs, ARC music sued Zeppelin for plagiarizing lyrics from Killing Floor. In this blog post, we will be determining if Led Zeppelin really copied Howlin’ Wolf or if his song was his own idea.

When I first listened to The Lemon Song and Killing Floor, I instantly noticed that some of the verses were nearly identical to each other. For instance, in the first verse of The Lemon Song the lyrics are, “I should have quit you, long time ago I should have quit you, long time ago I wouldn’t be here, my children Down on this killin’ floor.” which compared to Killing Floor, is very similar as the lyrics are, "I should have quit you, long time ago I should have quit you, long time ago I wouldn’t be here, my children Down on this killin’ floor". This means that Zeppelin clearly copied lyrics from Wolf and only slightly changed them. Not only that, but if you listen to both of the songs, the way they sing some of the verses is so alike that it seems suspicious.

On the other hand, people can make the argument that the song is original and that it isn't a rip off of Killing Floor. The beat is extremely different and the lyrics may have only been inspired by Killing Floor. Also, the genre's for both songs are different as The Lemon Song is a rock song and Killing Floor is a blues song making it somewhat original.

In my opinion, I think that Zeppelin's song is a rip off of Wolf's song because there are way too many similarities between the two, and even if the lyrics are only inspired, Wolf still deserves to be credited as it was his ideas. As I mentioned in the beginning, ARC music sued Zeppelin for plagiarizing and I think that it was well deserved because Wolf received no credit whatsoever for the lyrics that were copied. In addition, I think artist's writing songs should always check to see if they are plagiarizing from someone else to make sure that the lyrics or beat are original and not copied. If they are planning to use another artist's song for a cover, they also must provide credit to the original artist to avoid getting into legal problems. This not only applies to music but movies, TV shows, and creativity in general.

Citations:
Smith, Benjamin. “The Case Against Led Zeppelin: Is Hard Rock's Greatest Band Guilty Of Musical Plagiarism?” VH1 News, VH1 News, 21 Oct. 2014, www.vh1.com/news/53929/the-case-against-led-zeppelin/.

Review and Thoughts on Serial Podcast

The podcast Serial is based off the murder of Hae Min Lee in January of 1999. The popular podcast tells the horrifying story of Min Lee’s death and the arrest of her ex-boyfriend Adnan Syed, which resulted in a prison sentence that he is still serving to this day. Although he was arrested for murder, there was never actual evidence that proved Syed to be the murderer. 

Despite the fact that I’m not the biggest fan of podcasts, I thought Serial was still an enjoyable listen. I found the story interesting, thrilling, and filled with suspense. I also liked how she not only included her own opinion, but also the opinions of various people who knew Syed. This is a great addition because it makes the podcast less biased than if it was only the narrator sharing her opinions.

The idea of presenting this podcast in an investigative journalism format is very interesting and unexpected as this format is usually seen on TV. It really wants the viewers to use their own imagination and visualize the things that are happening to make the experience a lot better than seeing it on a screen.

While listening to Serial, I began to wonder about how the victims family felt as it must've been a tragic moment for them. I think that they must feel sad every time the podcast is mentioned because they probably don't want to remember the past events. Compared to reading, I think I prefer podcasts a lot more. This is because I find it much more efficient as I can multitask while listening whereas if I'm reading, I have to focus solely on reading.

In the beginning of the podcast, Koenig mentions the challenges of memory. I strongly relate to this as almost everyday, I'm unable to remember all of the events unless they're important. This raises problems for the rest of the podcast as Syed or anybody else could lie about what happened at the events leading up to the murder.

Should grade 12 English be required for University programs?

When applying to Universities, almost everyone has noticed that English is a required course for most programs. This brings the question of should a University English course be mandatory to get into your program? Some may argue that English isn't necessary if you're going into a program such as music, math, or engineering, but, the course teaches you about many essential skills that could help you in the future such as oral communication, researching, and writing effectively.

Every day, you use oral communication everywhere you go whether it's in your University, job, etc. Good oral communication skills will lead people (especially students) to effectively ask questions relevant to a discussion, and also help us explain ideas to peers or other students. For instance, if you're working on a group project and you have a great idea, if you don't clearly state what that idea is, it may be useless because others will not understand and dismiss it. American author Anthony Robbins once said, "The way we communicate with others and with ourselves ultimately determines that quality of our lives." This quote relates to my example because if you are capable of properly stating your ideas, you could make a positive change in the project. Therefore, English being required is good because Universities need to make sure that students are able to effectively ask questions, and communicate their ideas so that they can succeed in assignments/activities that require them to do so.

Researching is another skill that is important when it comes to University. This is because almost every program will require you to do assignments that make you do tons of research. In most English courses in high school, the class prepares you to research productively by teaching you how to cite your findings, find proper and reliable sources, and also the importance of avoiding plagiarism. For example, if a student were not to learn these things about researching it could lead to a great risk of using false information, and/or using information that was taken from someone else that isn't yours. Since the importance of researching is extremely high, all programs at Universities should require a grade 12 English credit.

Finally, the last reason why grade 12 English should be mandatory is because a student has to be able to write effectively in order to create essays or reports that will be done in mostly every program. Suppose you were in a music program and had to write an essay about a musician, if you never learned how to properly structure an essay, and use appropriate grammar, most likely your grade on that assignment won't be high at all. Furthermore, by making grade 12 English required, students won't have to be worried about making such mistakes on an essay or any kind of writing assignment.

Overall, I believe that English is far from useless and that it should definitely be mandatory in order to get into University due to the statements I made above.