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.