Quick write #12

The Crucible exemplifies a historical outlook on what mass hysteria looks like historically, but it can also be applied to modern life. It allowed readers to understand how the events of the Salem witch trials played out in 1962 and the possible motivations for the accusations. This is a common aspect of human society, and mass hysteria becomes a problem every so often as new social issues rise. In the puritan society of 1692, the idea of witchcraft was a way for people to manipulate the public eye. When Arthur Miller wrote the play in the 50's, it could be related to the fear of communism post-WWII. There are many instances of mass hysteria since 1692 and the manipulation of fears and The Crucible gives a glimpse at one of those instances, while the author relates the elements of the play to events of the modern world

Quickwrite #11

In The Crucible by Arthur Miller, certain characters aid the progression and growth if the mass hysteria in Salem. Abigail Williams in a key figure in the acceleration of the hysteria, she is the leader of the girls who claim to know of witchcraft. She leads the surge of conviction. Mary Warren, who was once one of the girls with Abigail on the stand, changes her position and accuses the girls, mainly Abigail, of lying in the court. Abigail immediately retaliated and further ignited the fear among the people of Salem. Either they feared the presence of witch craft, they feared being accused and killed, or both. Tituba serves as the scapegoat, Abigail blames her instantly, and because she is a slave with little social status and recognition, she is immediately convicted. She then later does not fight the conviction, maybe realizing that there was no way out of the accusation and the gravity of it. These characters each have unique roles in the progression of mass hysteria in Salem.

Quick write #10

I believe that lying to protect someone is fair only if what they did is just. Protecting someone from being arrested if they really do deserve to be punished for a crime is not just because they have done something unjust and should be responsible for that, even if that means getting in trouble. However if you are lying to protect someone innocent from harm, I believe that is fair. I think that telling a lie is right if there are circumstances in which you are protecting yourself or others from an unjust person or action. If you feel like telling the truth would harm you and that you have not done anything wrong, lying is acceptable. For example, if someone is invading your privacy by asking personal questions and you are uncomfortable and lie in response to a certain question, that is fair. The same goes if someone asks a personal question about someone else and you are protecting their privacy. It is always better to try to explain that you would rather not talk about that, but in some situations lying may be easier. However, if someone you know has done something and lying is protecting them from justice, it is unacceptable because nobody is innocent in that situation.

Quick write #9

The only time where I can remember being falsely accused in a larger sense. My siblings usually were the culprits and I mostly just tried to best to convince my parents of the truth. This method didn't always work and was usually relative to the situation and how guilty I appeared. Now, most commonly, it's just misunderstandings that get resolved with conversation. Now that my sister is out if the house, I usually don't get blamed for her mistakes. If I were falsely accused now, I would hope that I could maintain a calm composure and try to solve the situation with ease instead of getting frustrating and making the situation worse. I would probably talk directly to the person that accused me and try to find a motive and resolve the situation directly. If that didn't work, I would go to the authority figure and explain my side.