Rating: 
Summary: Excellent
Review: The play shows very good how people believe blindly what the others say. The church is the only puplic building at this time and the parishioners follow its roules. I find it incredible how they believe the words of the "afflicted children" even though children had nothing to say in that century. Probably that is the reason why they want to get attention by telling this lies. I think they can't imagine the consequences. It's terrible how the people wait to accuse their neighbours. They just want to take vengeance. Miller knows very well how to make the story thrilling. Until the end you I didn't dare to breath,because Proctor can't decide. But I think he did the right thing.
Rating:
Summary: Tragic
Review: Arthur Miller describes the historical situation of this play very well. He writes about the fate of every single person and about the influence which people can have on other people. Reading the story you can witness how the whole village is plunging itself into misery. This play is written to sympathise with each character. It's tragic how innocent people get hunted because of little differences to the majority of society. At the time where Arthur Miller wrote this play in America was the witch-hunt after communists. This state is almost a repetition of history. So we would say that it's worthy reading.
Rating: 
Summary: Hysteria, McCarthyism Exposed
Review: While Arthur Miller was more likely known for his most popular play DEATH OF A SALESMAN, which won the Pulitzer Prize as the best play in 1949, THE CRUCIBLE is regarded by many critics to be a much more superior work.THE CRUCIBLE was written in response to the ridiculous charges made by Senator McCarthy, who accused the Democratic administration of harboring and supporting Communists in the United States Government. Miller wrote the play in 1953, at the same time America was involved in a formidable struggle with the former Soviet Union. America in general had this secret and unexpressed xenophobia of this social-communist power. Miller had used the famous McCarthy saying in the play - the senator oftained maintained that those who opposed his hearing were Communists, and consequently, any public official who offered criticism, questions, or doubts of the hearings soon found himself defending himself against the charge of being a part of the Communicst conspiracy. In THE CRUCIBLE, we also found struggle and conflict between the Salem people and the Authority. At a more personal, narrower level, this conflict exists between John Proctor vs. Reverend Parris. John Proctor was a local member of the church who had opposed and challenged many of Parris' unnecessary expenditures. Like those who dared the power of the government and questioned authority of hearings back in 1950s here in America, anyone who opposed the authority of the Salem judges was automatically suspected of trying to undermine the court in the 17th century. Besides McCarthyism at the time when the play was written, THE CRUCIBLE reflected so much the concepts of Puritanism back in the 17th century. The unusual nature of the Puritan religion led to all kinds of and different levels of fear of witches and persecution. Puritans, like the authority in THE CRUCIBLE, deeply felt that their way of life was absolutely right and all other ways were wrong. Therefore, Puritans believed that government should be totally controlled by the church. THE CRUCIBLE is an authentic examination of the Puritan Age of America. It was written at the time when McCarthyism outburtsed and people lived in hysteria. It served to parallel the Salem Witch0hunt which brought about fear and persecution some 300 years ago. Interesting play. Fun to read.
Rating:
Summary: Yet another student.......
Review: Yes, here is yet another poor student who was forced to read this and similar writings on the Puritans! To my pleasant surprise, however, I found "The Crucible" to be better than I had first expected - this probably has to do partly with the fact that the story is rather short, but also with the fact that the story is rather interesting as well. Written in the form of a play by the thought-to-be-communist Arthur Millar, "The Crucible" can really bring you into the story if you let it. The main subject behind this book is the hypocrisy of the Puritan civilization, dealing mainly with the witch trials and burnings in Salem during the late 17th century in early America. The story is crafted around actual fact and history texts, but some of the characters and scenes Miller describes are fictitious, naturally. Even though the fiction element is strong, the book also carries a level of realism to it that takes you back to those horrible times in 1692 quite well. While I don't really like the reasons Miller wrote the book (to somehow prove he was innocent of ties with communists....what does that mean?), the book was still interesting and provocative. Students out there, stick with it - the book isn't that bad, it's short, to the point, and actually can have your complete attention at times.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Way To Get Back At The Goverment...
Review: This book was great! I liked all the contriversy with it all. Not only did the characters have a little something going on, so did the writer! WAY TO GO ARTHUR!! He really realted the two things good!
Rating: 
Summary: stupid
Review: i thought the movie was so stupid that i went to sleep instead of watching it!!!
Rating:
Summary: "Touchdown" Tommie Kennedy
Review: Arthur Millers book "The Crucible" was a good book to read. The main characters in this book is John Procter, Abigal, Paris, Mr Hale, and the judges in the trial. This book takes place in 1692 in Salem, Mass. There are several people who are suspected as witches, and are making the children sick. Abigal a 17 year old girl is suspected of titilating John Procter. Procter is trying to convince the judges that his wife Elizabeth is not a witch. Paris was the town minister who's daughter is sick. Mr Hale is a minister from a neighboring town and is known for his work in casting out demonic spirits. Overall this book was okay. Miller was comparing the Salem witch trials with the McCarthy hearing which was going on when Miller wrote the book.
Rating:
Summary: The Crucible; if you're gonna go, go all out
Review: Disclaimer: I can't figure out how to do italicized or underlined fonts, so all titles will be indicated by qutation marks. It seems like almost every event in our national and world history has been put into the form a fictional story. This does not nesecsarily make these stories boring or uncreative. There are many classic historical fiction works. For example, "Red Badge of Courage" was excellent. However, the manner in which Arthur Miller wrote "The Crucible" gives the reader the feeling that they are wasting their time. "The Cruicble" falls into an akward place, because it cannot be read by people who want to learn about the Salem Witch Trails (because of historical inaccuracies), and it cannot be read for the fictional story, because, outside of the historical facts, the plot is weak at best. Arthur Miller's "The Crucible" is the story of the Salem Witch Trails put into a play format. The only plot that Miller created outside of what actually happened is an affair between John Proctor and Abigail Williams. Abigail then becomes jelous of John's wife and starts accusing people of being witches, eventually accusing Mrs. Proctor. Ironically enough, John ends up being hung, while his wife is spared. Weak. Miller needs to get off the fence and decide if he wants to write a play or a textbook, because his mixture between the two is neither entertaining, nor educational. Overall, I think "The Crucible" is worth reading because any literature is worth reading, but Miller "wasted" the topic of the Salem witch trails. It could have been done better.
Rating: 
Summary: Dont judge a book by its cover
Review: When I first picked up this book I had the impression that it would focus more on witchcraft than on politics. The main themes of the book had more to do with trickery, descite and revenge than on witchcraft. The book's main focus is swirled around in how the main characters, such as Abigail and Putnam, get even with people how they dont like or people who they have past quarrels with. The Salem witch trials was just camouflague to what was really going on. People would accuse other people of witchcraft thinking that that was the fastest way to get rid of someone that was causing a problem to them. Most of the time no one had any evidence to back up their daft accusations. Abigail used this thinking to the fullest when she accused just about everyone in the general Salem area of witchcraft. She accused John Proctor's wife of witchcraft because she thought that once she was out of the picture, she could get with Proctor. The Crucible and the Salem witch trials were all about hidden agendas and nothing was what it seemed. This book really didnt do it for me because all that happened was a couple of stupid girls accused people of witchcraft and through the ignorance of the people at the time, those people were put to death. I expected a little more action than what was in the book.
Rating:
Summary: This Book Rocks
Review: Arthur Miller's play, "The Crucible" gives a true insight to the time of hysteria during the Salem Witch Trials. Reading the book, I thought the Puritans could do no wrong, commit no sin, or speak slander about each other; but then I realized these people were human and made mistakes. I have never read a work of literature in which human nature during hysteria is so well portrayed. Abigal was one character whom I despised because she is the kniving, cold-hearted, wicked vixen guys hate to love and love to hate. I did enjoy the books social message because the entire Salem scenario repeated itself during the 1950s, when Sen. Joseph McCarthy led teh nation on a Communist witch hunt.
| 
