Representation of Women in Nicholas Hytner’s The Crucible (1996)

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1 Ackerman, A Student Handbook to the Plays of Arthur Miller: All My Sons, Death of a Salesman, The Crucible, A View from the Bridge, Broken Glass.

2 Ibid., p. 135.

3 de Lauretis, "The Technology of Gender," in Technologies of Gender, p. 12.

4 Ibid.

5 Abbotson, Critical Companion to Arthur Miller: A Literary Reference to His Life and Work, p. 126.

6 Hollway, “Gender Difference and the Production of Subjectivity,” in Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation and Subjectivity, p. 223.

7 de Lauretis, Technology of Gender, p. 16.

8 Rando, “The Essential Representation of Woman,” in Art Journal, p. 48.

9 de Lauretis, Technology of Gender, quoted in Rando, Essential Representation, p. 48.

10 Miller, May 1999, Harvard University Boston, MA. Lecture.

11 Abbotson, Critical Companion, p. 123.

12 See François Jost, L’œil-cam´era. Entre film et roman (Presses Universitaires de Lyon, 1987), pp. 27–8.

13 Morgan, “The Crucible,” in New England Quarterly, p. 128.

14 Miller, The Crucible: A Play in Four Acts, p. 102–103.

15 Bloom, Arthur Miller’s The Crucible; Bloom’s Guides, p. 69.

16 Bloom, Arthur Miller’s The Crucible; Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations, p. 56.

17 Ibid., p. 56.

18 Morgan, Crucible, p. 126.

19 Smith, The Crucible by Arthur Miller, p. 75.

20 Ibid., p. 75–76.

21 de Lauretis, Technology of Gender, p. 3.

22 Ibid., p. 18.

23 Bigsby, Arthur Miller: A Critical Study, p. 147.