1,182
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Theatricality, the Spectacle’s Veil and Allegory-in-Reverse in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible

ORCID Icon &
Pages 183-193 | Published online: 12 Mar 2018
 

ABSTRACT

Our analysis will radicalise the notion of frame, which has been used in the field of the humanities, especially in a semiotic sense but also as a replacement for the often-used term of “context”. Arthur Miller, for one, was framed by Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. In response, Miller put his own point forward, the distance point—a point that organises perspective—of a theatrical play (The Crucible) whose power resides in the use of allegory against the political spectacle of its time. Theatre intervened in this case to confront the real life political theatre of the televised trials (a national spectacle) of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. The historical narrative and the anecdote of the Salem processes of 1692 in the play simultaneously provide an appropriate metaphorical link and distance from the situation in Miller’s present to strengthen his frame at two different levels.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 For a detailed overview of Miller’s other plays, see Bigsby, ed., Cambridge Companion to Arthur Miller.

2 Budick, 536.

3 Zivin, 58.

4 Fredric Jameson quoted in Finnegan, 135–6.

5 Miller, The Crucible, 91.

6 A good example that supports this argument can be found at www.salemwitchmuseum.com/education/index.php.

7 Miller, “The Crucible in History,” 99.

8 Davis and Postlewait, eds, 1.

9 Krysinski, 3.

10 Davis and Postlewait, 29.

11 Ankersmit, 45.

12 Davis and Postlewait, 29.

13 Erickson, 162.

14 Miller, “The Crucible in History,” 86.

15 Arthur Miller, “Are You Now or Were You Ever … ?,” The Guardian, 17 June 2000 [cited 18 August 2014]. Available from www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jun/17/books.guardianreview.

16 Ibid.; Budick, 536.

17 Popkin, 140.

18 Levack, 113.

19 Ibid.

20 Owens, 68.

21 Ibid.

22 Fender, 89.

23 Miller, Timebends, 341–2.

24 Kan, “Spectacle”.

25 Miller, Timebends, 334.

26 Perucci, 22.

27 Hoff, “Anatomy of a Murder,” 664.

28 United States Senate, “Have You No Sense of Decency?”

29 Caute, 541.

30 Hofstadter, 76.

31 Kan, “Spectacle.”

32 Crary, 97.

33 Ibid., 96.

34 Avelar, 69.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Higher Education Commission, Pakistan

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 363.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.