Standards Addressed:
* RI.11-12.3 Analyze a complex set of ideas or sequence of events and explain how specific individuals, ideas, or events interact and develop over the course of the text
* RI.11-12.6 Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness or beauty of the text.
* RI.11-12.2 Determine two or more central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text, including how they interact and build on one another to provide a complex analysis; provide an objective summary of the text.
* RI.11-12.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain. 

Blog Post on main page: (Remember - you must copy and paste the prompt and standards into your blog prior to your response. The standards listed are what I will use to grade your entry. This will ALWAYS be the process.)

1. RI.11-12.3, 1 – Explain how the opening scene is a catalyst for at least three major events in the play. Be sure to evidence from the text to support the events (remember – you have a copy of the screen play on Edmodo!)
2. RI.11-12.6, 1 – Explain how the author has use rhetoric in the play to develop his clear argument (appeals - logos, pathos, ethos; rhetorical devices: visit http://www.flashcardmachine.com/machine/?topic_id=2282658&source=pub.pub_details for a solid review of topics you could elaborate on in your post. Please note the text evidence and HOW the author used this evidence to develop rhetoric for his argument in the play.
3. RI.11-12.2, 1 – What truth is the author attempting to reveal with his play? Cite evidence from the text to support your analysis.
4. RI/RL.11-12.2 Thematic Unit Connection, consider these lines from the text:

PROCTOR, with a cry of his whole soul: Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!

How does Proctor’s sense of self impact him personally, and in turn, his family and the community of Salem?

The Crucible Blog Post
 
The beginning scene is symbolic of the entirety of the trials. Things started innocent but quickly got out of hand. One moment it's fun and games, the next, spectral finger pointing and dissent. It catalyzes "courts" taking the word of something intangible. Abigail's passionate drinking of the chicken blood prompted her to threaten Mary Warren and the other girls. It also led to over a hundred accused "witches." It led to the conviction of Elizabeth Proctor spurring protest from John Proctor through the testimony of Mary Warren, clearly scared of the psychotic Abigail Williams. This led to a last ditch effort by John to admit adultery to discredit Abigail and his eventual hanging by accusations from Mary and Abigail.

Arthur Miller uses several examples of paradoxes to exfoliate McCarthyism, such as "why do you never wonder if Parris be innocent, or Putnam, or Abigail? Are the accusers always holy now, were they born this morning as pure as God's fingers?" We as the audience know that they aren't pure and holy yet their word is treated as gospel. To that point, it's an example of dramatic irony in a way, because the audience suspects they are lying yet Danforth believes them wholesale. Arthur Miller points out the hypocrisy of not only the witch trials, but the witch hunt for communists. Another example of dramatic irony can be seen on page five of the screenplay, "There are wheels within wheels here, Mr. Hale. I hope you'll not forget that." We as the audience know that things will not end well for a majority of the characters because we have context of what happened to most victims during the trial. Arthur Miller also uses Pathos, specifying on page 23 of the screenplay, where John Proctor breaks down from the battling forces within himself. You can feel, not only through the poetic writing, but through Daniel Day-Lewis' acting, we feel the rock and the hard place grind John's life to a halt. But I also think it's telling that John doesn't beg for his life but for his name. He doesn't necessarily care about living, in fact, he probably thinks he deserves death and clearly he thinks he deserves Hell when he tells Abigail that they'll see each other in Hell, he argues for his name which lives forever. The memory of John Proctor is more important to him then life. This sort of selflessness emotionally resonates with the audience and we're totally on John's side, even if he "deflowered" a teenager.

He is attempting to fictionalize mob mentality and showing it has real consequences. That lies have a stern clout and can create a sequence of irreversible events, and that hysteria and pettiness can hurt innocent people. This is seen in, "Get your hands off me! Don't touch me! You're the Devil's man! I go your way no more, I love God." Mary has basically condemned John Proctor for a petty lie to save her own skin. It's an allegory for McCarthyism that condemned many people on something that cannot be proved. The loss of innocence is shown in the last page as John, Martha, and Rebecca hare hanged. It is also an allusion to the Salem belief that a witch could not recite the Lord's prayer. Another example of pettiness vengeance as a reason to accuse someone is seen with Thomas Putnam wanting John's land. It also speaks to what fuels a mob mentality, evinced by Ann Putnam's protectiveness because she lost seven babies. There's also irony in hanging Rebecca Nurse, arguably the most godly individual in The Crucible.

What's interesting about John Proctor is he does have a little metaphorical "devil" in him. But the only "devil" in John Proctor are the two governing right and wrong. Does a man deserve immortal salaciousness tied to his name when all has been laid out for his neighbors and the law? Is a guilty man any less of a human? Why does John deserve the mercy of lies more than any other? Reverend Hale says in the film, paraphrasing here, that it's more forgivable to lie and live then to die for pride. I think John represents the capacity we humans have for good and evil. We're just as likely to ruin someone else as we are to be a martyr. Danforth goes to John for a confession because of the weight his name carries in the Salem community. But paradoxically, seeks to ruin the validity of Proctor by having him sell his friends. So I question whether it would have done any good, or if the Salem residents would have been clever enough to see the strong arming happening in court. You can hear the spectators calling John a good man as he rides to the scaffold, yet none try to prevent the injustice. That's one of the biggest things I didn't understand about the ending. Maybe they were scared, and that's likely the reason, but it's like counting your chickens as they run off the side of a cliff. They saw the capacity of a person that John was, but they let him go anyway. That offers some theories on why they did nothing. One, they were secretly disgusted by John's other mistakes. Or, Arthur Miller wanted to show that John was at peace with his life and the only thing left for him was death. He wanted to be a martyr, and he'd redeemed himself, and he made it clear that he was more interested in what he'd be remembered by not his life. John Proctor's sense of self, allowed him to make the less grey choice of dying with all the others rather than bending to injustice. This, quite poetically, evangelized his name in the eyes of Salem.