The Crucible

Many critics saw clear parallels between the tale of the Salem witch hunts and the communist man hunt that took place in Hollywood, and for this reason, The Crucible’s precious message regarding community conscience and the validity of justice in the newly settled America during the 17th century was tainted by the smear of blacklisting.

Written in 1953, not only is it necessary to be familiar with the Puritan society that settled in the United States in the 1690s, it is also necessary to have an awareness of the culture surrounding America in the 1950s, during the Cold War. Miller repeatedly connects these two historical contexts and audiences can easily glean from his work, the attitudes he felt toward the era of the play’s production.

The era of the Cold War emerged after the cessation of World War 2, when the Soviet Union and America began an arms race, precipitated by espionage, weapons research and passive aggressive rhetoric. In an effort to cleanse the American people of the ‘communist plague’, the FBI banded a right-wing group specifically targeting members of the Communist Party of America and bringing them to answer for their allegiance. Those who were targeted were immigrants, and those that didn’t conform to the conservative views shared by the American people of the late 40s and 50s. Much like in Salem, people were called before an orchestrated trials board, known as the HUAC (House of Un-American Activities Committee) to account for their political loyalties and they were considered guilty until proven innocent and even after the trials had exonerated them, their reputation was in ruins and many would no longer work with or for them. A specifically targeted area was that of Hollywood and many famous celebrities (actors, screenwriters, directors) that worked in the industry were named and called to account for their alliances with the Communist Party.

The term ‘witch – hunt’ became synonymous with this period and also with the term ‘McCarthyism’, which was coined in reaction to Senator Joseph McCarthy, who was the main political driver behind the hunt to cleanse the country of the ‘red scare’. He claimed to be weeding out enemies of the United States, including what he referred to as Communist ‘fellow-travellers’, or those tainted by association; people under interrogation during the HUAC trials were encouraged to name others and many did in an effort to rid themselves of any blemish.

Miller’s involvement in the trials had an enormous impact on his writing of The Crucible; he too was victimised as a playwright in the 1950s and had his passport cancelled. But, like many others in this time, Miller stayed loyal to his comrades (Communist or not) and refused to name any others. His crucial resistance to authoritarian manipulation mirrors that of Proctor, who, refuses to ‘blacken’ the names of his innocent friends by allowing his false confession to be made public.

The Puritan were a peoples that had broken from the High Church Christianity in an effort to strip back what they believed had become a church sullied by man, and return to the pure obedience in God and his laws once more. The setting allows Miller to use cumulative tension to grow the narrative and examine the immense strain on such a society.

The Dressmaker

Set in the 1950s, in rural Australia, Ham’s novel is deeply embedded into a context rife with socio-historical restraints. Having emerged from the Great Depression that filtered its way across from 1930s America, the population of Australia remained unfamiliar with luxury items and as a result, many families became nomadic and moved from state to state looking for work on farms and in small towns. The McSwiney’s are an exemplar to this; but as the economy grew in strength they no longer needed to move and hence, the McSwiney’s are more of a permanent fixture in Dungatar than a roaming caravan. Nevertheless, their poverty echoes many Australian families; Mae and Edward McSwiney have eleven children and live in abject poverty, their ramshackle camp often being mistaken as part of the tip that they lived besides.

As the country moved into the decade of the 50s, rural Australia was a conservative place. Divorce was a shameful thing and as an unwed mother, Molly Dunnage, who refused to give up her baby, had to endure the hardships associated with her decision – being forced to leave her home and family in shame, living in poverty, given no support by the government in her predicament and shunned by society. A woman was subjected to the whims of men; Molly’s admission that ‘he [Evan] came after me and used me’ is said so matter-of-factly and punctuated by her resignation that she ‘had nowhere to go’ and was not told where her daughter had been sent for all those years.

The text anchors itself to popular culture, including the release of Hollywood movies such as Sunset Boulevard and the musical South Pacific with its catchy theme tune ‘Bali Haiiiii, come to meeeee’ (Part 2); even picking up on the Australian culture of enjoying pavlova with one another and feeding canned tomato soup to someone who is ailing. This is aptly juxtaposed with the references to Tilly’s more worldly experiences, and as the exciting packages which begin to arrive from Florence and Milan as she amasses the requirements she needs for her dressmaking business; yet this world is foreign to the women of Dungatar, who despite reading the glossy pages of Vogue and Women’s Illustrated, remain unable to pronounce most of the designer names and are in awe of Tilly’s creations. Following the war, fashion was conservative for two reasons – the absence of any frivolous fabrics brought on by war rationing and the pressure from the other townsfolk to remain moderate and traditional, and whilst the women’s creativity in their outfits was stifled, so too were their dreams for a better existence then the dusty town of Dungatar. Creativity was frowned upon, and the unconventional form in which Sergeant Farrat appreciates the beauty and opportunity that clothes and fabrics could provide is stifled and kept in the shadows of a society that is threatened by change. In fact, in order to hide his interest in fabrics and dressmaking, Farrat conforms to a more domestic excuse for buying bolts of fabric from the local general store.

In such a small community, the perception of what is acceptable evolves often depending on the perpetrator and despite change being seen as threatening, there are some exceptions if that change will protect one’s reputation (such is the case with the hasty marriage of William and Gertrude). The eccentricities and odd behaviours of the residents are accepted and everybody turns a blind eye to the foibles of others – whereby actions such as heinous adultery, domestic abuse, cross-dressing, homosexuality and embezzlement are forgiven. Except in the case of Tilly and her mother, whose transgressions follow them around like a fog that can never be lifted.