Before The Crucible
by Liz Lund
Description:
Goal: To introduce the political and historical background that led to the writing of The Crucible. This includes the fear of Communism in the 50s and 60s, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and the Salem Witch Trials.
Audience: High school junior English class that is about to begin studying Arthur Miller's The Crucible. They need to be introduced to the historical background that the play was written in, as well as the historical background the play was based on. They also need to get excited about what was in the play, and what is going to happen.
Workshop Directions:
Opening: George's "Evil Grandma" Game. Describe the senario. A boy did not know his grandma very well, but always assumed she was a good person. But when she passed away, and he went to her funeral, he heard everyone telling very negative stories about her. The people in the workshop become the people at the funeral. Everyone in the group comes up with a story about a grandma. They move around the group telling people they meet the "rumor" they heard. The facilitator stops the group after people have heard many of the other people's stories, and has everyone exaggerate their stories. They can exaggerate their own or one they heard, but they have to make it worse. After these stories have been shared, bring them back together and ask them what the worst story they heard was. Then finish the senario. The people at the funeral were jealous of how good this grandma was, and so they made up lies about her. But now that everyone has gone home, how to we tell everyone that those rumors weren't true?
Questions: How can you fix these rumors? What kind of damage can rumors do? What damage have they done in your life, or in the lives of people you know? What damage has it done to public figures?
I arranged with Therman to say a very uncommon word in a comment during the above discussion that no one else had used. He told a story about Angelina Jolie, and after he told that story, I asked him to repeat it. I them told him that that name was not allowed in the classroom and that he was not allowed to participate in the rest of the workshop. The only way he could stay is if he told me who else had said that name. It went around the group, with everyone accusing other people, until Jacob refused and was sent to the wall, and Julia had no one that she could accuse. After this happened, I called everyone back to the group.
Questions: How many of you lied when you named people? How did you pick who you led about? Why did you lie about it? If you didn't give names, why didn't you?
Lecture: This is exactly what happened during the McCarthy period. Everyone was so afraid of Communists infiltrating the US that anyone who expressed any idea that remotely questioned the US government or policies was brought before the House Un-American Activities Committee. If they named other "subversives," they could go free. If not, they were sent to prison. Those they named were then brought in and questioned. Many had no connection with any questionable group, and were put on the chopping block with no idea who had accused them or who to accuse because they didn't know any Communists. This process destroyed reputations, and careers.
Many ended up on blacklists, or "lists" of names that circulated among employers. People on these lists could not get jobs. Others ended up in prison.
Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible during this time period when many artists were under attack. He compared McCarthyism to colonial witch trials. He had done quite a bit of research on the witch trials, and his play is based on real events.
Activity: "Yes, but." This game is played in pairs, with one person acting as the oppressor, or the accused. The other person acts as the oppressed, or the accuser. They debate an issue back and forth. The oppressed starts by describing how the oppressor wronged them. The oppressor responds with an excuse, but they have to start what they say with "Yes, but," and go from there. Every time they respond, they must start with "Yes, but." The situation was one person was accusing the other of being a witch. So it started with, "You told people I'm a witch but I'm not, and I want you to tell them that." The response was, "Yes, but..." I modeled this activity, then paired people up, putting people who had played before with people who haven't. After it had gone on for a while, I had them come back and discuss the various excuses they had used. Then I had them switch roles and do it again.
Lecture: Witches were accused by neighbors, and often to push the blame off of themselves they would accuse others. The Crucible was based on a case of a few girls who were caught dancing and conjuring at night in the woods with a black women. When this happened, they started accusing all kinds of people, claiming that they were using the Devil to hurt them. Witches were blamed for illnesses, bad crops, or any unlucky event. They were associated with animals who served as their familiars, with "poppets," or dolls that they used to cast spells on people, and dancing at night. People who were unpopular in the community, or who might have a grudge against someone who was hurt, were accused of witchcraft.
When someone was accused of witchcraft, a few tests were administered. First, they had to repeat the commandments or the Lord's Prayer. If they couldn't, they were witches. If they wouldn't not confess to being witches, they were burned or hung. If they did confess, often they had to serve time in jail and their families were disgraced. If they said nothing, they were tortured until they confessed, often by having stones put on them until they were crushed. But if they died under torture without confessing or denying, there was no disgrace to the family.
Activity: To explore how those who were accused of witchcraft could not really defend themselves against attack, we did a bit of modified Forum Theatre. I pulled a scene from the witch trial of Sarah Good, a minor character in The Crucible. Julia and Meg acted it out, with Meg as the accused and Julia as the accuser. After they ran it through once, they started again. When someone saw a chance to try a new tactic to defend themselves, they would say "Freeze," and step into the accused place, and try a new argument. People took turns freezing the action and changing tactics.