Gender Roles In The Crucible By Arthur Miller

969 Words4 Pages

In society today, gender roles are taken more seriously than they were in the past. In The Crucible, American author Arthur Miller, reinforces gender roles in their work, the importance of their reputations, and the emotions they portray. To begin, in the play, men worked to earn money and make decisions, and women worked to be good housewives and servants. For example, John Proctor, a farmer in his mid-dle thirties (Miller 20)., supports his family through hard physical labour. Reverend Parris, “a widower with no interest in children, or talent for them,” (Miller sd), is a father regardless of his feelings (Miller sd). Both these men had jobs in which it required lots of energy to properly perform. Contrary to men, women did not have labour …show more content…

Towards the end of the play, when the time came for Proctor’s trial, he was hesitant to speak. He cried, “I cannot mount the gibbet like a saint. It is a fraud, he said. I am not that man. My honesty is broken, Elizabeth. I am no good man. Nothing’s spoiled by giving them this lie that was not rotten long before” (Miller ). During this scene, Proctor was hesitant to speak because he did not want everyone to know about his affair with Abigail. He beat himself up about it and was worried about what the truth would do to his name. Nevertheless, Proctor’s wife, Elizabeth, did not care as much about what others thought of her. Instead, she defended her husband, “He has his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him” (Miller 45). Elizabeth showed strength and resilience by speaking her mind to protect the man she loves, no matter the consequences she would face. Having a public image was much more significant for men because they were quick to accuse others in order to protect themselves. Throughout the play, the male characters often clashed when it came to making important decisions. Proctor put Putnam in his place after he commanded Parris to look for witchcraft, “You cannot command Mr. Parris. We vote by name in this society, not by acreage” (Miller 28). Putnam was quick to order Parris to do what he wanted without thinking of the others, which showed he was himself selfish. On the other hand, Proctor defended …show more content…

For example, Miller described the female characters as over sensitive people. Oftentimes in the play, women would either be crying or screaming. Such as, when Mary Warren found out about Goody Osburn, she wailed, “Goody Osburn - will hang!” (Miller ). Also, many descriptive stage directions were often defining women by using more heartfelt words. Miller wrote, “Elizabeth is now pouring her heart out” (Miller ). Frequently, the dialogue written for the female characters included were written with exclamation marks at the end of the sentence. These exclamation marks added more emphasis on what they were saying and portrayed their emotions as overly dramatic. As well, men’s emotions were less emphasized and Miller made them—for the most part—emotionally unavailable. For instance, a couple times throughout the play, Proctor speaks as if what is done, is done. He stated, “You have all witnessed it - it is enough” (Miller ). His dialogue shows that he has accepted the consequences and that no matter how much he wails or complains, it will not change the outcome. In addition, when Mary Warren came back to explain the events that unfolded in court, she was making a large deal out of it, but Proctor was more put together. While Mary Warren wailed, “Mr. Proctor, in open court she nearly choked us all to death” (Miller 57). Proctor responded with a more composed tone, and asked questions