The Crucible Danforth And Hale Essay

Caison Barber, Mrs. Dodson & Mrs. Carroll, American Studies, per. 4/9 8 March 2024 Allegory Between Reverend Hale and Judge Danforth In the play, The Crucible, written by Arthur Miller, Reverend Hale has righteous motivations when trying to save John Proctor when compared to Judge Danforth’s corrupt motivations when desacralizing the court by falsely condemning people to death in a vain pursuit of power. When Reverend Hale is first introduced, he acts as an expert on witchcraft, but after discussing with Mr. Proctor about the likelihood of false accusations for personal profit, he begins to defend the idea of false accusations to Judge Danforth. As Reverend Hale and Judge Danforth argue about the possibility of false accusations, Reverend Hale argues that after “[he] [has]

[.] Therefore, who may possibly be [a] witness to it? The witch and the victim. [.] Now we cannot hope upon the witch accus[ing] herself [.] Therefore we must rely upon [the children] [.] to testify”(Miller 93). Hale wanted to testify against the claim that Rebecca Nurse is a witch. Danforth, on the opposite spectrum, gives no merit to the possibility that Rebecca Nurse is not a witch. Danforth contrasts Hale because he is very unchanging and blunt. He seems to predetermine all decisions he makes without hearing out the testimony of the defendant, while Hale makes a true effort to attempt to discover the truth by asking questions. Hale and Danforth continue to differ after sharing their reactions to learning about Proctor’s adultery with Abigail. During the court proceeding, Proctor, in a last-ditch effort, reveals to the court his major sin. Danforth's reaction was to “deny every scrap and title of this”(Miller 103). His response holds little logic because a man with a good reputation like Johns would not give up on a meaningless lie. Despite having a good argument, he chooses to side with Abigail again. At this point, he has already sentenced many people to death by