Composers utilise political and personal motives to assist in the formation of texts. Arthur Miller’s The Crucible (1953) utilises drama as an allegorical representation of the unjust corruption of the McCarthy Era. George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) draws an allegorical rejection towards the corruption of the Russian revolution. Both texts convey how the devious or contriving nature of politics ultimately causes people to manipulate or create situations for their own gain and personal agendas. Miller, through The Crucible, displays how composers manipulate their audience to favour their representation. However, his representation displays the creation and manipulation of situations to serve personal agendas. Miller replicates the Salem Witch …show more content…
Despite Proctor’s adulterous affair with Abigail which diminishes his innate rationalism and morality, the strained dialogue between him and Elizabeth ‘I cannot speak for I am doubted, every moment judged for lies’ suggests Proctor’s shame of such doings. This evokes a sense of sympathy in the reader and thus Proctor’s moral empowerment. Proctor’s ultimate decision to be ‘hanged’ rather than give up his ‘integrity’ displays Proctor’s morality due to his refusal to use his power to exploit others. On the other hand, Reverend Parris draws upon irony as a religious authority due to his complete manipulation of power to gain more, the irony evident in ‘they will have me out of Salem for such corruption in my house’ evocatively conveys Parris’ valuing of superiority over integrity. Corruption of the Church is further noted through Parris’ valuing of material possessions ‘golden candlestick’, displaying how those with authority manipulate situations to fulfil self-serving desires. Thus, through the contrasting representation of Proctor and Parris, Miller represents the contriving nature of politics when those in power manipulate situations to gain