Who Is Wrong In The Crucible

Is there any way to judge if people are good or not? In The Crucible, by Arthur Miller, and perhaps in real life, one of the main problems is deciphering the goodness of people. One cannot tell a sinner from a saint apart, as every character either has excessive pride, sinful witchcraft, or terrible lies. However, the play heavily applies, however unnapparent by the reader, that certain people who commit sin are less guilty than others, especially those who don not understsand they are wrong. The theme that only people who fully understand the situation at hand can be morally judged is proven through Proctor’s fair moral outlook in the story and Parris’s who does wrong in contrast to Danforth who looks righteous in the story despite all the wrong he does, because he does not know, and . It is evident throughout that the play gives Proctor a sense of righteousness, therefore judging him because he was fully aware that the trials were false. Proctor carried out all his actions eventually aware that the Salem

Parris is an odd character, a minister who is the slimiest snake of them all, because he lives simply to satisfy his needs. The play makes him partake in nothing but evil, even in the end when he wishes to, “Postpone these hangin’s for a time” (Miller 127). He had wanted the hangings for a time, but he then realized hanging respectable people like Rebecca Nurse and John Proctor will cause the town to revolt. He takes many evil actions later on as well. No one’s evil intentions are repeated in the play as much as Parris, because it the play here is proving the theme that only the informed can be righteously judged, and Parris is a minister as well as witness of whatever happened in the forest, completely contrasting with the foolish but seemingly innocent