the crucible and dressmaker essay

VCE Study Tips

English Language

Private Tutoring

Only one more step to getting your FREE text response mini-guide!

Simply fill in the form below, and the download will start straight away

English & EAL

Comparing The Crucible and The Dressmaker

August 13, 2020

Want insider tips? Sign up here!

Go ahead and tilt your mobile the right way (portrait). the kool kids don't use landscape....

Updated 24/12/2020

• Themes, Motifs and Key Ideas
• Comparative Essay Prompt Example
• Sample Essay Topics

The Crucible is a four-act play that portrays the atmosphere of the witch trials in Salem. As an allegory of McCarthyism, the play primarily focuses on criticising the ways in which innocent people are prosecuted without any founded evidence, reflecting the unjust nature of the corrupted authoritarian system that governs Salem. It starts off with the girls dancing in the woods and Betty’s unconsciousness, which causes the people of Salem to look for unnatural causes. People start scapegoating others to escape prosecution and falsely accuse others to gain power and land, facilitating mass hysteria which ultimately leads to the downfall of the Salem theocracy. The protagonist John Proctor is one of those that decides to defy the courts and sacrifices his life towards the end of the play, ending the play on a quiet note in contrast with its frenzied conflict throughout the acts.

The Dressmaker shows the audience the treatment towards Tilly Dunnage upon her return to fictional town Dungatar years after she was wrongly accused of being a murderess. Rosalie Ham critiques the impacts of rumours on Tilly and Molly, also establishing her condemnation of the societal stigma of this isolated town. Tilly starts making haute couture outfits to transform the lives of the women in the town and help them present themselves as more desirable and elevate their ranks. However, the townspeople still see Tilly negatively, except for some individuals who are able to look past the opinions of others and get to know Tilly themselves. Ham’s gothic novel garners the audience’s sympathy towards the outcasts of the town and antagonises those who find pleasure in creating drama and spreading rumours about others.  

2. Themes, Motifs and Key Ideas

Through discussing themes, motifs, and key ideas , we’ll gain a clearer understanding of some super important ideas to bring out in your essays. Remember, that when it comes to themes, there’s a whole host of ways you can express your ideas - but this is what I’d suggest as the most impressive method to blow away the VCAA examiners. Throughout this section, we'll be adhering to the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy to help us easily find points of similarity and difference. This is particularly important when it comes to essay writing, because you want to know that you're coming up with unique comparative points (compared to the rest of the Victorian cohort!). I don't discuss this strategy in detail here, but if you're interested, check out How To Write A Killer Comparative . I use this strategy throughout this discussion of themes and in the next section, Comparative Essay Prompt Example.

Similarities and Differences (CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT Ideas)

Social class .

Both The Crucible and The Dressmaker talk extensively about class. By class, what I mean is the economic and social divisions which determine where people sit in society. For instance, we could say that the British Royals are ‘upper class’, whilst people living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to get by are ‘lower class’.

Ultimately, both The Crucible and The Dressmaker are set in classist societies where there is no opportunity for social advancement. Whilst Thomas Putnam steals the land of poor Salemites accused of witchcraft, the McSwineys are left to live in absolute poverty and never leave the ‘tip’ where they have lived for generations. Dungatar and Salem view this social division as a ‘given’ and reject the idea that there is anything wrong with certain people living a life of suffering so others can have lives of wealth and pleasure. As such, for both Salem and Dungatar, the very idea that anyone could move between the classes and make a better life for themselves is inherently dangerous. What we can see here is that class shapes the way communities deal with crisis. Anything that overturns class is dangerous because it challenges the social order – meaning that individuals such as Reverend Parris in The Crucible , or Councillor Pettyman in The Dressmaker may lose all their power and authority.

For The Crucible , that’s precisely why the witchcraft crisis is so threatening, as the Salemites are prepared to replace Reverend Parris and deny his authority. Although Abigail and the group of girls thus single-handedly overturn Salem’s class structures and replace it with their own tyranny, Parris’ original intention was to use their power to reinforce his authority. In The Dressmaker , Tilly is threatening because she doesn’t neatly fit in to Dungatar’s class structure. Having travelled the outside world, she represents a worldly mindset and breadth of experiences which the townspeople know they cannot match.

For this theme, there’s a DIVERGENCE of ideas too, and this is clear because the way that class is expressed and enforced in both texts is vastly different. For The Crucible , it’s all about religion – Reverend Parris’ assertion that all Christians must be loyal to him ensures the class structure remains intact. More than that, to challenge him would be to challenge God, which also guides Danforth in executing those who don’t follow his will. In the case of The Dressmaker , there’s no central authority who imposes class on Dungatar. Rather, the people do it themselves; putting people back in their place through rumour and suspicion. However, by creating extravagant, expensive dresses for the townspeople, Tilly inadvertently provides people with another way to express class.  

Isolated Communities

CONVERGENT:

The setting forms an essential thematic element of The Crucible and The Dressmaker . Both communities are thoroughly isolated and, in colloquial terms, live in the ‘middle of no-where’.

However, what is starkly different between the texts is how this isolation shapes the respective communities’ self-image. For Salem, its citizens adopt a mindset of religious and cultural superiority – believing that their faith, dedication to hard work and unity under God make them the most blessed people in the world. Individuals as diverse as Rebecca Nurse and Thomas Putnam perceive Salem to be a genuinely incredible place. They see Salem as the first battleground between God and the Devil in the Americas, and as such, construct a grand narrative in which they are God’s soldiers protecting his kingdom. Even the name ‘Salem’ references ‘Jerusalem’, revealing that the Salemites see themselves as the second coming of Christ, and the fulfilment of the Bible’s promises.

Not much of the same can be said for The Dressmaker . Dungatar lacks the same religious context, and the very name of ‘Dungatar’ references ‘dung’, or beetle poop. The next part of the name is 'tar', a sticky substance, creating the impression that Dungatar's people are stuck in their disgusting ways. The townspeople of Dungatar are acutely aware of their own inadequacy, and that is why they fight so hard to remain isolated from the outside world. Tilly is therefore a threat because she challenges their isolation and forces the men and women of Dungatar to reconsider why their community has shunned progress for so long. In short, she makes a once-isolated people realise that fear, paranoia, division and superstition are no way to run a town, and brings them to acknowledge the terribly harmful impacts of their own hatred.

On top of that, because Salem is literally the only Christian, European settlement for miles, it is simply impossible for them to even think about alternatives to their way of life. They are completely isolated and thus, all of their problems come from ‘within’ and are a result of their own division. For Dungatar, it’s a mix of societal issues on the inside being made worse by the arrival of people from the outside. The township is isolated, but unlike Salem, it at least has contact with the outside world. All Tilly does, therefore, is show the people of Dungatar an alternative to their way of life. But, for a community used to the way they have lived for decades, it ultimately contributes to its destruction.

By the way, to download a PDF version of this blog for printing or offline use, click here !

3. Comparative Essay Prompt Example

The following essay topic breakdown was written by Lindsey Dang. If you'd like to see a completed A+ essay based off this same essay topic, then check out LSG's A Killer Comparative Guide: The Crucible & The Dressmaker , written by 50 study scorer and LSG tutor, Jordan Bassilious!

[Modified Video Transcription]

Compare the ways in which outcasts are treated in The Crucible and The Dressmaker.

Step 1: Analyse

Before writing our topic sentences, we need to look at our key words first. The keywords in this prompt are outcasts and treated .

So, who are considered outcasts in the two texts? Outcasts can be those of traditionally lower classes, they can be characters with physical flaws, those that are different to others or those who do not abide by the standards of their respective societies.

• In The Crucible : Tituba, Abigail, John Proctor or even Martha Giles can be considered as outcasts.
• In The Dressmaker : We can consider Tilly, Molly, The McSwineys, etc.

We also need to look our second key word ‘treated’. How would we describe the treatment towards these characters? Are they treated nicely or are they mistreated and discriminated against? Do ALL members of that community have that same treatment towards those outcasts or are there exceptions? Remember this point because we might be able to use this to challenge the prompt.

We’re going to skip Step 2: Brainstorm today, but if you’re familiar with LSG teachings, including the THINK and EXECUTE strategy discussed in my How To Write A Killer Text Response ebook, then you’ll be good for this part.

Step 3: Create a Plan

Both texts portray outcasts as victims of relentless accusations or rumours, seeking to engage the pathos of the audience towards those who are marginalised.

• In The Crucible , Tituba the ‘Negro slave’ is the first person to be accused by witchcraft in Salem. Her ‘consequent low standing’ is also shown through her use of language ‘You beg me to conjure! She beg me make charm’ which is fraught with grammatical errors, compared to Judge Danforth who uses legal jargon and the Putnams who are much more well-spoken.
• Similarly, the McSwineys are also those of lower class and are seen as the outcasts of Dungatar. Their names show us their position in the social hierarchy because they are associated with swines which are pigs. This is confirmed by Sergeant Farrat who said ‘Teddy McSwiney was, by the natural order of the town, an outcast who lived by the tip’. Even when Teddy McSwiney died, the townspeople still did not reflect on the impacts that their prejudice and bigotry had on him, eventually forcing the McSwineys to leave the town because they could not find a sense of belonging living there.
• Tilly is also poorly treated due to the fact that she is fatherless, being bullied by the kids at school especially Stewart Pettyman and also used by William as a leverage to marry Gertrude, threatening Elsbeth that ‘it’s either her [Gertrude] or Tilly Dunnage’
• Also discuss Giles Corey’s death and the significance of his punishment as the stones that are laid on his chest can be argued to symbolise the weight of authority

Miller and Ham also denounce the ways in which outcasts are maltreated due to their position in the social hierarchy through his antagonisation of other townspeople.

• There’s also a quote on this by Molly ‘But you don’t matter – it’s open slather on outcasts'. Herein, she warns the audience of how quickly outcasts can become victims of rumours and accusations as the term ‘slather’ carries negative connotations.
• Similarly, the theocracy that governs Salem dictates the rights of their people and children. He specifically states 'children were anything but thankful for being permitted to walk straight, eyes slightly lowered, arms at sides, and mouths shut until bidden to speak', which explains the girls’ extreme fear of being whipped. Salem is very violent to children, slaves and helpers and it can be seen that this is the result of the social hierarchy and the Puritan ideology.
• For The Dressmaker , also discuss the ways in which they name others in this quote ‘daughter of Mad Molly is back – the murderess!’ Likewise discuss how Goody Osbourne the ‘drunkard half-witted’ and Sarah Good an old beggar woman are the first ones to be named. You can talk about Martha who is accused of being a witch just because she has been ‘reading strange books’, and Sarah Good due to the mere act of ‘mumbling’. The normality of these actions underlines the absurdity of the accusations made against these individuals, furthering Miller’s chastisement of the fictitious nature of the trials and also the ways in which outcasts are the first to be scapegoated.

However, there are still characters that are driven by their sense of morality or remorse instead of mistreating the outcasts of their community.

• Both Sergeant Farrat and Proctor are motivated by their remorse to make amends. Proctor’s evasion of ‘tearing the paper’ and finding ‘his goodness’ is motivated by his desire to atone for his sin (having committed adultery with Abigail), and Sergeant regretted sending Tilly away. He, in his eulogy, says ‘if you had included [Tilly], Teddy would have always been with us’, expressing his regret for the ways outcasts are treated in Dungatar. Similarly, Teddy McSwiney also has a pure relationship with Tilly and treats her differently instead of judging her based on the rumours about her being a ‘murderess’.
• While those who can sympathise with outcasts in The Dressmaker are either outcasts themselves or are remorseful (or both), there are those in The Crucible that are purely and solely motivated by their moral uprightness. Rebecca Nurse is neither an outcast (as she is highly respected for her wisdom) nor remorseful (as she has remained kind and pure from the beginning of the play). She is always the voice of reason in the play and tries to stop authoritative figures from convicting and prosecuting outcasts. A quote you can use would be ‘I think you best send Reverend Hale back as soon as he come. This will set us all to arguin’ again in the society, and we thought to have peace this year'.

4. Sample Essay Topics

1. 'I say—I say—God is dead.' —John Proctor, The Crucible . Explore how communities respond to crisis.

2. People must conform to societal expectations in The Crucible and The Dressmaker . Do you agree?

3. Discuss how The Crucible and The Dressmaker use textual features to convey the author’s perspective.

4. Gender repression is rife in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker . Discuss.

Now it's your turn! Give these essay topics a go. If you're interested in reading a 50 study scorer's completed essays based off these 4 essay topics, along with annotations so you can understand his thinking process, then I would highly recommend checking out LSG's A Killer Comparative Guide: The Crucible & The Dressmaker.

This blog has written contributions from Lindsey Dang.

Download a PDF version of this blog for printing or offline use

Understanding Context in The Crucible and The Dressmaker

The Crucible by Arthur Miller

The Dressmaker by Rosalie Ham

Get our FREE VCE English Text Response mini-guide

Now quite sure how to nail your text response essays? Then download our free mini-guide, where we break down the art of writing the perfect text-response essay into three comprehensive steps. Click below to get your own copy today!

Access a FREE sample of our The Crucible & The Dressmaker study guide

Written by Jordan Bassilious who achieved a perfect study score of 50, English Premier's Award and a 99.5 ATAR:

• Learn unique points of comparison through LSG'S CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy and stand out from the rest of the Victorian cohort
• Sample A+ essays, with EVERY essay annotated and broken down on HOW and WHY these essays achieved A+
• Advanced discussions like structural feature analysis, views and values and critical readings.

“Once upon a time…”

The fairy tale of Cinderella is a well-known, well-loved and well-ingrained story that was always told to me as a bedtime story. Who could forget the mean-spirited stepsisters who punished and ruined Cinderella’s life to no end? According to the dark Brothers Grimm version, the stepsisters mutilated their feet by cutting off their heels and toes to fit into the infamous shoe, and their eyes were pecked away by birds until they were blinded! It’s definitely one way to send a message to children… don’t be bullies or you’ll be punished. Which is exactly what the Brothers Grimm’s views and values were. Their construction of their fairy tale to send a message of what they viewed as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is simplistically shown through the writers’ choice in determining the characters’ fate. The evil stepsisters are punished, while Cinderella receives happiness and riches because she remained kind and pure. A clear and very simple example of how texts reflect the beliefs, world views and ethics of the author, which is essentially the author’s views and values!

What are the views and values of a text?

Writers use literature to criticise or endorse social conditions, expressing their own opinions and viewpoints of the world they live in. It is important to remember that each piece of literature is a deliberate construction. Every decision a writer makes reflects their views and values about their culture, morality, politics, gender, class, history or religion. This is implicit within the style and content of the text, rather than in overt statements. This means that the writer’s views and values are always open to interpretation, and possibly even controversial. This is what you (as an astute literature student) must do – interpret the relationship between your text and the ideas it explores and examines, endorses or challenges in the writer’s society.

How do I start?

Consider the following tips:

• What does the writer question and critique with their own society? What does this say about the writer’s own views and the values that uphold?
• For example,  “Jane Austen in Persuasion recognises the binding social conventions of the 19th century as superficial, where they value wealth and status of the utmost priority. She satirises such frivolous values through the microcosmic analysis of the Elliot family.”
• The writer’s affirming or critical treatment of individual characters can be a significant clue to what values they approve or disapprove of. What fate do the characters have? Who does the writer punish or reward by the end of the text?
• Which characters challenge and critique the social conventions of the day?
• Look at the writer’s use of language:
• Characterisation
• Plot structure
• Description
• In other words …what are the possible meanings generated by the writer’s choices?
• Recognition and use of metalanguage for literary techniques is crucial because you are responding to a work of literature. Within literature ideas, views and values and issues do not exist in a vacuum. They arise out of the writer’s style and create  meaning .
• How do the writer’s choices make meaning?
• How are the writer’s choices intended to affect the reader’s perception of social values?
• Weave views and values throughout your close analysis essays, rather than superficially adding a few lines at the conclusion of the essay to indicate the writer’s concerns.
• Using the writer’s name frequently will also assist in creating a mindset of analysing the writer’s commentary on society.

Below are some examples from an examiner report of successful and  insightful  responses reflecting the views and values of the writer:

(Another tip is to go through examiner’s reports and take note of high quality responses, even if they are not the text you’re studying)

When contrasted with the stark, blunt tone of Caesar throughout the play ‘You may see, Lepidus, and henceforth know...’ the richness of Shakespeare’s poetry with regard to his ‘couple so famous’  denotes how the playwright himself ultimately values the heroic age  to which his protagonists belong over the machinations of the rising imperial Rome.

It is the word ‘natural’ here through which Mansfield crafts a sharp irony that invites us to rate Edna’s obsession with her own performance.... It is this satiric impulse that also leaps to the fore through the image of Edna, ‘clasping the black book in her fingers as though it were a missal’...the  poignant economy of Mansfield’s characteristic style explores her views on the fragility of the human condition .   

‘In Cold Blood’ provides a challenging exploration of the value placed on human life. The seemingly pointless murders undermine every concept of morality that reigns in Middle America, the ‘Bible Belt’, as well as the wider community.  Capote insinuates his personal abhorrence of the death penalty and the disregard of mental illness in the justice system .

Why are views and values important in literature, and especially for close analysis?

Every year, the examiner reports emphasise how the best close analysis responses were ones that “showed how the text endorsed and reflected the views and values of the writer and were able to weave an understanding of these through the essay” (2013 VCAA Lit examiner report). By analysing HOW the text critiques, challenges or endorses the accepted values of the society in the text, you are demonstrating an understanding of the social and cultural context of the text, thus acknowledging the multifaceted layers that exist within literature. You are identifying the writer’s commentary of humanity through your own interpretation. Bring some insight into your essays!

We've curated essay prompts based off our The Crucible and Year of Wonders Study Guide which explores themes, characters, and quotes.

• Compare how the conflict between illusion and reality is explored in these texts. ‍
• 'Uncertainty breeds fear, and fear breeds further uncertainty.' Compare how this idea is demonstrated in The Crucible and Year of Wonders . ‍
• Compare how secrets and superstition affect the characters in both texts. ‍
• Compare how The Crucible and Year of Wonders explore issues of human fallibility and deception. ‍
• Compare the ways these texts examine the preservation of morality amidst accusation and condemnation. ‍
• 'Humans are ultimately inclined towards evil rather than good.' Compare how the two texts explore this inclination. ‍
• Compare how The Crucible and Year of Wonders examines the strength of one's faith during hardship and conflict. ‍
• “How little we know, I thought, of the people we live amongst.” ( Year of Wonders ) Compare what the two texts say about community and one's understanding of reality. ‍
• "Here we are, alive, and you and I will have to make it what we can.” ( Year of Wonders) 'It is only possible to discover what it means to live when faced with death.' Compare the ways these texts explore this possibility. ‍
• “It is the essence of power that it accrues to those with the ability to determine the nature of the real.” ( The Crucible ) Compare the ways the two texts demonstrate the connection between power and controlling the truth. ‍
• Compare how truths and falsehoods shape the lives and societies in The Crucible and Year of Wonders . ‍
• Compare how The Crucible and Year of Wonders shows that conflict can cause both regression and strengthening of integrity and humanity. ‍
• Compare how women are perceived in both The Crucible and Year of Wonders . ‍
• Compare the ways morality is examined and determined in these texts. ‍
• "Man, remember, until an hour before the Devil fell, God thought him beautiful in heaven?" ( The Crucible ) Compare how the two texts explore the repercussions of disillusionment.

The Crucible and Year of Wonders is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing). For a detailed guide on Comparative , check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

Tracks and Into The Wild are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative.

INTRODUCTIONS

Into the Wild (2007) is a non-linear survival film directed by Sean Penn, which is based on Jon Krauker’s 1996 novel of the same name. It recollects the final few months of the life of Christopher McCandless as he departs from society in both an act of resistance as well as a means of self-discovery. A bright young college student in the 1990s, McCandless abandons his family and affluent lifestyle to embark on a frontier-style journey into the Alaskan wilderness. Troubled by a dysfunctional family and disenchanted with the materialistic excesses of 1980s America, McCandless seeks a radical engagement with nature, in the style of his literary heroes Henry David Thoreau and Jack London. After 113 days in the wilderness, he suffers from starvation and dies. The true story of McCandless’ journey renders the film an important depiction of self-reliance, isolation, and the unparalleled power of nature.

Whilst the film is of a biographical nature, it is important to understand that it is heavily subject to the interpretations and opinions of Penn. The story is informed by McCandless’ writings, and interviews with those who knew him, but is ultimately a work of artistic interpretation. Nonetheless, Penn’s film offers strong commentary regarding the materialistic, consumerist nature of modern living, whilst also ultimately emphasising the more humanistic importance of family and love.

Tracks is Robyn Davidson’s 1980 memoir detailing her perilous journey through 1700 miles of Australian outback and the remarkable character transformations that take place throughout. The events of the story begin in 1973, when a young Robyn Davidson arrives in Alice Springs with an outlandish plan to train wild camels to accompany her through the Australian desert. When, after two years of gruelling training, she receives a sponsorship from National Geographic, her journey can finally go ahead- on the condition that a photographer accompany her and document parts of the journey. This compromise weighs heavily on Robyn, as photographer Rick Smolan intrudes on her solitude and compromises everything the trip means to her. As Robyn delves deeper into the journey, each day brings new discoveries about the camels, the landscape, the people of Australia, and ultimately, her self. Tracks  emerges as a candid and compelling story of one woman’s odyssey of discovery and transformation.

Whilst Tracks is mostly a personal account, it also presents a co-existent dichotomy between modernistic libertarianism and conventionalism, which serves as a reflection of the changing political views and ideological turbulence of the time, as Davidson notes ‘you could choose not to participate in politics, but you could not avoid politics’. Thus, in many ways Davidson’s journey can be seen as a firm statement that challenges the inherent sexism, racism, and ‘status quo’, whilst also simultaneously embracing the notion of freedom, independence, and escape from conventionalism and ‘self-indulgent negativity’.

At LSG, we use the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy to help us easily find points of similarity and difference. This is particularly important when it comes to essay writing, because you want to know that you're coming up with unique comparative points (compared to the rest of the Victorian cohort!). I don't discuss this strategy in detail here, but if you're interested, check out my How To Write A Killer Comparative . I have used this strategy to create this themes table and throughout my character, views and values, and literary technique analysis.

CHARACTER ANALYSIS

Both Robyn Davidson and Christopher McCandless are products of the time period in which they live, and reject the concept of adhering to a predetermined notion of who they should be and how they should behave. Both embark on their journey because they reject the expectations of their class and gender.

AUTHORS VIEWS/VALUES

Women’s rights in 1970s australia .

Tracks is set in the late 1970s, an era of intense social and political change in Australia. The second wave feminist movements of the 1960s and 70s were enormously influential in Australia, as women began to dismantle the sexist structures inherent in Australian society at this time. Davidson describes Alice Springs as hopelessly in the grips of a ‘cult of misogyny’. She rejects the archetype of the passive, docile woman. She is passionately determined to shed her own sense of herself as traditionally “feminine,” a quality she sees as arising from being trained from birth to be “door-mattish”.

Davidson acknowledges her gender has played a central part in the media’s fascination with her journey. The character of the ‘camel lady’ that emerges suggests the significance of her trip, as a woman travelling alone in the 1970s through intensely difficult terrain. Davidson describes the late sixties and early seventies as a time of radical social time, when “anything and everything seemed possible, and when the status quo of the developed world was under radical scrutiny by its youth”. Thus Davidson’s actions must be considered in the context of this time, at the peak of the second wave feminist movement.

There are many explicit examples of Robyn facing misogyny and embodying feminist principles. One such example is when an Alice Springs local suggests she’s the “next town rape case”. This statement reveals the position of a woman in this misogynistic society, wherein a single woman travelling alone through the bush was synonymous with danger and irresponsibility. Davidson rejects this ideology and refuses to succumb to the violent sexism she encounters, or compromise her journey.

Tracks  is not an explicitly feminist text, but it clearly echoes the philosophies of feminism. In the years since the trek, Robyn Davidson has become a feminist symbol of defiance, endurance and strength. Thus to consider Tracks  from a feminist perspective is important when studying this text, Davidson’s criticisms of Australian misogyny inform our understanding of this historical context, and the significance of her actions.

Some example sentences:

• Davidson exposes the realities of misogynistic Australian culture in the 1970s.
• Davidson’s journey emerges as a defiant example of women’s strength and independence.
• Davidson’s friendship with Gladdy Posel suggests the injustices of women’s financial dependence on abusive men and condemns the limited options for women, particularly for those in rural settings.
• Tracks challenges the constraints of gender through a narrator that cannot be defined by stereotypical images of the domestic and passive female.

Indigenous Rights in Australia

The 1970s saw the first attempts to improve the lives and rights of indigenous Australians. In 1971 Indigenous people were counted in the census, and in 1976, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act was established. Davidson’s time with Mr Eddie exposes her to the harsh reality of the living conditions of Indigenous Australian’s throughout the 1970s, as well as inspiring a deep appreciation for the culture and connection with the land. Davidson is frustrated with the mistreatment of Indigenous people in Australia, and feels ambivalent about her status as a white, privileged, outsider in their community. Davidson confronts the racist and discriminatory stereotypes and attitudes towards Indigenous Australians, and experiences first hand the realities of the issues these people face. Davidson encounters intense generosity and friendship in the Indigenous community that she admires and presents as a stark contrast to the intolerant attitudes of white Australians in Alice Springs.

• “The blacks were unequivocally the enemy – dirty, lazy, dangerous”
• “Aborigines. Warm, friendly, laughing, excited, tired Pitjantjara Aborigines...” (p. 155)
• “Ceremonies are the visible link between Aboriginal people and their land. Once dispossessed of this 
land, ceremonial life deteriorates, people lose their strength, meaning and identity.” (p. 167) 

• Davidson renegotiates her identity and relationship with the land after learning from the Indigenous Australians.
• Davidson condemns the racist attitudes of white Australians towards the aboriginal people.
• Davidson embodies the changing attitudes of young Australians towards aboriginal Australians, endorsing a respectful relationship with the traditional land owners.

INTO THE WILD

Social criticism of materialistic excess.

While Into the Wild is set in the 1990s, McCandless’ formative years were the 1980s – a decade characterised by the consumerism, extravagance, and materialism of President Reagan’s America. The reverberating effects of this time period inform McCandless’ general outlook and disdain for American society. Whilst this contempt for consumerism is one motivation for McCandless’ actions, he is equally troubled by the family violence and dysfunction he experienced as a young man. This traumatic past informs his extreme actions and outlook.

Example sentences:

• Penn exposes the effects of materialistic society on young impressionable people.
• Penn explores the consequences of experiencing childhood trauma, and how this manifests in adult actions.
• Penn condemns the expectations of 21 st century nuclear families.
• Penn endorses the liberating power of familial love and relationships.

Depiction of the unparalleled power of nature and man’s inability to contend with it

Inspired by Thoreau and London, Chris seeks enlightenment in the wild. Despite a philosophical understanding of the power of nature, Chris believes he can survive the untamed wilderness of Alaska. Although nature is the locus for self-realisation and growth for Chris, it is also what destroys him. As the viewer watches him slowly deteriorate, we come to fully comprehend the force of nature – suggesting man’s inability to control it.

• Penn’s depiction of McCandless’ deterioration suggests human’s inability to control nature.
• Penn endorses the liberating power of literature, but cautions the idealism contained within romantic depictions of nature.

LITERARY TECHNIQUES

Narrative voice.

An important aspect of Into the Wild to consider is that McCandless’ story, while true, is told through Sean Penn’s directorial lens, which is in turn based on Jon Krakeur’s book. The story is informed by McCandless’ writings, and interviews with those who knew him, but is ultimately a work of artistic interpretation. Consider how this affect’s a viewer’s perception of Chris, does this raise questions around representation and identity? This is in direct contrast to Tracks , which is a first person, linear past tense, autobiographical account of the writer’s experience. Where Robyn is completely in control of her narrative, McCandless’ is subject to the artistic interpretation of others.

Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is defined as the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal, or object. Robyn repeatedly personifies the animals she encounters. The camels in particular take on their own human personalities in her life. This technique, called anthropomorphism, can be used to complement a discussion of the theme of isolation. Robyn attributes distinct characteristics to each camel, suggesting her need for companionship and the powerful absence of human connection in prolonged periods of isolation.

Davidson’s depiction of her dependence on animals reveals deeper meanings about her inability to depend on, and communicate with, humans in the same way. Robyn’s reliance on her dog, Dookie, becomes more intense as the journey continues. Upon Dookie’s death, both the reader and Robyn experience the dog’s death as a powerful blow.

• “I am quite sure Diggity was more than a dog, or rather other than dog. (p. 207)”
• “But I said goodbye to a creature I had loved unconditionally, without question. ... I walked out into the morning and felt nothing. I was numb, empty. All I knew was I mustn‟t stop walking. (p. 223)
”
• “Diggity had become a cherished friend rather than simply a pet. (p. 227)”
• Kate: “remembered humans and hated them”
• Zeleika: “had a lovely gentle nature” “the street-smart, crafty, unfazable, self-possessed leader”
• Dookie: “nominally king, but if anything untoward happened he was the first to hide behind Zeleika’s skirts”
• Goliath: “cheeky, pushy, self-centred, demanding, petulant, arrogant, spoilt and delightful”

SAMPLE PARAGRAPHS

Prompt: Discuss the ways in which the environment assists the protagonists in their journey for self-discovery.

Introduction: In forging connections with the environment and people around us, humans end up inadvertently discovering themselves. It is this notion that resonates throughout both Robyn Davidson’s 1970 memoir, Tracks , and Sean Penn’s 2007 film, Into the Wild , where the relationships that the protagonists form throughout their journeys leads to intense self- discovery and growth. Both Davidson and McCandless seek knowledge and guidance through both the individuals they meet and, specifically to McCandless, the books he reads, citing it as a means of grappling with the fundamental stages of self-discovery. Whilst Davidson and McCandless experience different relationships with their immediate family, it is ultimately the concept of family that underpins their motivations and inspires them to pursue their journeys – both physical and psychological. Further, the respective temporal environments in which both protagonists are immersed in emerge as a distinct theme that facilitates each stage of self- discovery in the climatic lead up to the ultimate self-realisation.

Body Paragraph 1: Both Into the Wild  and Tracks endorse the guiding power of influential figures on both protagonists, as a catalyst for their growth. Davidson commences her self-described ‘lunatic’ journey with little knowledge of the wild to substantiate her mammoth ambition. That her drive outweighs her preparation manifests in the early moments of the text, wherein Davidson endures a grueling internship with the impulsive ‘maniac’ Kurt Posel. This man appears the epitome of the ‘biased, bigoted, boring and above all, brutal’ man she describes as the stereotypical ‘Aussie male’. Kurt is abusive to both Davidson and his wife, but his eccentric and impulsive ways expose her to the harsh realities of bush living. Ultimately, Kurt’s guidance allows Davidson to gain the fundamental skills she needs to train camels, whose dispositions reflect the erratic nature of Kurt himself. In direct contrast to this tense, exploitative relationship, is Davidson’s nuanced and spiritually rewarding relationship with Mr. Eddie, an aboriginal elder whom she describes as a “sheer pleasure to be with”.  Despite an ostensible language barrier, Eddie’s instruction of the Indigenous Arts and Culture leave an impressionable impact on Davidson’s character and personality. By accepting Eddie’s guidance at a pivotal point in her journey, Davidson’s ambivalent sense of self, the overwhelming feeling of being an imposter, is diminished. Davidson becomes more grounded and connected to her environment; the knowledge that she derives from key characters contributes to a distinct conformational change in her personality and thus critically assists her in developing a strong sense of one self.  A similar theme resonates in Into the Wild , where Chris McCandless heavily relies upon the guidance of various prominent figures he meets throughout his journey as well as ‘the characters of the books he loved from writers like Tolstoy, Jack London and Thoreau’ whose words he could and often would ‘summon….to suit any occasion’. The fact that McCandless readily referred to the words of the likes of Tolstoy, London, and Thoreau amidst times of mental angst and challenge, is a significant reflection of not only the quintessential teacher and student relationship he shares with them, but also the level of impact they have had in shaping in the ideological processes that define Chris’s values and sense of oneself. This very idea is furthered by Sean Penn when he depicts Christopher McCandless quoting soviet Russian poet, Boris Pasternak, suggesting that humans ‘ought to call each thing by it’s right name’, following which he acts impulsively and with great haste, engineered with rapid and distorted camera movements. In doing so, Penn illustrates the importance that Chris places upon the words of such idealists to the stage where he acts upon their advice without giving them proper consideration within his literal, temporal context. The protagonists of both Into the Wild and Tracks , both rely upon the knowledge and guidance of individuals, be they physical or via literature, as a means of grappling with their fundamental understanding of the human spirit and in doing so their intricate understanding of themselves.

Body Paragraph 2: Both texts demonstrate a degree of discontentment and resent towards the institutionalized, '20th century convention' of family. Davidson describes the notion of family as “invisible ropes and chains” of guilt, she comments that families lack for the most part, a true sense of love. This sentiment is starkly contrasted with Davidson’s intense engagement with the wild, which she describes in the language of love and connection. “I love you. i love you sky, bird, wind, desert, desert, desert’ proclaims Davidson, as she describes having “no more loved ones to care about” and “no more ties” to bind her to material existence. Davidson laments the distortion of her journey for public consumption, stating “so far people had said that i wanted to commit suicide, that i wanted to do penance for my mother’s death…” this comment is one of the only references to her mother’s suicide, which can be interpreted as a catalyst for her ambivalence about the notion of family. This experience evidently informs Davidsons’s somewhat impenetrable exterior and suggests a deeper complexity to her resistance of 20th century societal expectations. Similarly, Christopher McCandless articulates a powerful contempt for family. McCandless feels impeded in his personal motivations by the familial concepts of ‘graduating college’ and ‘getting a job’ which he describes as “20th century inventions” inextricably linked with “this world of material excess”. McCandless expands on this point, commenting that his pursuit for self-discovery has ultimately resulted in ‘the killing of the false being within’, the ‘false being’ that was bound to the societal expectations and the material conventions of the time. Chris’ departure into the wild is as much of an act of punishment for his family, as it is about Chris discovering true freedom and metaphysical spirituality. It is this idea of ‘telling the world’ of his family’s misdeeds that continually motivates Chris to continue on with his journey, which is depicted by Penn through the countless solo enactments and impersonation of both Chris’ mother and father, often depicting a negative experience which has quite evidently scarred his ‘crystal like’ mind. Family is thus, a primary motivation for both key characters within Tracks and Into the Wild to firstly partake on their journey, but more significantly to discover an uncorrupted, unbiased ‘true’ version of them that had been lost amidst ‘this world of material excess’.

Conclusion: Both Tracks and Into the Wild explore the inextricable link between ones environment and their personal growth. Nature is emphasised as a world removed from the materialistic excess of modern urban life, in which one can engage with an alternative, radical set of values. Both Davidson and McCandless escape from the confinements of their lives and experience profound transformations over the course of their journeys. Thus, both Davidson and Penn comment on the omniscient, multifaceted nature of the environment around a person being instrumental in moulding each stage of the journey of self-discovery and transformation.

*A big shout out to Suraj Hari, 2017 graduate and currently studying Medicine in Tasmania, who is a contributing author of this blog post.

I am Malala and Made in Dagenham is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing). For a detailed guide on Comparative , check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

• Compare the importance and role of idols and role models in I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.
• Describe the role of fear and obligation as an obstacle to progress by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• ‘As we change the things around us, the things around us change us’. Discuss the extent to which this is true by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss the benefit of adversity in strengthening one’s will to persevere by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Resilience is more important than success. Discuss whether this is true within the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Compare the role and importance of family within the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Compare both I am Malala and Made in Dagenham in relation to the importance of language as a device (spoken and written).
• Compare the forms of resistance displayed by protagonists Malala Yousafzai and Rita O’Grady in texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham and decide why they chose these methods.
• Analyse the effectiveness of small triumphs creating ripple effects in wider communities by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss whether support networks are intrinsic for a single figure to create positive change by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• The main protagonists are galvanized by the people they wish not to be like rather than their role models. Discuss to what extent this is true by comparing the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.
• Made in Dagenham and I am Malala explore the vices of deceit, appeasement and scapegoating. Discuss these by comparing both texts, commenting on how they pose a threat to the causes of both protagonists.
• What role do interpersonal relationships play in the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham? Can these relationships be both positive and negative? Discuss.
• Change cannot be immediate but gradual. To what extent is this true in texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham .
• Examine the role of the media in driving social change by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham ‍
• A patriarchal society is invariably one that is repressive. Discuss this statement and its truths or falsities by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss solidarity in relation to social, historical and cultural progress and whether it can be both positive and negative by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.

Photograph 51 & The Penelopiad are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of our most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

We've explored themes, characters and literary devices amongst other things over on our Comparing The Penelopiad and Photograph 51 blog post. If you need a quick refresher or you’re new to studying this text pair, I highly recommend checking it out!

Here, we’ll be breaking down a Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad comparative essay topic using LSG’s THINK and EXECUTE strategy , a technique to help you write better VCE essays. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, you can learn about it in our How To Write A Killer Text Response study guide.

Within the THINK strategy, we have 3 steps, or ABC. These ABC components are:

Step 1: A nalyse

Step 2: B rainstorm

Step 3: C reate a Plan

Without further ado, let’s get into it!

The Prompt:

‘You heard what you wanted to hear.’ ( Photograph 51 ) 

‘Now that all the others have run out of air, it’s my turn to do a little story-making.’ ( The Penelopiad ) 

Compare the ways in which both texts suggest there is power in storytelling. 

The first step is to deduce what type(s) the essay question is (for a refresher on the 5 types of essay prompts, check out this blog ). I usually find that a process of elimination is the easiest way to determine this. The prompt doesn’t explicitly include the keyword ‘How’, so it isn’t how-based. There are also no characters mentioned in the prompt, so we can rule out character-based. There’s no metalanguage included, so it isn’t metalanguage-based either. However, the prompt does mention the themes of ‘power’ and ‘storytelling’, so yes, it is theme-based. There are also two quotes (one from each text) included as part of the prompt, so it’s also quote-based.

Now that we’ve determined what types of essay prompt are relevant here, the next step is to identify its keywords: ‘the ways’ , ‘both texts ’, ‘power ’ and ‘storytelling’ . 

The inclusion of ‘the ways’ tells us that we must consider different examples from ‘both texts’ where Ziegler and Atwood show us there is ‘power in storytelling’ . The thematic words ‘power ’ and ‘storytelling’ are especially important in your selection of evidence and also your three distinct paragraph ideas, as singling out the thematic keywords will make sure you do not go off-topic. 

Step 2: Brainstorm

Let’s look at the common themes of ‘power’ and ‘storytelling’ that are central to the essay topic, and more specifically, how there is power WITHIN storytelling. In the case of Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad , a common representation of storytelling that is present in both texts is that truthful storytelling is subjective. This means that both Atwood and Ziegler posit that those in power throughout history have been afforded the ability to shape the historical narrative to best fit their interests. Both texts are also set within patriarchal societies - 1950s Britain and Ancient Greece. Therefore, our overall contention in response to this topic can be: 

Both texts suggest that the ability to control the subjective nature of storytelling is a power that has predominantly been afforded to men throughout history .

This opening line addresses ‘power in storytelling’ in a specific way that brings in the contexts of both texts. Each of your paragraphs should fall somewhere under this umbrella of thought - exploring the dynamics of the patriarchal systems within both texts in relation to storytelling. Who tells the story? How does it benefit them? Why not others? 

It is now time to develop the three main ideas that will form your essay structure. It is important to remember that each paragraph should include a discussion of converging and diverging ideas. Try to only use one or two examples from each text in a paragraph, as this way, you will have more time and space in your paragraphs to analyse your literary techniques and quotes. As the old saying goes, show don’t tell! 

P1: Both texts give women a voice through the retelling of their stories from a different perspective. 

Convergent Ideas: 

• Photograph 51 serves as a correction to the history of the discovery of the helix structure. 
• The Penelopiad inserts the female perspective into the famous myth of The Odyssey , giving reasoning and depth to the female voice.

Divergent Ideas: 

• Rosalind’s story is primarily told by the male scientists as the play retells the events, injected with commentary from the male scientists.
• The Penelopiad is a first-person recount from Penelope herself, therefore she is given more agency and control of the narrative.

P2: However, women still lack authority in the shaping of their own narratives as their subjective truth and perspective is often undermined.

Convergent Ideas:

• Predominantly, the narration is told from the male perspective as male scientists narrate Rosalind’s life. Her story is still subject to male opinion.
• The Maids interrupt Penelope’s first-person narrative through the 10 interludes from the maids’ perspective. In doing so, they cast doubt on Penelope’s retelling of the narrative and offer a more truthful perspective.
• Rosalind’s story is often interrupted by other male scientists, therefore more directly illustrating that men have more control over the subjective truth. Despite Rosalind’s story being central to the novel, Ziegler still demonstrates the difficulty women face in being believed and accredited for their contribution to history.
• Penelope’s story is not interrupted by men like Rosalind’s is. Therefore, there is a lack of male dominance in this aspect of the tale. However, the theme of patriarchal dominance is instead illustrated through the lack of authority that the maids have. Despite their account of the events in the tale being the most accurate, their low social status limits the power of their voice in a patriarchal society.

P3: In patriarchal societies, the men ultimately control their own narrative and how they are remembered, amplifying their own greatness by omitting the potential blemishes on their character.

• The male scientists deflect the blame for discrediting Rosalind by instead blaming her cold personality instead of their own deception and inability to cooperate with a woman.
• The execution of the maids is dismissed in the trial of Odysseus as Odysseus’ actions are justified in the patriarchal society of Ancient Greece.

Divergent Ideas:

• The male scientists’ reputations remain untarnished at the conclusion of the narrative, aside from personal guilt and shame. They achieved the scientific success they set out to achieve and were remembered as heroes.
• Unlike the untarnished reputation of the male scientists, the maids curse Odysseus at the conclusion of the narrative.

The ability to control the subjective nature of storytelling is a power that has predominantly been afforded to men throughout the retelling of history (1) . This is a result of the dominance of patriarchal systems, which inherently give men more agency in society to dictate the narrative for the next generations to remember (2) . Both Atwood’s The Penelopiad and Ziegler’s Photograph 51 criticise this power imbalance in historical storytelling and deliver the female perspective in two different eras of history. Each text recognises that the lack of voice women are granted in society undermines and suppresses their contribution to history (3) . Ultimately, both authors question the objectivity of the legacies that men have left behind, casting doubt on the narratives that they have shaped by introducing the underrepresented female perspective (4).

Annotations (1) A ‘universal truth’ or broad thematic statement is a great way to start an essay. This is your overall contention that does not mention the specifics of the texts - it purely deals with the themes of the topic. 

(2) As seen here, your second sentence can be used to back up the universal truth in a way that is more specific to the texts and the ideas you’re going to discuss. In my second sentence, I’ve included more information about the societal power structures that are present within the texts and how men have more power to dictate historical narratives. 

(3) Then, you signpost the three ideas that you’re going to discuss within your essay in a clear, precise and summarised way. Here is where you can mention textual details such as the titles, authors, forms and setting (i.e. 1950s Britain and Ancient Greece).

(4) I have finished off my introduction with an ‘Ultimately’ sentence that discusses the authorial intent of both authors. This offers a broader in-depth look at the topic as a whole, as it acknowledges the author’s intentional decisions about the text. 

By writing narratives that focus on the female perspective in history, both texts afford the female protagonists power through the representation of their voice. Atwood and Ziegler address the imbalance of female input in history and aim to rectify that through representing the contributions women made in both narratives. Photograph 51 , through the form of a play that retrospectively reenacts the events leading up to the discovery of the helix structure, cements Rosalind Franklin as the true genius behind the 'secret of life'. This honour has been credited to Watson and Crick solely throughout history, with them being given recognition of the 'Nobel' and having their names 'in textbooks'. Ziegler firmly details how the key to their success is the 'photograph she took of B', which Watson exploits to eventually win the race to construct the model. Similarly, The Penelopiad is also a societal correction to the lack of female representation in the narratives presented (4) . Written as a first-person narration, Penelope’s aim as a narrator is to be given the opportunity 'to do a little story-making' in this retrospective novel, inserting her perspective into the well-known myth of Odysseus and The Odyssey (5) . The characterisation of Penelope is subverted in Penelope’s retelling, as the generalisation of her character being only recognised for her 'smart[s]', '[her] weaving', and '[her] devotion to [her] husband' is challenged. Atwood contends that Penelope is also determined, self-sufficient and tactile through the narrative voice she grants Penelope as the main protagonist of the text. Rosalind in Photograph 51 is not the narrator of her story, which limits her agency in the telling of her truth in comparison to Penelope, who is able to shape her story the way she wishes (6). Underpinning both of these texts is Atwood and Ziegler’s authorial intention to contend that there is an underrepresentation of female contribution to history, and therefore utilise their texts to give power to female characters in patriarchal systems (7) .

Annotations (4) The transitional sentence between texts can be less jarring and clunky if you introduce your example from Text B in a similar vein to the discussion of Text A. As seen here, I have used my discussion of how Ziegler represents Rosalind in a manner that is seen as a historical correction to then transition into how Penelope also serves the same purpose.

(5) The explicit stating of the first-person narration style in The Penelopiad directly addresses the keywords of 'the ways' from the essay question. By incorporating different textual examples like narration and characterisation (as seen in the following sentence), I’m able to analyse multiple ways that the authors suggest there is power in storytelling.

(6) It makes it easier to discuss your divergent idea if it is directly linked to the converging ideas you’ve already mentioned, just as I have here in pointing out the difference in protagonists and narration. This means you don’t have to waste time re-explaining things from the texts!

(7) I conclude with a more broad statement that references the authors’ intentions in order to finish with a more in-depth exploration, just like the end of the introduction.

Women still lack authority in the shaping of their own narratives as their version of the truth is often undermined. Despite the main motivator for the texts being to empower the women by giving them a voice, both texts also recognise the limitations of a patriarchal society by illustrating the challenges the protagonists face in having their voices heard. By viewing the past through a retrospective lens in The Penelopiad , Penelope is finally able to deliver her perspective, encapsulated in the opening line of 'now that I’m dead I know everything'. (8) The notion that Penelope had to be dead and free of the restraints placed on her voice whilst she was alive in patriarchal Ancient Greece demonstrates the complete lack of authority the voices of women have in establishing themselves in history. This is echoed in the same retrospective retelling of Rosalind’s story in Photograph 51 , as the play begins with Rosalind stating that 'this is what it was like', establishing that the events that follow this initial line are a snapshot into the limitations she had to face as a woman in the male-dominated scientific field. It also references that the interjections of the male scientists as they commentate on her life were 'what it was like', as male opinion majorly shaped the suppression of Rosalind’s success throughout the play. On the contrary, (9) Penelope’s recount of the story is less interrupted by interjections of other characters, specifically those from men. However, the maids deliver ten interludes throughout The Penelopiad . These interludes are another example of female voice being represented in the text, but often being dismissed due to their crudeness or sarcastic nature in their casting of doubt over both Penelope and Odysseus, as they taunt Penelope’s decision to 'blame it on the [...] poxy little sluts!' and blemish Odysseus’ name by characterising him as the 'artfullest dodger' or 'blithe lodger', in reference to his infidelity. Despite the maids being the most authoritative in terms of true Greek theatre, (10) as they deliver the truest and most objective judgement of events, they are 'forgotten' and are not served true justice as a result of their low social status and gender that limits their voice in a patriarchal society. The female perspectives in the texts are truer representations of history in both contexts, yet because of limitations regarding their gender in the two patriarchal systems, they are overshadowed by the male recounts of history.

Annotations (8) To strengthen your essay, it is important to also use evidence that is not strictly dialogue or themes from inside the text. In this line, I use a literary device - retrospective storytelling - to back up the analysis I am talking about.

(9) Starting your discussion of the divergent ideas is easy with the use of phrases such as ‘on the contrary’, ‘unlike this…’ and ‘however’. You don’t want to spend unnecessary time on filler sentences. Be efficient!

(10) By further strengthening my analysis with a range of examples (e.g. mentioning the historical importance of genre, such as Greek theatre in this instance), I’m able to demonstrate a deeper knowledge of not only the texts and their context . 

In patriarchal societies, the men ultimately have more control over their own narratives and shape them for their own personal glorification of character. The omission of immorality and emphasis on male achievement by the men narrating the story is a clear indication that despite the selfish choices they make, men are still able to shape their legacies in their favour. Watson and Crick in Photograph 51 are depicted as 'arrogant' and duplicitous as they extort their 'old friend[ship]' with Wilkins for personal gain, pressuring him into 'talking about his work' to further progress towards notoriety. The conclusion of the play, with Watson and Crick accepting the honour of the Nobel Prize and claiming it as the 'finest moment' of their lives, illustrates that the motivation of personal success justifies the immoral actions of men as they are remembered fondly as scientific heroes without the blemishes of their characters. Similarly in The Penelopiad , Odysseus is revered as a hero through the intertextual reference of The Odyssey, a myth detailing the legend of Odysseus and his 'cleverness'. Penelope’s recounting of the 'myth of Penelope and Odysseus' sheds light on her ingenuity in the tales of Odysseus, showing that she 'set the whole thing up on purpose', referring to the deceiving plan that Odysseus had been awarded all the credit for in the original retelling of their story. Additionally, in the 'trial of Odysseus', Odysseus’ character is evaluated in the setting of a court, as the maids have demanded justice for Odysseus’ unjust execution of them. However, the judge overturns this decision as it would serve as a 'blot on an otherwise exceedingly distinguished career', encapsulating the idea that men in a patriarchal society will omit personal errors in favour of presenting themselves and other men as heroes of their narratives. However, unlike the untarnished male success of Photograph 51 , the maids curse Odysseus so he would 'never be at rest' in the conclusion of the narrative, as Atwood makes the final statement that men throughout history should be held accountable for the immoral actions they make (11) .

‍ Annotations (11) By concluding with a specific reference to the authorial intent of this specific idea explored throughout the paragraph, you ‘zoom’ back out and show your reader the bigger picture. 

At the end of each text it is evident that, regardless of the representation and voice that is given to the female characters, the deeply entrenched patriarchal systems in both timelines negate this power in favour of the male voice (12) . Ziegler’s play asserts that Rosalind’s 'groundbreaking work' should 'cement her place in history', and aims to give her recognition from a relatively more progressive, feminist society. Atwood’s conclusion also is representative of giving women more recognition for their achievements, like giving credit for Penelope’s 'intelligence' as an esteemed character trait in contemporary society. Both characters cast doubt over the previously revered male heroes in both texts, and further criticise the lack of female representation in those heroic stories. In conveying both Penelope and Rosalind’s stories, the authors call for a further critique of past and future accounts of human achievement. 

‍ Annotations (12) In this conclusion, I have chosen to focus on comparing the authorial intentions of Atwood and Ziegler in relation to the topic. In doing so, it can summarise my contention that I introduced earlier in the essay. By starting my conclusion with an overall statement regarding the ending of the two texts, I draw on the readers’ preexisting ideas of how they felt at the end of each narrative.

If you’re studying Photograph 51 and My Brilliant Career, check out our Killer Comparative Guide to learn everything you need to know to ace this assessment.

Ransom and Invictus are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative.

Introductions

Clint Eastwood’s 2009 film ‘Invictus’ centers on the events following the election of Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first black President in the post-apartheid era. The film follows President Mandela’s attempt to infuse a deeply divided country with new energy, by supporting the South African rugby team’s victorious 1995 World Cup Campaign. The unlikely bond formed between President Mandela and Francois Pienarr, the captain of the rugby team, illustrates themes of unity and reconciliation in a divided nation. The film begins with the image of a deeply divided society in 1990, as Mandela is released from 27 years of incarceration. A poignant opening scene sees Mandela drive along a long dirt road that runs between two playing fields, on one side, young black children shout excitedly as Mandela passes. On the other side, immaculately dressed white boys stare vacantly, as their coach proclaims, “This is the day our country went to the dogs.” This tumultuous period in South African history is of central concern to ‘Invictus’, as Eastwood portrays the lingering racial prejudices imbedded in this society. The film portrays the tension between the bitter resentment of black South Africans towards their former oppressors, with the fear and uncertainty of white Afrikaners under Mandela’s political leadership. Eastwood masterfully depicts the true story of the moment when Nelson Mandela harnessed the power of sports to unite a deeply divided South Africa.

Set during the Trojan War, one of the most famous events in Greek mythology, David Malouf’s historical fiction ‘Ransom’ seeks to explore the overwhelming destruction caused by war, and the immense power of reconciliation. Drawing on the Iliad, the epic poem by Homer, Malouf focuses on the events of one day and night, in which King Priam of Troy travels to the enemy Greek encampment to plead with the warrior Achilles to release the body of his son, Hector. Maddened by grief at the murder of his friend Patroclus, Achilles desecrates the body of Hector as revenge. Despite Achilles refusal to give up Hector’s body, Priam is convinced there must be a way of reclaiming the body – of pitting new ways against the old, and forcing the hand of fate. Malouf’s fable reflects the epic themes of the Trojan war, as fatherhood, love, grief and pride are expertly recast for our times.

Malouf and Eastwood both depict societies on the brink: Troy faces annihilation by the Greeks, while South Africa faces an uncertain future as it emerges from the injustices of the apartheid era, both worlds are in dire need of true heroes to bridge the great divide. Together, these two texts echo the significance of hope in the enactment of change. To learn more, head over to our full Ransom Study Guide (covers themes, characters, chapter summaries, quotes and more).

The power of shared human experiences

Both texts are centrally concerned with the significance of the universal experiences of love, loss, grief and hope to unite a divided people. Both Invictus and Ransom explore how societal forces divide people into different, often conflicting groups – whether this be race, history, culture, or war. Each text appeals to the universal experiences that define the human condition, and emphasise the significance of opportunities to cross-cultural divides.

In ‘Ransom’, Malouf is centrally concerned with the theme of fatherhood. This concept links the mortal and godly realms, which King Priam straddles over the course of his journey. The relationship between Priam and Somax illustrates this complex theme most clearly. The two men, despite being deeply separated by their class, education and power, share their common familial experiences. Priam confronts the poignancy of their shared experience of losing sons, questioning whether it “meant the same for him as it did for the driver”. Malouf thus presents Priam as initially lacking in terms of his understanding, Somax’s friendship and stories are the catalyst for Priam to engage in deeper, empathetic understanding. Somax’s trivial yet symbolically significant story about the griddle-cakes represents a moment of anagnorisis for Priam, wherein the shared bond of humanity in fatherhood allows Priam to obtain insight, and progressively grow as a human and as a leader. This incident fuels the journey to appeal to Achilles “man to man”, Priam’s insight into the power of empathy allows him to appeal to their shared bond as suffering fathers.

Just as Priam goes to Achilles “as a father”, using their common quality, fatherhood, to further understand each other, Mandela, too, emphasises the point that you must “know [your] enemy before [you] c[an] prevail against him” and thus he “learned their language, read their books, their poetry”. Mandela attempts to unite Black and white South Africans, despite the mutual animosity and distrust fostered by decades of apartheid. Black and White South Africans share almost nothing in common, with significant cultural and societal barriers to their reconciliation, including different dialects. Rugby emerges as the most poignant manifestation of this divide as the White South Africans support their national team, but the black south Africans barrack for the opposing side. The scene wherein Pienarr and Mandela meet over tea is symbolic of this sentiment of fostering unity amongst deep divisions. President Mandela literally hunches over to pour the tea for Pienaar, this inversion of status demonstrates his willingness to reduce his dignity as a superior and speak with Pienarr, and by extension, white south Africans, on an equal level, modelling an example of how race relations in his nation should be carried out. This equality is also symbolised by the passing of the tea to Pienaar, the close up shot where both arms of the individuals are depicted on an equal level reinforces this sense of mutual equality and respect, extolling the virtues of empathy and integrity as a uniting force.

Leadership and Sacrifice

Mandela and Priam symbolise how leadership must inevitably entail familial sacrifices. Both leaders self-identify with their nation and people. Priam embodies Troy itself, his body is the ‘living map’ of the kingdom.  The ‘royal sphere’ he embodies is constrained by customs and tradition, full of symbolic acts that separate him from the mortal world. To an extent, these royal obligations and ritual suffocate Priam’s individuality and he is unable to show his true nature, or connect with his family in the way he would desire to. He regards intimate relationships with his children as “women’s talk” that “unnerves him” as it is not “his sphere”. This articulation of the disassociation of the “royal sphere” with natural human bonds of family reveals the secondary role that family and love must take when one’s role as a leader is paramount. Similarly, Mandela claims “I have a very big family. Forty-two million people”. Unlike Priam, Mandela seeks human connection, predicating his leadership on democratic ideals. This takes a physical and emotional toll, as shown by Mandela’s collapse in his driveway. The cost of leadership here is evident, as Mandela has effectively sacrificed his family for the good of his nation. His strained relationship with his daughter Zindzi further reinforces this, as she disapproves of Mandela reaching out to Pienarr, likening him to one of the white “policeman who forced (her) out of her home”, showing the disconnect between father and daughter due to the sacrifices necessitated by Mandela’s life of leadership, including his 27 year imprisonment.

Fatherhood and Masculinity

In ‘Ransom’ Malouf presents an enclosed, limited and unemotional masculine world, with particularly stringent expectations for men’s behaviour. This is a world characterised by war, wherein the expectations of violent masculinity are paramount. In presenting Achilles inside of “a membrane stretched to a fine transparency”, Malouf reveals the constant tension between the emotional, domestic human nature inside Achilles and the hierarchical violent external society that he is expected to abide by, revealing the constricting nature that the society has on defining men’s actions. Malouf uses words like “knotted” and “rope-like” when describing Achilles’ muscles, implying that his conventional great strength, the source of his fearsome reputation, represents a confinement that the society enforces on him and other men. Further, through a degree of compassion, Priam is able to touch the “sore spot whose ache he has long repressed” in Achilles, a symbol of the emotions that have been supressed by the dominant patriarchal nature of this society.

Whilst the world of ‘Invictus’ is less overtly masculine and patriarchal, the narrative of the film is primarily focused on the male experiences, with female characters assuming a largely secondary role. Zindzi’s strained relationship with her father exemplifies the sacrifices involved in leadership. Whilst Mandela is seen to have sacrificed a close connection with his daughter, this is suggested to be in service of the nation, “I have a big family. Forty two million people”.

Character analysis and comparison

Character analysis/comparison.

- aging king of troy

- individuality has been subsumed by the ceremonial functions of his high position

- self-identifies with nation

- life of obligation

- foregoes convention and embraces chance with his proposal to offer ransom for his son’s body

- becomes more attuned to the natural world

- gains a greater appreciation of his true self as a man, rather than a symbolic figurehead

- historic figure, symbol of peace

- spent 27 years in prison for sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government while he was trying to gain civil rights for all south Africans

- tackled institutionalised racism, poverty and inequality

- suffered under apartheid

- pursues reconciliation, prepared to face down calls for retribution

- in his speech to the sports council, he defends the traditions of the people who persecuted him

- interacts easily with people of all social standings

- charismatic, in touch with the people

 Comparison

- embody essential role that leadership plays in achieving just resolutions to conflict

- sacrifice family for leadership

- illustrate that effective leadership takes a toll on the individual

- exemplify that reconciliation requires unexpected and difficult acts. Such as Mandela’s embrace of the Springboks and Priam’s appeal to Achilles “man to man”

- both show effective leadership involves expressing empathy and understanding the humanity of your enemies

Literary and cinematic techniques

- In one of the first scenes in Mandela’s office after he is elected President, Eastwood strategically frames the racial segregation and tension between the two groups via the mise-en-scene; they stand on separate sides of the room, wearing distinctly different clothing and calling Mandela either “Mr President” or “Madiba”, representative of their own identity. The lingering tension between the two groups permeates the entirety of the film, and the microcosm of the bodyguards acts as a symbol of the chasm within the wider nation.

- The deeply symbolic scene wherein Mandela and Pienaar have tea, Eastwood strategically uses a close up shot to frame the passing of the tea cup so that both arms of the individuals are depicted on the same level, reinforcing this sense of mutual equality and respect. It is this sharing of hope that ignites Pienaar to reciprocate Mandela’s egalitarian actions. As Pienaar brings a ticket for Eunice, recognising that “there’s a fourth” family member, he mimics Mandela’s value that “no one is invisible”. Consequently, it is demonstrated that regardless of skin colour, characters reciprocate Mandela’s empathy and compassion, revealing the limitless power such human qualities to reach across the boundaries of division.

- The wide shot of the passing of the trophy from Mandela to Pienaar is framed against the large crowd, metaphorically representing South Africa’s support with the unity of the black and whites, reflecting Mandela’s desire to “meet black aspirations and quell white fears”. Their diegetic cheers work to create the idyllic depiction of the lasting power of this change, implying the true limitless nature of hope in their society.

Learn more through Caleb (English study score 47) about Invictus Film Technique Analysis - How Can I Write About It?

- Priam’s moment of anagnorisis in which he discovers the concept of “chance”, marks the beginning of his enactment of change through the power of hope. Despite his family who wishes that he would “spare [himself of] this ordeal”, Priam’s vision guides him to overcome familial and societal obstacles in pursuit of reconciliation.

- Symbol: Griddlecakes – represent pleasure in common things, but also the growing realisation within Priam of his distance from such pleasures. The love and care with with Somax’s daughter cooked the cakes has a value that surpasses the conventional riches associated with the ruling elite. This is a catalyst for a moment of realisation for Priam.

This month’s blog post will be short but it contains one extremely valuable point you should take away – especially if you’ll be writing imaginary pieces in the next few months. Creative essays are great because they offer interesting and unique stories; however, there is one common downfall that occurs in writing. Some students create pieces that are  too  straightforward. Rather than using vocabulary, imagery and symbolism to express a point, they simply write down a statement that sums up what they wish to say. Your aim is to invite the reader to  experience  the story through your words. This can be done through the character’s thoughts, feelings, actions etc. Thus the well-known phrase among writers, ‘ Show, don’t tell’ . Keeping this idea in mind turn you into a much more successful writer – and you’ll see the difference!

Tell: Katie was very happy.

Show: Katie’s face lifted. Little wrinkles appeared around her bright eyes, her dimples made an appearance that dug into her cheeks as a big grin emerged to show her perfect teeth.

Tell: She felt horrible for the weeping children.

Show: Guilt throbbed inside her as she stared at the weeping children. Her heart pounded against her chest, her hands trembling beside her still body, her brain screaming at her to do  something .

Tell: I was scared.

Show: I hear my breathing; heavy, and rapid. I shut my eyes tightly. I can feel goosebumps running up my arms and down my back.

To test whether or not you are ‘telling’ instead of ‘showing’, think about whether or not your sentence leaves room for questions. In Example 1, ‘Katie was very happy’ would leave the reader thinking – what thought or action showed that she was happy? Whereas ‘show’ demonstrated that she was happy without directly stating it.

The key is to go into the finer details of your story!

The Great Gatsby is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Area of Study 1 - Text Response. For a detailed guide on Text Response, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response .

• Introduction

Call it the greatest American novel or ultimate story of unrequited romance— The Great Gatsby is undoubtedly a stunning snapshot of one of the most American decades that America has ever seen. The 1920s saw significant economic growth after WWI, and what’s more American than material excess, wealth, and prosperity? The stock market was going off, businesses were booming, and people were having a great time.

Well, not everybody—and on the flipside, what’s more American than socio-economic inequality or the ever-quixotic American Dream?

In this blog, we’ll go through the novel in this context, examine some of its key themes, and also have a think about the critiques it raises about American society. We’ll also go through an essay prompt that ties some of these things together.

Life in the Roaring Twenties

This snapshot from the 2013 film adaptation actually tells us a lot about the 1920s. On the one hand, social and cultural norms were shifting—men no longer sported beards, and women were dressing more androgynously and provocatively. On the other hand, the modern, American economy was emerging—people began buying costly consumer goods (like cars, appliances, telephones etc.) using credit rather than cash. This meant that average American families were able to get these things for the first time, while more prosperous families were able to live in extreme excess.

In Fitzgerald’s novel, the Buchanans are one such family. Tom and his wife Daisy have belonged to the 1% for generations, and the 1920s saw them cement their wealth and status. At the same time, the booming economy meant that others (like the narrator Nick) were relocating to cities in pursuit of wealth, and (like Gatsby) making significant financial inroads themselves. 

The Great Gatsby traces how the differences between these characters can be destructive even if they’re all wealthy. Add a drop of Gatsby’s unrequited love for Daisy, and you have a story that ultimately examines how far people go for romance, and what money simply can’t buy. 

The answer to that isn’t so obvious though. Yes, money can’t buy love, but it also can’t buy a lot of other things associated with the lifestyle and the values of established wealth. We’ll get into some of this now.

Wealth and class

Fitzgerald explores tensions between three socio-economic classes—the establishment, the ‘nouveau riche’ and the working class.

Tom and Daisy belong to the ‘old money’ establishment, where wealth is generational and inherited . This means they were born into already wealthy families, which affects their upbringing and ultimately defines them, from the way they speak (Tom’s “paternal contempt” and Daisy’s voice, “full of money”) to their major life decisions (including marriage, symbolised through the “string of pearls” he buys for her—which, fun fact, is estimated to be worth millions of dollars today). It also affects their values, as we’ll see in the following section.  For now, consider this image of their home (and those ponies on the left, which they also own), described as follows:

“The lawn started at the beach and ran toward the front door for [400 metres], jumping over sun-dials and brick walls and burning gardens—finally when it reached the house drifting up the side in bright vines as though from the momentum of its run.”

Nick Carraway also comes from a similar (though not as extravagant) background—his family had been rich by Midwestern standards for “three generations” before he came to New York.

Conversely, Gatsby belongs to the ‘ nouveau riche ’, or new money. Unlike the Buchanans, Gatsby was born into a poor family, only coming to wealth in the 1920s boom. Specifically, he inherited money from Dan Cody after running away from home at 17.

Although they are all rich, there are significant cultural differences between old and new money. Old money have their own culture of feigned politeness which Gatsby doesn’t quite get. When Tom and the Sloanes invite Nick and Gatsby to supper in chapter six, Gatsby naively accepts, to which Tom would respond behind his back, “Doesn’t he know [Mrs. Sloane] doesn’t want him?” Even though Gatsby is financially their equal, his newfound wealth can’t buy his way into their (nasty, horrible) lifestyle.

Finally, this is contrasted with the working class, particularly George and Myrtle Wilson who we meet in chapter two. They live in a grey “valley of ashes”, the detritus of a prosperous society whose wealth is limited to the 1%. Fitzgerald even calls it a “solemn dumping ground”, suggesting that life is precarious and difficult here. Consider what separates George—“blond, spiritless… and faintly handsome”—from Tom (hint: $$).

Myrtle is described differently, however—she is a “faintly stout” woman with “perceptible vitality”. This may be less of a description of her and more of a commentary on Tom’s sexuality, and what attracts him to her such that he cheats on Daisy with her. Still, Myrtle’s relative poverty is evident in her expressions of desire throughout their meeting—“I want to get one of those dogs,” she says, and Tom just hands her the money.

Ultimately, looking at the novel through the lens of class, we see a society where upward social mobility and making a living for yourself is possible, just not for everybody. Even when you get rich, it doesn’t guarantee that you’ll suddenly, seamlessly integrate into the lives of old money. 

Morality and values

Added to this story of social stratification is a moral dimension, where Fitzgerald can be a little more critical. 

Firstly, old money is portrayed as shallow . Daisy’s marriage to Tom and the Sloanes’ insincerity are elements of this, but another good example is Gatsby’s party guests. Many aren’t actually invited—they invite themselves, and “they came and went without having met Gatsby at all.” Their vacuous relationship to Gatsby is exposed when he dies, and they completely abandon him. Klipspringer, “the boarder”, basically lived in Gatsby’s house, and even then he still wouldn’t come to the funeral, only calling up to get a “pair of shoes” back. 

The rich are also depicted as cruel and inconsiderate, insulated from repercussions by their wealth. Nick’s description of Tom’s “cruel body” is repeatedly realised, as he breaks Myrtle’s nose in chapter two and condescends Gatsby with “magnanimous scorn” in chapter seven. After Myrtle dies, Nick spots the Buchanans “conspiring” and describes them as “smash[ing] up things and creatures and then retreat[ing] back into their money or their vast carelessness”—he sees them as fundamentally selfish.

Gatsby is portrayed more sympathetically though, which may come from his humble upbringing and his desire to be liked. This is probably the key question of the novel—is he a hero, or a villain? The moral of the story, or a warning? Consumed by love, or corrupted by wealth?

I’m going to leave most of those for the next section, but I’ll finish here with one last snippet: Lucille, a guest at his parties, tears her dress and Gatsby immediately sends her a “new evening gown”. Weird flex, but at least he’s being selfless…

That said, a major part of Gatsby’s character is his dishonesty, which complicates his moral identity. 

For starters, he fabricates a new identity and deals in shady business just to reignite his five-year-old romance with Daisy. We see this through the emergence of Meyer Wolfsheim, with whom he has unclear business “gonnegtions”, and the resultant wealth he now enjoys. 

In chapter three, Owl Eyes describes Gatsby as a “regular Belasco”, comparing him to a film director who was well-known for the realism of his sets. This is a really lucid analysis of Gatsby, who is in many ways just like a film director constructing a whole fantasy world.

It’s also unclear if he loves Daisy for who she is, or just the idea of Daisy and the wealth she represents. Indeed, he doesn’t seem to treat her as a person, but more like something that he can pursue (like wealth). This is a good read, so I won’t really get into it here—just consider how much things have changed since Gatsby first met Daisy (like her marriage and her children), and how Gatsby ignores the way her life has changed in favour of his still, stationary memory of who she used to be.

Love, desire and hope

All of this makes it tricky to distil what the novel’s message actually is. 

Is it that Gatsby is a good person, especially cast against the corrupt old money?  

This analysis isn’t wrong, and it actually works well with a lot of textual evidence. Where Nick resents the Buchanans, he feels sympathy for Gatsby. He explicitly says, “they’re a rotten crowd…you’re worth the whole damn bunch put together.” Maybe love was an honourable goal compared to money, which ostensibly makes you “cruel” and “careless”. 

I wouldn’t say he was cruel, but this reading is complicated by how he can be careless, choosing not to care about Daisy’s agency, and letting his desires overtake these considerations. 

Is it that Gatsby and his desire for Daisy were corrupted by wealth despite his good intentions? 

There’s also evidence to suggest wealth corrupts—Nick describes it as “foul dust” that “preyed” on Gatsby, eroding his good character and leaving behind someone who resembles the vacuous elite. Although love might’ve been an honourable goal, it got diluted by money. 

Gatsby’s paradigm for understanding the world becomes driven by materialism, and he objectifies Daisy. He starts trying to buy something that he originally didn’t need to buy—Daisy’s love. She certainly didn’t fall in love with this man who owned a mansion and a closet full of “beautiful shirts.” Thus, Gatsby is a sympathetic product of a system that was always stacked against him (a poor boy from North Dakota). Capitalism, right?

Is it that capitalist America provides nothing for people to pursue except for wealth, and therefore little reason for people to feel hope?

Past the basics: structural economic tension and the doomed American Dream

Now we want to start thinking beyond the characters (e.g. if Gatsby is a good person or not) and also factor in their social, historical, political and economic context (e.g. if he was doomed to begin with by a society driven by money). This subheading does sound a bit much, but we’ll break it down here. 

A key part of this novel is the American Dream, the idea that America is a land of freedom and equal opportunity, that anyone can ‘make it’ if they truly try. Value is placed on upward social mobility (moving up from a working-class background) and economic prosperity (making $$), which defined much of the Roaring 20s…

…for some. 

For many others, there was significant tension between these lofty values and their lived reality of life on the ground. As much as society around them was prospering, they just couldn’t get a piece of the pie, and this is what makes it structural—as hard as George Wilson might work, he just can’t get himself out of the Valley of Ashes and into wealth. Indeed, you can’t achieve the Dream without cheating (as Gatsby did). 

So, there’s this tension, this irreconcilable gap between economic goals and actual means. Through this lens, the tragedy of The Great Gatsby multiplies. It’s no longer just about someone who can’t buy love with money—it’s about how nobody’s dreams are really attainable. Not everyone can get money, and money can only get you so far. Everyone is stuck, and the American Dream is basically just a myth. 

Thus, the novel could be interpreted as a takedown of capitalist America, which convinced people like Gatsby that the answer to everything was money, and he bolted after the “green light” allure of cold, hard cash only to find out that it wasn’t enough, that it wasn’t the answer in the end.  (.

Consider what kind of message that sends to people like the Wilsons—if money can’t actually buy happiness, what good is it really to chase it? And remember that Gatsby had to cheat to get rich in the first place. 

Is [the novel’s message] that capitalist America provides nothing for people to pursue except for wealth, and therefore little reason for people to feel hope?

You tell me.

Prompt: what does Fitzgerald suggest about social stratification in the 1920s?

Whenever you get a new essay topic, you can use LSG’s THINK and EXECUTE strategy , a technique to help you write better VCE essays. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, then check it out in How To Write A Killer Text Response .

Let’s try applying this to a prompt. I’ll italicise the key points that have been brought up throughout this post. 

Firstly, social stratification clearly divided society along economic lines . This could be paragraph one, exploring how class separated the Buchanans and Wilsons of the world, and how their lifestyles were so completely different even though they all lived in the prosperity of the Roaring 20s . George Wilson was “worn-out” from work, but he still couldn’t generate upward social mobility for his family, stuck in the Valley of Ashes. Conversely, Tom Buchanan is born into a rich family with his beach-facing mansion and polo ponies . Colour is an important symbol here—the Valley is grey, while East Egg is filled with colour (a green light here, a “blue coupe” there…).

The next paragraph might look at the cultural dimension , exploring how you just can’t buy a way of life. This might involve analysing Gatsby’s wealth as deluding him into thinking he can “repeat the past” by buying into the life(style) of old money . This is where Fitzgerald disillusions us about the American Dream —he presents a reality where it isn’t possible for anyone to ‘make it’, where the Buchanans still treat you with scorn even if you’re just as wealthy. Gatsby’s dishonesty is ultimately a shallow one—try as he might, he just cannot fit in and win Daisy back.

Finally, we should consider the moral dimension —even though the wealthier socioeconomic classes enjoyed more lavish, luxurious lifestyles, Fitzgerald also argued that they were the most morally bankrupt. Money corrupted the wealthy to the point where they simply did not care about the lives of the poor, as seen in the Buchanans’ response to Myrtle’s death. Even Gatsby had to compromise his integrity and deal in shady business in order to get rich—he isn’t perfect either. Social stratification may look ostentatious and shiny on the outside, but the rich are actually portrayed as shallow and corrupt. 

A good essay on this novel will typically combine some of these dimensions and build a multilayered analysis. Stratification, love, wealth, morality—all of these big ideas can be broken down in terms of social, economic, cultural circumstances, so make sure to consider all angles when you write. 

Have a go at these prompts!

1. Nick is biased in his assessment of Gatsby—both of them are no better than the corrupt, wealthy Buchanans. Do you agree?

2. In The Great Gatsby , money is a stronger motivating factor than love. Do you agree?

3. Daisy Buchanan is more innocent than guilty—explore this statement with reference to at least 2 other characters. 

4. What does Fitzgerald say about happiness in The Great Gatsby ?

5. Is money the true antagonist of The Great Gatsby ?

6. The women of The Great Gatsby are all victims of a patriarchal society. To what extent do you agree? (Hint: are they all equally victimised?)

Challenge: According to Fitzgerald, what really lays underneath the façade of the Roaring 20s? Make reference to at least 2 symbols in The Great Gatsby . (Hint: façade = “an outward appearance that conceals a less pleasant reality” – think about things like colours, clothes, buildings etc.)

The Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response

How To Write A Killer Text Response Study Guide

How to embed quotes in your essay like a boss

How to turn your Text Response essays from average to A+

5 Tips for a mic drop worthy essay conclusion

The Importance of the Introduction

‍ The Complete Maus by Art Spiegelman is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Area of Study 1 - Text Response. For a detailed guide on Text Response, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response .

• Analysing Techniques in Visual Texts

1. Introduction

The Complete Maus is a graphic novel that depicts the story of Vladek Spiegelman , a Polish Jewish Holocaust survivor who experienced living in the ghettos and concentration camps during the Nazi regime. Vladek’s son, Art has transformed his story into a comic book through his interviews and encounters which interweaves with Art’s own struggles as the son of a Holocaust survivor, as well as the complex and difficult relationship with his father.

Survival is a key theme that is explored during Vladek’s experience in concentration camps and his post-Holocaust life. 

For example, Vladek reflects that “You have to struggle for life” and a means of survival was through learning to be resourceful at the concentration camps.

Resourcefulness is depicted through the physical items Vladek keeps or acquires, as well as through Vladek’s skills . For example, Vladek explains to Art that he was able to exploit his work constantly through undertaking the roles of a translator and a shoemaker in order to access extra food and clothing by being specially treated by the Polish Kapo .

He even wins over Anja’s Kapo to ensure that she would be treated well by not being forced to carry heavy objects. Vladek’s constant recounts and reflections symbolise survival, as Vladek was willing and able to use his skill set to navigate through the camp’s work system.

During the concentration camps, food and clothes also became a currency due to its scarcity and Vladek was insistent on being frugal and resourceful , which meant that he was able to buy Anja’s release from the Birkenau camp.

Although survival is a key theme, the graphic novel explores how Holocaust survivors in The Complete Maus grapple with their deep psychological scars. 

Many of those who survived the war suffered from depression and was burdened with ‘survivor’s guilt’. This can be seen through the character of Art’s mother, Anja, as 20 years after surviving the death camps, she commits suicide. After having lost so many of her friends, and families, she struggled to find a reason as to why she survived but others didn’t. Throughout the graphic novel, her depression is apparent. In a close-up shot, Anja appears harrowed and says that “I just don’t want to live”, lying on a striped sofa to convey a feeling of hopelessness as if she was in prison. Her ears are additionally drawn as drooped, with her hands positioned as if she was in prison in the context is that she must go to a sanatorium for her depression.

It is not only Anja’s guilt that is depicted, but also Art himself who feels partly responsible. Art feels that people think it is his fault as he says that “They think it’s MY fault!” and in one panel, Art is depicted behind bars and that “[He] has committed the perfect crime“ to illustrate that he feels a sense of guilt in that he never really was the perfect son. He believes he is partly responsible for her death, due to him neglecting their relationship. Spiegelman also gives insight to readers of a memory of his mother where she asks if he still loves her, he responds with a dismissive ‘sure’ which is a painful reminder of this disregard. 

Intergenerational Gap

Art constantly ponders how he is supposed to “make any sense out of Auschwitz’ if he “can’t even make any sense out of [his] relationship with [his] father”. As a child of Jewish refugees, Art has not had the same first-hand horrific experiences as his parents and in many instances struggles to relate to Vladek’s stubborn and resourceful tendencies. Art reflects on this whilst talking to Mala about when he would not finish everything his mother served, he would “argue til I ran to my room crying”. This emphasises how he didn’t understand wastage or frugality even from a very young age, unlike Vladek.

Spiegelman also conveys to readers his sense of frustration with Vladek where he feels like he is being treated like a child, not as an adult. For example, Art is shocked that Vladek would throw out one of Art’s coats and instead buy a new coat, despite Vladek’s hoarding because he is reluctant and feels shameful to let his son wear his “old shabby coat”. This act could be conveyed to readers that Vladek is trying to give Art a life he never had and is reluctant to let his son wear clothes that are ‘inappropriate’ in his eyes. However, from Art’s perspective, he “just can’t believe it” and does not comprehend his behaviour.

Since we're talking about themes, we've broken down a theme-based essay prompt (one of five types of essay prompts ) for you in this video:

3. Analysing Techniques in Visual Texts

The Complete Maus is a graphic novel that may seem daunting to analyse compared to a traditional novel. However, with countless panels throughout the book, you have the freedom to interpret certain visuals so long as you give reasoning and justification, guiding the teacher or examiner on what you think these visuals mean. Here are some suggested tips:

Focus on the Depiction of Characters

Spiegelman may have purposely drawn the eyes of the Jewish mice as visible in contrast to the unapparent eyes of the Nazis to humanise and dehumanise characters. By allowing readers to see the eyes of Jewish mice, readers can see the expressions and feelings of the character such as anger and determination . Effectively, we can see them as human characters through their eyes. The Nazis’ eyes, on the other hand, are shaded by their helmets to signify how their humanity has been corrupted by the role they fulfill in the Holocaust.

When the readers see their eyes, they appear sinister , with little slits of light. By analysing the depictions and expressions of characters, readers can deduce how these characters are intended to be seen.

Look at the Background in Each Panel

Throughout the graphic novel, symbols of the Holocaust appear consistently in the background. In one panel, Art’s parents, Anja and Vladek have nowhere to go, a large Swastika looms over them to represent that their lives were dominated by the Holocaust.

Even in Art’s life, a panel depicts him as working on his desk with dead bodies surrounding him and piling up to convey to the reader that the Holocaust still haunts him to this day, and feels a sense of guilt at achieving fame and success at their expense.

Thus, the constant representation of symbols from the Holocaust in Spiegelman’s life and his parents’ past in the panels’ background highlights how inescapable the Holocaust is emotionally and psychologically . 

Size of Panels

Some of the panels in the graphic novel are of different sizes which Spiegelman may have intended to emphasise the significance of certain turning points, crises or feelings . For example, on page 34, there is a disproportionate panel of Vladek and Anja passing a town, seeing the first signs of the Nazi regime compared to the following panels. All the mice seem curious and concerned, peering at the Nazi flag behind them. This panel is significant as it marks the beginning of a tragic regime that would dominate for the rest of their lives.

You should also pay close attention to how some panels have a tendency to overlap with each other which could suggest a link between events, words or feelings.

Although not specifically targeted at Text Response, 10 Things to Look for in Cartoons is definitely worth a read for any student studying a graphic novel!

Whether you consider yourself a Frankenstein expert, or someone who is a bit taken back by the density of the novel and Shelley’s writing, do not fret! Below I will outline 3 tips which, will hopefully give you a clearer perspective on how to approach writing on Frankenstein! Let’s get started!

1. ALWAYS TRY TO TALK ABOUT SHELLEY’S CONCERNS

Since the book was set during the Age of Enlightenment and the Romantic era, Shelley essentially used Frankenstein as a vessel to criticise and warn readers against many of the values upheld during her era. It’s therefore crucial that you address this!

The late 18th century and the first decades of the 19th century were exciting times for science and exploration. Shelley’s two main protagonists, Walton and Frankenstein, both passionately sough to discover what had previously been hidden. Walton wanted to be the first to find a passage through the Arctic Circle; Frankenstein wanted to be the first to create manmade life, to uncover the mysteries of Nature.  Both men claimed to be desirous of benefitting humankind but both wanted glory more. This obsession to win accolades for their discoveries will destroy Victor, and turn Walton for a while into a hard taskmaster over his crew.

Juxtaposed against these two characters is Henry Clerval. Clerval, too, has an inquiring mind but he also cares about humanity, family and friends. He represents the balanced human being who is sociable, compassionate, intelligent and loyal to his friends. Victor’s ability to reanimate the dead, to bring to life his gigantic Creature using the newly discovered electricity, makes him a genius but also a monster. In his inexperience he botches the work producing a hideous and terrifying creature with, ironically, initially all the virtues of the ideal man of he world. Repulsed by his amateurish handiwork, Victor abandons his creation, setting in place the vengeance that will unfold later.

Try to ground any response to Shelley’s text in the enormous enthusiasm for new discoveries and new geographic phenomena that attracted lavish praise for those who went where others feared to tread. It was this praise that drove Walton and Frankenstein to exceed reasonable expectations becoming reckless and careless of the consequences of their actions.

2. ALWAYS TRY TO DRAWS LINKS AND CONTRAST DIFFERENT CHARACTERS AND THEMES!

Walton, Frankenstein and the Creature are interconnected in so many ways – whether it be their isolation, ambition, desire for companionship, desire for vengeance or the Romantic values they share. I’ve also noted that it is also really easy to connect themes in Frankenstein as the tragic story-arc of the novel is built upon many different causes. What I mean by this is that there is a clearly define relationship between isolation, ambition and vengeance (and ultimately tragedy) in the sense that isolation is what led to the brewing of unchecked ambition which essentially causes the resultant tragedy.

Take Frankenstein for example: having left his loving family and friends, who provided him with love and companionship for Ingolstadt, there was no one to hold him back from his natural tendencies towards unchecked ambitions, leading him to creating the monster who out of spite towards society kills all of Frankenstein’s loved ones, leading them towards the desire for mutual destruction. Being able to see these links and draw them together will not only add depth to your writing but it also arms you with the ability to be able to deal with a wider array of prompts.

3. ALWAYS TRY TO LOOK FOR MORE NUANCED EXAMPLES AND DISCUSSIONS!

While Walton, Frankenstein and the Creature can be discussed incredibly thoroughly (and by all means go ahead and do it), but it is also very important to consider the novel as a whole and talk about, if not more thoroughly, on the minor characters. While characters such as the De Laceys, villagers and the rustic in the forest can be used to highlight the injustices brought upon the creature and people’s natural instincts of self preservation and prejudice, innocent characters such as Elizabeth and Justine can be used to emphasise the injustice of society and the consequences of unchecked ambition and isolation.

Henry Clerval (like previously mentioned) can be contrasted against Walton and his best friend Frankenstein to show that as long as we have a balanced lifestyle and companionship, ambition will not lead us to ruin. Characters such as the Turkish merchant can also have parallels drawn with Frankenstein in telling how our selfish desire and actions, born out of inconsideration for their consequences, can backfire with great intensity. Lastly the character of Safie (someone I used a lot in my discussions) can be compared and contrasted with the Creature to show the different treatment they receive despite both being “outsiders” to the De Laceys due to their starkly different appearances.

Mentioning these characters and utilising these contrasts can be monumental in showing your understanding of the novel and by extension, your English analytical ability.

[Video Transcription]

‍ Hey guys, I'm Lisa, welcome back to Lisa's Study Guides. Today, we're going to be talking about Frankenstein and breaking down an essay topic for it. So in the past, I've done plenty of videos looking at different types of essay topics and breaking them down by looking at keywords and then going into the body paragraphs and looking at those ideas. This time round, the takeaway message that I want you to leave with is understanding what types of evidence you should be using inside your body paragraphs. Specifically, I wanted to talk about literary devices or metalanguage. Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein uses so many literary devices that it's impossible to ignore. If you are somebody who is studying this text or other texts that you use and are heavily embedded with literary techniques, then it's really important that you don't just use dialogue as part of your quotes, but actually reading between the lines. I'll teach you on how it's not just about finding dialogue, which you include as quotes inside your body paragraphs, but reading between the lines, so looking at literary devices like metaphors, symbols, imagery, so let's get started. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein constitutes escaping critique of the prioritization of scientific advancement over human welfare and relationship. Dr. Frankenstein is fascinated with science and discovery, he is consumed with the idea of a new and more noble race by stitching up dead body parts from a cemetery. He feverishly works away at his experiment until one day the creature is born. Frankenstein is horrified at the living thing he has made and completely rejects the creature, leaving it without a parental figure. The creature is left alone to look after himself. He educates himself and on repeated occasions tries to approach people in society, however, is rejected every time because of his monstrous appearance. As a result, the creature becomes enraged at humanity and Frankenstein's unfair treatment towards him and consequently exacts revenge on Frankenstein and his family. The essay topic we'll be looking at today is, Our sympathies in this novel ultimately lie with the creature. Discuss. So in previous videos, we've looked at keywords, how to identify them and how to define them. Since it's pretty straightforward for this essay topic, I thought I would skip that part and then go into the more nitty gritty with the body paragraphs. But, if you are unfamiliar with these steps, then I'll link them in the card above and also in the description below so you can have a look at how I went ahead and did the keyword section in my planning, now back to the prompt. Unequivocally within Frankenstein, Shelley portrays sympathy as spread throughout the text through depicting the creature as innately human through his desire for relationship and the challenges he faces at the hands of the prejudice enlightenment society he's born into, Shelley elicits sympathy for his situation. However, through the notable absence of the female gender throughout the text, Shelley portrays those silent within society as most deserving of sympathy. So, with this in mind, here are the potential paragraphs in response to this prompt. Paragraph one, Shelley's depiction of the creature as innately human motivates support for his challenges at the hands of a prejudice society. The action of the creature to open his dull yellow eye, symbolic of his nature as a human being alongside a green wrinkled on his cheeks, with one hand stretched out, indicates his simple desire for paternal connection. Through constructing the creature's actions as innately human Shelley acts proleptically of the inequitable experiences the creature will experience throughout the structural architecture of the text. And through doing so, depicts his character as worthy of support. Similarly, through the metaphor of fire, Shelley explores the duality of progress and innovation of which the creature desires. The fire, one that gives light as well as heat, yet also causes a cry of pain, indicates the hardships of the creature in his isolation, whereby, his forced to withdraw from his desire for education. Upon viewing himself in a pool, the creature becomes "fully convinced that I was in reality [a] monster" with the consequent sensations of despondency and mortification granting the reader the opportunity to sympathize with the creature in order to indicate the intensely negative social prejudices that are inflicted upon the creature. So you can see that we've looked at symbols of the creature's nature and the metaphor of fire to support our topic sentence. Using literary techniques is what's going to make the difference between you and another student who might be saying the same thing. Why? Because when you look at literary devices, it means that you're reading just beyond the lines, just beyond what's in front of you. You're now introducing your own interpretation, so you're looking at fire and thinking about what that means in connection to the text, and why Mary Shelley would use the term of a fire and revolve her discussion around that. So let's see how we keep doing this in the next body paragraph. Paragraph two, Shelley indicates the significance of relationships as a key element of human nature that the creature is denied, motivating affinity from readers. In replacement of human relationships, the creature rather seeks comfort within the natural world. The metaphorical huge cloak that the creature takes refuge within indicates this, illustrative of an ecosystem, the forest allows the creator to surround himself with life. The subsequent attempts to "imitate the pleasant songs of the birds" reveals the desperate urge of the creature for companionship as he is abandoned by the paternal relationship represented by Victor Frankenstein, which forms a core of human relationships. Again, here we've discussed the metaphorical huge cloak and its connection with the forest, I strongly encourage you to have the goal of discussing at least one literary device per body paragraph. And no, there is no such thing as talking about too many literary devices because it's really just about whether or not your argument is concise and whether or not you're backing that up with evidence. Paragraph three. However, it is Shelley's depiction of the submissive female sex within Frankenstein that becomes most deserving of sympathy. Each female character is characterized as passive, disposable, and they're serving a utilitarian function, namely as a channel of action for the male characters within the text. Notably, the complete lack of absence of Margaret Saville, functioning only as an audience for Walton's letters exemplifies this. Margaret's role within the text is simply to enable Walton to relay the story of Frankenstein and as such were the most necessary character of the texts whilst the most distant. This ironic dichotomy enables Shelley to exemplify the difficult role of the female within society, arising sympathy from the readership. Here, even the purposeful emission of a character is discussed as a language technique. So, this type of literary device definitely tops the cake because you're literally looking at what's not even there. That's definitely reading between the lines. Frankenstein is a very complex novel, and sometimes that's what makes it a difficult text to study. But, it lends itself to many unique interpretations and it's heavily dressed with heaps of literary devices or metalanguage, however you want to call it. So, that's what makes it an absolutely fantastic text for high school students to study. If you wanted to find out more on how to nail a Frankenstein essay, then I'll link you to my blog just down below, because there are definitely more tips there to help you excel in this particular text. Thank you so much for watching, and especially even if you're not studying this text, I hope you've been able to take something away from this video. And I'm confident that you have because talking about literary devices is definitely a topic that isn't necessarily the fore front of discussion in classrooms, and it's something that a lot of people struggle with. So, I hope you are able to walk away with a new goal in sight in order to improve your English essays. So, I will see you guys next time, thank you so much for joining me, see you guys soon. Bye!

Updated 14/12/2020

• Definition of Metalanguage
• Examples of Metalanguage in VCE English

Although it appears on criteria sheets, many students never really understand the term  metalanguage . Strangely, it is something that is rarely addressed in classrooms. While the word may be foreign to you, rest assured that metalanguage is not an entirely new concept you have to learn. How come? Because you have been unknowingly using metalanguage since the very beginning of high school.

It's a word that is more and more frequently thrown around as you get more advanced in high school. And, it's something that becomes tremendously important in your final year of high school, because the more you include metalanguage discussion in your essays, the more intricate your discussion becomes and the more unique it also becomes.

So, let's find out exactly what metalanguage is.

2. Definition of Metalanguage

Metalanguage is  language that describes language .

So, instead of maybe using the word, "He was sad ", we might say something like, "He felt sorrowful " . The choice in words changes the meaning that is interpreted by the reader, just slightly, but there is still a difference. So, when it comes to studying texts or reading articles, and trying to analyze what the author is trying to do, we look at metalanguage as a way to help give us insight into the ideas that they're trying to portray.

The simplest way to explain this is to focus on part 3 of the English exam – Language Analysis. In Language Analysis , we look at the author’s writing and label particular phrases with persuasive techniques such as: symbolism, imagery or personification. Through our description of the way an author writes (via the words ‘symbolism’, ‘imagery’ or ‘personification’), we have effectively used language that describes language.

Now, if we look at the bigger picture, our analysis of an author’s language can be applied to Text Response, and even Reading and Comparing. To learn more about why metalanguage is important in Text Response, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response . Otherwise, for those interested in Comparative, head over to our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

3. Examples of Metalanguage in VCE English

• Grammar and punctuation
• Foreshadowing

For example

• Achilles is  characterised as a foetus, for his position is ‘chin down, shoulders hunched’ as though he is inside a womb. ( Ransom , David Malouf)
• In the first scene of All About Eve* , Mankiewicz foreshadows Eve's sinful and regretful actions, as a sorrowful expression is emphasized as she accepts her award

As you can see, the word 'foreshadows' pushes us in a new direction. Rather than just saying what has already happened or telling your teacher or examiner something that they already know, it forces you to actually analyze what's in front of you and to offer your own unique interpretation of why this metalanguage or why this technique has been used.

*If you happen to be studying this text, check out our All About Eve Character Profiles .

• Mise-en-scene
• Camera angles

When Terry leaves Friendly’s bar, the thick fog symbolises his clouded moral judgement as he decides whether he should remain ‘D and D’, or become a ‘rat’. ( On the Waterfront , Elia Kazan)

• Stage direction
• The miniature set Zac creates is designed with a white backdrop, symbolising his desire to wipe away reality since he ‘can’t stand real things'. ( Cosi , Louis Nowra)

In Medea , the motif of animals emphasizes the inhuman and bestial nature of Medea, highlighting how she defies natural norms.

This student has actually given us an analysis of why animal motifs are used. And that is to highlight how Medea defies natural norms, because of her inhuman and bestial nature.

4. Conclusion

As indicated earlier, you should be familiar with many, if not all the terms mentioned above. Take note that some metalanguage terms are specific to a writing form , such as camera angle for films. If you need help learning new terms, we have you covered - be sure to check out our metalanguage word banks for books and our metalanguage wordbank for films .

As you discuss themes or characters, you should try and weave metalanguage throughout your body paragraphs . The purpose of this criteria is to demonstrate your ability to understand how the author uses language to communicate his or her meaning. The key is to remember that the author’s words or phrases are always chosen with a particular intention – it is your job to investigate why the author has written a text in a particular way.

Hey guys, welcome back to Lisa's Study Guides. Today, I'm really excited to talk to you about metalanguage. Have you guys ever heard of metalanguage before? It's a word that is more and more frequently thrown around as you get more advanced in high school. And, it's something that becomes tremendously important in your final year of high school, because the more you include metalanguage discussion in your essays, the more intricate your discussion becomes and the more unique it also becomes. So, let's find out exactly what is metalanguage. Simply put, metalanguage just means language that analyses language. When authors write anything, we make certain decisions when it comes to writing. So, instead of maybe using the word, "He was sad", we might say something like, "He felt sorrowful". The choice in words changes the meaning that is interpreted by the reader, just slightly, but there is still a difference. So, when it comes to studying texts or reading articles and trying to analyse what the author is trying to do, we look at metalanguage as a way to help give us insight into the ideas that they're trying to portray.

Metalanguage comes in really handy, especially if you're somebody who struggles with retelling the story - I have a video on how to avoid retelling the story , which you can watch. Metalanguage essentially takes you to the next level. It prevents you from just saying what happened, and forces you into actually looking at how the ideas and themes are developed by the author through the words that they choose to use. So, let's have a look at a couple of examples to give you a better idea. I'm going to show you two examples. One uses metalanguage and one doesn't, and you'll see how a massive difference in how the student understands the text is really clear.

Number one, foreshadowing.

In the first scene of All About Eve , Mankiewicz emphasizes Eve's sorrowful expression as she accepts her award.

In the first scene of All About Eve , Mankiewicz foreshadows Eve's sinful and regretful actions, as a sorrowful expression is emphasized as she accepts her award. As you can see, as soon as we put in the word foreshadows, it pushes us in a new direction. Rather than just saying what has already happened or telling your teacher or examiner something that they already know, it forces you to actually analyse what's in front of you and to offer your own unique interpretation of why this metalanguage or why this technique has been used. So, in this case, it's foreshadowing. ‍ Let's have a look at another one, motif.

In Medea , Euripides commonly refers to animals when describing Medea's actions and temperament.

See how, in the first example, it was really just telling you what we might already know through just reading the book, but when it comes to the second example, this student has actually given us an analysis of why animal motifs are used. And that is to highlight how Medea defies natural norms, because of her inhuman and bestial nature. So, those are some examples of metalanguage. There are so many more different types of metalanguage out there...

Don't forget to also check out Our Ultimate Guide to Oral Presentations for everything you need to know for Oral Presentations.

Here are over 20 Oral Presentation Ideas for you if you're presenting a speech on Australian issues in the media.

• Should gay couples have the same adoption rights as straight couples?
• Should businesses be required to have a sex quota?
• Should political parties be required to run a certain percentage of women candidates?
• Gender workplace diversity
• Treatment of refugees on Manus Island
• Should there be a temporary ban on all immigration into Australia?
• MP citizenship
• Should the government classify Bitcoin as a legal currency?
• Homelessness in Australia
• Obesity in Australia
• Sexual harassment in the TV/movie/hollywood industry
• Should gender identity be added to anti-discrimination laws?
• Should universities provide ‘trigger warnings’ and ‘safe spaces’ for students?
• Should workplaces provide ‘trigger warnings’ and ‘safe spaces’ for staff?
• Informed consent with online data
• Religious freedom
• Same sex marriage freedom
• Adani coalmine
• Political donations
• Penalty rates in Australia
• Wage theft in Australia
• Indigenous recognition in the constitution
• Should we invest in public interest journalism?

See last year's Oral Presentation Ideas here . You might also be interested in Advice for A+ oral presentations here too! Best of luck!

Get exclusive weekly advice from Lisa, only available via email.

Power-up your learning with free essay topics, downloadable word banks, and updates on the latest VCE strategies.

latest articles

Check out our latest thought leadership on enterprise innovation., vce english unit 3, area of study 2: creating texts - what is it.

Breaking Down Themes & Key Quotes in The Erratics by Vicki Laveau-Harvie

Developing Interpretations SAC Guide: Interpreting Alias Grace

Keep in touch

Have questions? Get in touch with us here - we usually reply in 24 business hours.

Unfortunately, we won't be able to answer any emails here requesting personal help with your study or homework here!

Copyright © Lisa's Study Guides. All Rights Reserved. The VCAA does not endorse and is not affiliated with Lisa's Study Guides or vcestudyguides.com. The VCAA provides the only official, up to date versions of VCAA publications and information about courses including the VCE. VCE® is a registered trademark of the VCAA.

03 9028 5603 Call us: Monday to Friday between 3pm - 6pm or leave us a message and we'll call you back! Address: Level 2 Little Collins St Melbourne 3000 VIC

• Mar 28, 2020

Comparing Arthur Miller's The Crucible and Rosalie Ham’s The Dressmaker

Updated: Jul 10, 2022

This post is a great read for anybody, but it will be especially intriguing for:

Teachers of Unit Four VCE English, Area of Study One

Students studying these texts as a part of VCE Reading and Comparing Texts

Those who enjoy either of the texts and would like to read something new.

What happens when our behaviour is tied more to the group we are a part of and less about our own desires?

How is human behaviour changed when people are aware that every action will be judged by those around them?

What is it within a society that can lead people to resort to absurd or abhorrent behaviour?

Contextually separated by centuries and continents, The Dressmaker and The Crucible find common ground in their exploration of the most awful side of human behaviour and the pressure felt by individuals within a society that sets a strict moral and social code. Students will find similarities in the isolation of Dungatar and Salem, as well as the herd mentality of their citizens. What may prove more challenging however, will be teasing out the differences between these texts and their comments on how individuals can be led to panic, fear, jealousy and denial.

The people of Dungatar are introduced in a manner which some students may find disorienting and difficult to grasp. However, as the novel continues, the interactions between the townspeople and their connections to each other are made more clear. Gradually, we begin to see them as a collective through the social events and the eisteddfod, as well as through the rejection of Tilly. By outlining each character’s personal experiences before bringing them together, Ham is able to convey the lack of privacy and the unspoken open secrets known by the people. Farrat refers to them as his “flock”, however other terms such as ‘mob’ and ‘herd’ may be more applicable in certain sections.

Tilly’s reemergence exposes the swift and lasting justice of the rural community as the townspeople won’t forget the past and continue to ostracise Tilly. Ham’s description of “The Hill” and the tip enhance this rejection as it is made clear that the people of Dungatar find comfort and solidarity within their tight knit community. The rejection and hatred opens an avenue for the venting of frustrations and the people are able to use Tilly and Molly as a scapegoat for all of the pressures they experience at the hands of their fellow townspeople and those within their own families. The unspoken acceptance of violence, control and abuse is tempered by their lashing out at the ones they reject - promiscuity becoming a sin that they can all stand in judgement of in order to help them cope with their own failings.

Further huddling for comfort can be seen as Tilly begins dressing them in beautiful gowns. Ham amplifies the group setting by commenting that the women of Dungatar had been “renovated” and the reader now sees them as a collective. The period of excitement for the town is temporary, as the social gatherings and delight in wearing such beautiful gowns culminate in a disastrous rendition of Macbeth. By the novel’s end, most characters have succumbed to the pressures of their personal lives or the expectations of those around them. The “costumes” and the gowns designed to work with their flaws are not enough for them to project who they wish to be in the eyes of others and both the social fabric, as well as the physical buildings of the town are destroyed.

Miller’s play also examines the tendency for individuals to seek confidence within the strength of a group. Similarly to the people of Dungatar, the families of Salem experience a period of immense pressure which heightens existing feuds and creates division amongst a terrified populace. In a scramble to find meaning for the hardships they’ve experienced, or to bolster their own sense of righteousness, the people of Salem turn on eachother and seek a scapegoat as a release for all of their frustrations.

It is worth examining the codes followed by both groups and the social structures that keep these in place. The theocracy that dominates the town of Salem is strong and can be felt by all of those within the township as they conform to the word of the church and collectively fear all that exists outside of Salem in the “virgin forest...the devil’s last preserve”. This strict moral code is much more prevalent in the daily lives of the people of Salem, yet it holds similar bonds to the code adhered to by the people of Dungatar. In the absence of a single religion or ideal to all fall behind, the characters from The Dressmaker still rigidly conform to the conservative values of 1950s Australia. The sins of the people are covered over, hidden from view or subtly ignored. As Molly points out to her daughter, “Everybody knows everything about everyone but no one ever tittle-tattles because then some else’ll tell of them. But you don’t matter – it’s open slather on outcasts.”

As readers, we can analyse the manner in which both Miller and Ham allow us to be removed from the people of their texts as we are disgusted, amused or distrubed by the goings on in Salem and Dungatar. Miller points out that “one can only pity them all” and when we view his characters in this manner, the play becomes a prism in which we can sympathise with the fear and hysteria and see how such strict expectations of behaviour and conscience can lead to such awful outcomes. In a similar manner, by the time the bus drives back to a scorched Dungatar, the reader views the residents as a collective of hypocritical, absurd individuals who have buckled under the pressure of social expectation and the struggle to conform to a society so full of expectation and judgement.

Where we can find differences in these texts is in the source of the pressure that leads to their downfall, as well as their ability or inability to heed the words of those who hold authority. The people of Dungatar are torn apart by their own actions and the pressures they place upon those close to them and others within the town. Through revenge, aspiration to prove one’s self and jealousy, the people of the town are led down a path of destruction. This pressure not only exists in the projection of an image towards the rest of the society, but also by the expectations (some absurd, some abhorrently evil) placed upon people by those in their own homes. The desire to be something more and to outdo rivals leads to an eruption of emotion amongst the people as the novel concludes. Amongst the destruction, Farrat stands hopeless as he is unable to save the town or it’s population from themselves and what they have created.

Whilst there is most definitely pressure within Salem and its households, the arrival of Hale, Danforth and the other judges introduces a dynamic of authority which aims to cleanse the town of evil. Under such a microscope, its people panic and hysteria ensues. The people find comfort in each other, however they succumb to a mob mentality that sees this validation come from the accusations of others and the blaming of all evil and wrongdoing upon those who are outside of their mob. The people’s trust in authority and fear of Danforth’s judgement leads them to become such a pakicked mob. Their adherence to the authority and fear of others can be seen differently to the people of Dungatar who have a leader in Sergeant Farrat who espouses messages of tolerance and love. Tragically, the people of the country town are completely deaf to his message and opt to continue in a cycle of hatred and jealousy. As Farrat aims to protect his “flock”, the people can not, or will not hear his sermon and their behaviour proves to be their own undoing.

Taking a step back and viewing Salem and Dungatar as stages with tragic characters playing out their lives can open us up to a critical understanding of the dangers of a herd mentality and why people seek comfort in the company of some and the exclusion of others. To see the fractured societies and the tangible and intangible destruction of the town and village allows students to analyse what led to such destruction. Whilst there are many similarities within these texts, the richest analysis and comparison will come from unpacking the differences in what leads people to act in such hysterical or plainly evil ways.

Ben Taylor - The English Lab

We’ve got lots more to say about this pair!

Our Reading and Creating workshops have finished for this term, but are still available as webinar replays. Two hours of great PD in your own time, at your own pace for $120!

Head to the resources section to purchase the booklet and receive the link for the webinar recording.

Here’s what some of our attendees of the live webinars had to say:

"A really practical-based session, provision of effective strategies and teacher support on how to implement these to get the best out of every student. This has to be the best Comparative PD yet! Highly recommend it!"

- Caitlin, Elisabeth Murdoch College

"These resources feel immediately useful, and collated in a meaningful sequence...I feel as thought I could confidently give the the workbook to use as the 'unit plan'. It's a huge weight off my shoulders and a wonderful way to begin a unit."

"Being in a regional area meant being able to access this online was actually a real bonus. I also really appreciate the fact that I can go back over the presentation again as I need to."

- Kath, King's College

In this presentation, teachers will be provided with a booklet of resources which push students to think about the texts in a conceptual manner. You'll be introduced to new ideas and points of comparison, before being taken through worked examples which utilise lessons about writing succinct, insightful and comparative pieces.

Recent Posts

Understanding An Open Letter to Doubting Thomas - Writing About Play

Understanding All That We Know of Dreaming - Writing About Play

Understanding Harrison Bergeron - Writing About Protest

Comentarios

An Ultimate Guide to Comparing The Crucible and The Dressmaker

Whilst Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and Rosalind Ham’s The Dressmaker diverge in their structure, form, setting and focus, they share a thematic exploration of social oppression, hypocrisy and power. Miller’s allegorical play satirises the imposition of power of authoritarian regimes, namely, the theocracy governing Salem and the McCarthy government. Oppression in Dungatar, in contrast, is not institutionalised. Social conventions and customs are set by community members; the punishment for social deviants is usually marginalisation and ostracisation in Ham’s world, whereas sanctions for violations in Miller’s world manifest more violently - in the forms of execution and corporal punishment. Ham’s focus is therefore on the socially repressive world of Dungatar, together with the role of religious bigotry and prejudice in coercing disenfranchised individuals.

Both texts criticise the disproportionate maltreatment of outcasts, who are more susceptible to institutionalised and social execution. The experiences of marginalised characters are depicted vividly in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker , with some characterised by a lack of agency. However, the authors do not see them as mere victims defeated by society, but empowered individuals with the power to change. Miller’s protagonist, John Proctor, and Ham’s eponymous ‘Dressmaker’, Tilly Dunnage, both contribute to the disintegration of their respective corrupt societies. Both Salem and Dungatar, despite the differences in the endings, become purified, with the courts losing their power in the former case and the town burnt to the ground in the latter.

Notes: If you enjoy this blog, don't miss out on our upcoming $5 Crucible & Dressmaker lecture by Tara Niemes (50 in English) to learn how to write a perfect scorer in the exam. See bottom corner of this page!

Both Dungatar, in Ham’s The Dressmaker , and Salem, in Miller’s The Crucible , are insular communities governed by strict systems of values and norms. These rigid societies are challenged by unexpected external forces: the arrival of witchcraft in The Crucible and Tilly Dunnage’s return in The Dressmaker. Yet, these external events do not catalyse social disintegration themselves but test these communities' strength and unity.

Religion and Superstition:

Religion serves as a critical plot device in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker , yet the texts depict the impact of faith and superstition in distinct ways. Miller refers to the witch hunt in Salem as a "perverse manifestation" of "panic," stemming from the town's stringent religious laws, which create a stark dichotomy - one is either with the church or against it. This dichotomous religious framework underscores the hollowness of such religious tenets. In contrast, Ham explores the perils of blind reliance on religion. Ham illustrates this through Mr Almanac, who staunchly believes that “all that’s needed is God’s forgiveness,” refusing to seek medical help for his ailing wife, Irma. This tragic blindness to the practical needs of life underscores the pernicious impact of unquestioning faith.

Notes: Religion also impacts characters’ internalisation of guilt.

In the maelstrom of mass hysteria and fear where "vengeance walks Salem," Miller focuses on the burden of guilt experienced by those with true humanity and conscience. This internal guilt and shame have a greater impact on a person than external judgments. Characters who cannot forgive themselves often suffer more, as they must wrestle with their conscience. Miller exemplifies this through the character of John Proctor, a man tormented by internal guilt due to his affair with Abigail. His guilt is so immense that he declares he will “cut off [his] hand before [he’ll] reach for [her] again”. His internal struggle manifests in denial, as he attempts to convince himself that he and Abigail “never touched”. However, his guilt only leads to heightened tension in his relationship with his wife, Elizabeth. Proctor's self-judgment eventually pushes him to blame Elizabeth, unable to recognise that the “magistrate sits in [his] heart that judges [him]”. This powerful self-realization eventually drives him to public confession, and in doing so, he finds emancipation from his guilt and shame, transforming his pain into altruistic action.

Miller's The Crucible contrasts with Ham's The Dressmaker , where religion and superstition become conduits for self-blame. The protagonist, Tilly, becomes a character consumed by internal guilt following the tragic death of her son, Pablo. This guilt is manifested through physical ailments, a “feverish nausea” which “churn[s] in her stomach”. Tilly endures the “sour people” of Dungatar as a form of self-inflicted “penance”. But unlike Proctor, who is guilty of his sin, Tilly imposes unwarranted blame upon herself. However, she eventually realizes her innocence, symbolised through a heartfelt confession shared with Molly, her mother. This realisation leads to Tilly's liberation from her guilt, metaphorically represented by the fire that obliterates Dungatar, thereby rejecting the unwarranted guilt that dominated her life. 

While Proctor's redemption comes from acknowledging his sin, Tilly's freedom comes from recognising her innocence, highlighting the different approaches to guilt in both texts. Thus, both Miller and Ham explore the conflicting attitudes towards internal guilt which pervade human nature. They celebrate the freedom that comes with the cleansing of guilt, albeit achieved through distinct narrative routes.

Gender Roles:

Both Miller and Ham unpack stereotypical gender roles within their narratives, although the focus on gender may be more explicit in The Dressmaker than it is in The Crucible.

In The Crucible , the era's Puritanical ideals uphold patriarchal expectations, resulting in men, like John Proctor, being celebrated despite their flawed behaviours. Proctor is revered and even feared, despite his acts of lechery, gaslighting, and relations with a young employee, violence, and threats. These potentially misogynistic undertones could be influenced by Miller's personal context, as he had an affair in the 1950s, and Proctor might reflect some aspects of his own life. Likewise, Evan Pettyman, a figure of authority, enjoys the societal perks of his gender. Despite not being the primary breadwinner, he maintains dominance over the women in his life. Lesley Muncan similarly fits the heteronormative mould by marrying Mona and suppressing his self-expression. Sergeant Farrat initially conforms to societal expectations, concealing his cross-dressing habits, but eventually discloses his true self, symbolising the "clock set wrong".

Women like Elizabeth, who conform, suffer silently in the face of societal expectations. She blames herself for the "wintry house," implying the belief that women are their husband's property and are responsible for their happiness. She is depicted as a dutiful wife, her minimal responses to Proctor's conversation illustrating the societal expectation for women to suppress their feelings and opinions. Similarly, Mona's marriage to Lesley reflects her conformity to societal norms, as does her tendency to partake in gossip and slut-shaming.

However, women who defy societal norms experience liberation and empowerment. Abigail is portrayed as seductive and deceitful, with an “endless capacity for dissembling” facilitated by her feminine beauty. She subverts the expectations of her gender by leveraging her beauty and manipulative skills to rise to the position of power – where the crowd “parts like the sea for Israel” as she walks past. She openly defies societal norms through her lies, sexual behaviour, and occult practices in the forest, using these transgressions to expose the pretence of Salem. This parallels Tilly's refusal to conform to societal norms allowing her to navigate her own destiny, underlining Ham's subversion of traditional gender roles.

Ham further challenges heteronormative expectations through the secret lesbian relationship of Nancy and Ruth, hidden due to societal pressures. Their plight represents the silent struggle of those who could not conform to heteronormative norms during this era. In sum, Miller's work demonstrates the patriarchal norms of the Puritan era while Ham uses her narrative to challenge and subvert traditional gender roles.

Social Status & Injustices:

Both texts delve into the profound influence of social roles, underscoring the vulnerability of society's 'easy targets' such as women, people of colour, and those with mental illnesses. Ham demonstrates this societal injustice through the character Molly, who discerns that "it's open slather on outcasts". Similarly, the McSwineys, living near a rubbish tip, are metaphorically positioned as the town's outcasts.

Parallel to Ham's portrayal, Miller showcases the character of Tituba, a woman of colour and a slave, who faces discrimination and mistreatment. Parris dismissively orders, "Out of my sight!", highlighting her low social standing. The narrator notes how "her slave sense has warned her that, as always, trouble in this house eventually lands on her back", further demonstrating the disproportionate blame and punishment she receives. Sarah Goody, an older, impoverished woman, also endures societal persecution due to her vulnerable position.

The protagonists, Proctor and Tilly, serve as the paradox within their societies. Proctor remains rooted in his Christian ideals, in contrast to the hypocritical society that claims to uphold the same virtues. He becomes the sacrificial lamb, bearing the brunt of societal injustice to expose the flawed system. Tilly, an outcast in her community, follows a similar trajectory.

The roles of Danforth and Farrat provide a juxtaposition of how those tasked with upholding justice can fail to do so. Danforth subverts his duty by actively encouraging injustice, while Farrat, though passive in his neglect, offers some support to Tilly when she falls victim to social injustice.

However, not all perpetrators face justice. The narrative depicts a concerning impunity: Reverend Parris and Danforth maintain their powerful positions despite their actions. Yet, this is not absolute. There are instances where justice catches up with those evading it, like Evan Pettyman who, after evading punishment for his misdeeds for decades, is eventually killed by Marigold. Similarly, Parris experiences a fall from grace, losing his wealth and reputation.

Moreover, the citizens of Dungatar face collective retribution when their houses are burned down, leaving them uninsured. This contrasts with the reality of The Crucible , where not everyone faces justice, reflecting the difference between the fictional nature of both The Dressmaker and the historical realism of The Crucible . Hence, both texts offer incisive critiques of societal norms, exploring the unjust consequences of societal roles and the varying degrees of justice served.

Hysteria and Reputation:

Both Dungatar and Salem are insular communities, governed by a strict system of values and norms. The creation of chaos in both texts is contemporaneous with the intrusion of unexpected external forces: the arrival of witchcraft in The Crucible and Tilly’s arrival in The Dressmaker . However, these events do not catalyse social disintegration themselves but merely put the community's strength and unity to a test. 

Betty’s affliction, caused by the “Devil’s touch”, causes paranoia and prompts irrational responses. As Salem’s social order is founded upon religious bigotry, the court resorted to dogmatic approaches in resolving the matter. Miller shows that the community is very susceptible to deceit, especially if the false remarks align with their beliefs, and how such a tendency paves way for opportunism. The truthful words of social outcasts are disregarded, whereas the malignant accusations of conformists are valued by the court. Division is created as a result of Salem’s mob mentality.

Tilly’s trauma is caused by the Pettymans’ baseless accusations and attribution of blame. Her arrival reminds them of their mistreatment of an innocent child, a past characterised by bullying, abuse and corruption. When the “bastard” returns, the community’s true self emerges, as exemplified through the prejudice, and at a later part, jealousy manifested.

Miller’s didactic American realist style allows him to depict the parallels between the contagious spreads of unfounded accusations in the repressive system of Salem’s theocracy and McCarthyism. 

Conclusion:

"The Crucible" and "The Dressmaker" offer profound insights into societal norms, power dynamics, and the role of religion and gender. Through their vivid narratives, they expose the pervasive influence of hysteria and reputation in shaping societal behaviors. Importantly, they depict the experiences of marginalized characters not as victims defeated by society, but as empowered individuals capable of instigating social change.

TLDR & FAQs:

How does The Dressmaker relate to The Crucible?

The Dressmaker by Rosalie Ham and The Crucible by Arthur Miller, though distinct in their settings and plots, share numerous thematic similarities.

• Social Hierarchy and Marginalisation: Both novels depict close-knit communities characterized by stringent social hierarchies, where nonconformity is met with hostility. In The Dressmaker , Tilly is ostracized due to her mother's reputation and her own accused crime. Similarly, in The Crucible , characters such as Tituba and Sarah Good are marginalised due to their race and socioeconomic status.
• Abuse of Power: Power dynamics play a significant role in both narratives. Figures like Judge Danforth misuse their authority, leading to wrongful executions in the Salem witch trials. Likewise, characters like Evan Pettyman in Ham's text exploit their positions for personal gain, resulting in an oppressive and unjust environment.
• Guilt and Vengeance: These novels also delve into the human experiences of guilt, vengeance, and redemption. John Proctor grapples with his guilt over his affair with Abigail, leading to a tragic end. Tilly in The Dressmaker , on the other hand, deals with guilt over her supposed crime in childhood, ultimately finding a form of redemption through her fiery vengeance on the town that ostracized her.
• Hypocrisy: Both Miller and Ham criticize the hypocrisy prevalent within their societies. The puritanical society of Salem, despite its claims of piety, is depicted as deeply flawed and hypocritical. Similarly, the outwardly respectable community of Dungatar is revealed to be morally corrupt underneath its facade.

What is the key message of The Dressmaker?

• Critique of Small-town Hypocrisy: The novel harshly critiques small-town mentality and the dangerous consequences of unchecked gossip and hypocrisy. Dungatar, the setting of the book, appears charming and simple on the surface but is ridden with secrets, lies, and injustice.
• Power of Redemption and Self-discovery: The protagonist, Tilly, returns to her hometown seeking personal redemption for a crime she was accused of in her childhood. In the process, she embarks on a journey of self-discovery, realizing her worth and skill, which she uses to transform the town's women and later to exact her revenge.
• Consequences of Prejudice: The narrative underlines the lasting impact of discrimination and unjust treatment on individuals. Tilly's ostracization has deep psychological effects, which she only begins to resolve after many years.
• Power of Female Empowerment: Despite being set in a patriarchal society, the book emphasizes the power of female resilience. Tilly's character is a symbol of defiance against gender norms and expectations.
• Cycle of Vengeance: The novel also explores the destructive cycle of vengeance. Tilly's quest for justice leads to the devastation of Dungatar. This suggests that revenge, while cathartic, can have harmful consequences.

What is the key message of The Crucible?

• Hysteria and Fear Can Lead to Destruction: A central message of the play is that mass hysteria, when fueled by fear and suspicion, can lead to irrational behaviors, false accusations, and ultimately devastating consequences. The witch trials, in this case, serve as a symbol of how societal panic can destruct a community.
• Importance of Reputation: The play heavily emphasizes the importance people place on their reputations in a society. Characters like John Proctor and Rebecca Nurse are overly concerned about their public image, which significantly influences their decisions. However, the message is that the truth and moral integrity should be valued over public reputation.
• Integrity and Personal Honor: Perhaps the most potent message is the emphasis on personal integrity. John Proctor chooses to die rather than sign a false confession, showing that he values his personal honor over his life. This act illustrates the theme that maintaining one's integrity is more important than preserving one's life.
• Critique of McCarthyism: The Crucible was also written as an allegory for the anti-communist hysteria during the McCarthy era in America, drawing parallels between the Salem witch trials and the Red Scare. Miller's play carries a warning about the dangers of allowing fear to override reason and justice.

Related posts

An Ultimate Guide to False Claims of Colonial Thieves 

An Ultimate Guide to Oedipus The King

An Ultimate Guide to Chronicle of a Death Foretold

An Ultimate Guide to The Memory Police

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, most important themes in the crucible, analyzed.

Book Guides

The Crucible remains a staple of high school English because it is rich in themes that are consistently relevant to human beings regardless of time period. But these themes aren't always easy to explain or dissect in the context of the play, and they can be even harder to develop into essays. Read on for an overview of what a theme is, a list of important themes in The Crucible with specific act-by-act details, and a summary of how to use this information in your essays and other assignments.  

What’s a Theme? Why Are Themes Important?

Before I get into the nitty-gritty of how  The Crucible  themes are expressed, let's do a quick overview of what themes are and why they matter. A theme is a central topic that is addressed by a work of literature. Themes can be expressed in many different ways. In the case of a play like The Crucible , themes are revealed mainly through the dialogue of the characters. They're also revealed though events in the plot. 

Themes tell us what the purpose of the work is. What is the writer attempting to convey to the viewer? The Crucible 's themes have lent the play artistic longevity because they're more or less universal to the human experience across time.  If you hope to write an awesome essay on  The Crucible , you should have extensive knowledge of its themes. If you can show that you understand the themes of a work of literature, you've clearly mastered the material on a deeper level.  In the next few sections, I'll take a look at a group of broad themes in  The Crucible , including irony, hysteria, reputation, and power.

Theme 1: Irony

First off, what is irony? Many people are under the impression that irony is just when something happens that you don't expect (or that you really hoped wouldn't happen). In reality, true irony only happens when a situation is the exact opposite of what you would expect.  The classic example of an incorrect use of irony is in Alanis Morisette's song "Ironic" when she says that "rain on your wedding day" is an example of irony. Well, it's not. Sure, you don't expect or want rain, but it's not the polar opposite of getting married. A real example of irony would be if two married guests got into a fight about going to your wedding that ended in their divorce.

Irony abounds throughout The Crucible  as  characters who believe they are combating the Devil’s handiwork actually perform it themselves.   The ruthlessness with which the suspected witches are treated is aimed at purifying Salem, but it achieves the opposite outcome. The town slips further and further into chaos and paranoia until it reaches a point of total devastation.  As Reverend Hale says to Danforth, “Excellency, there are orphans wandering from house to house; abandoned cattle bellow on the highroads, the stink of rotting crops hangs everywhere, and no man knows when the harlots’ cry will end his life - and you wonder yet if rebellion’s spoke?” (Act 4, pg. 121).

The court's attempts to preserve Puritan morality by arresting and executing accused witches ironically lead to the removal of the most virtuous people from society. These people are the only ones who refuse to throw out false accusations or lie about involvement in witchcraft, so they find themselves condemned (this is the fate of Rebecca Nurse). This means that much of the population that remains is comprised of the power-hungry, the selfish, and the cowardly. 

There are several ironies in Act 1 that center around Abigail Williams. In her conversation with John, Abigail claims that he helped her realize all the lies she was told by two-faced people in Salem who only publicly adhere to the conventions of respectable society (pg. 22).  The irony is that, in the face of John’s rejection, Abigail turns around and creates her own lies soon after that give her increased control over the society she resents.  She puts on a fake front to get what she wants, ultimately creating a persona that’s even worse than that of the hypocrites she criticizes.   Abigail’s many deceptions are sometimes laughably ironic as she chastises others for lying even as she is spinning falsehoods.  In this act, she yells “Don’t lie!” at Tituba immediately before she tells some of the most damning lies of the play accusing Tituba of witchcraft (“ She comes to me while I sleep; she’s always making me dream corruptions!” pg. 41).

Hale also makes some unintentionally ironic statements in Act 1 when he begins his investigation.  He claims that they must not jump to conclusions based on superstition in their investigation of Betty’s affliction.  Hale is convinced that a scientific inquiry based only on facts and reality can be conducted to detect a supernatural presence. This is ironic because   searching for "the Devil's marks" as the potential cause of an ailment is inherently superstitious.

Once the accusations begin, Parris initiates an ironic thought process that persists throughout The Crucible: “You will confess yourself or I will take you out and whip you to your death, Tituba!” (pg. 42).  This “confess or die” mindset is one of the central ironies of the play.  The whole purpose of a trial is to hear both sides of the story before a verdict is reached.  In telling people they must confess to their crimes or be hanged, the officials show that they have already decided the person is guilty no matter what evidence is provided in their defense.

In Act 2, John Proctor’s guilt over his affair with Abigail is demonstrated through an ironic exchange with Reverend Hale. When Hale asks him to recite his commandments, the only one he forgets is adultery.  This is also the commandment that he has violated most explicitly , so you’d think it would be the first one to spring to mind.  The fact that he forgets only this commandment shows that he is trying extremely hard to repress his guilt.

This act also sees the irony of Hale discussing the “powers of the dark” that are attacking Salem (pg. 61).  This is irony of the same type that I discussed in the overview of this theme.  Hale doesn’t realize that his own fears and suspicions are the real powers of the dark.   Salem is under attack from the hysteria that is encouraged by the same people who seek to keep imaginary supernatural demons at bay.

In Act 3, Hale continues to make ironic statements about the existence of concrete proof for the accusations of witchcraft.  While touting his holy credentials, he claims that he “dare not take a life without there be a proof so immaculate no slightest qualm of my conscience may doubt it” (pg. 91).  This “immaculate proof” that has led him to sign numerous death warrants is nothing but the fabrications of teenage girls and other townspeople seeking petty revenge.  These types of statements made by Hale earlier in the play become even more ironic in Act 4 when he realizes he made a horrible mistake by trusting the “evidence” that was presented to him.

Abigail’s presence is always rife with irony in The Crucible , as she constantly chastises others for sins she herself has committed.  When she is brought in for questioning and claims to see Mary’s familiar spirit, she says “Envy is a deadly sin, Mary.” Abigail herself has acted out of envy for the entire play.  Her jealousy of Elizabeth Proctor’s position as John’s wife has led her to attempted murder, first by the charm in the woods and now by accusing Elizabeth of witchcraft. 

Elizabeth is a victim of cruel irony in this Act when she is summoned to testify on the reasons why she dismissed Abigail from her household.  John has already confessed that the affair was the reason for Abigail’s dismissal.  John tells the judge to summon Elizabeth to back him up because he knows she always tells the truth.  Ironically, though she is normally honest to a fault, in this situation Elizabeth decides to lie to preserve John’s reputation, not knowing he has already confessed.  This well-intentioned mistake seals both of their fates. 

Act 4 is Danforth’s turn to shine in the irony department.  He is appalled by Elizabeth’s lack of emotion when he asks her to help the court get a confession out of her husband (pg. 123).  This attitude comes from a man who has shown no remorse for condemning people to death throughout the play.  He refers to John’s refusal to confess as “a calamity,” looking past his own involvement in the larger calamity of the conviction that led John to this point.   

Later in Act 4, Danforth becomes angry at the implication that John’s confession may not be the truth. He insists,  “I am not empowered to trade your life for a lie” (pg. 130). Of course, we know that Danforth has been trading people’s lives for lies this whole time.  He has sentenced people to death based on lies about their dealings in black magic, and he has accepted other false confessions from those who would rather lie than be executed.  To Danforth, anything that doesn’t confirm that he was right all along is a lie. 

Discussion Questions

Here are a few questions related to this theme that you can use to test your grasp of irony and its significance as a theme in The Crucible : 

• How is Parris’ fate in act 4 ironic when considering his role in the events of the play?
• Why do certain characters seem to be blind to the irony of their actions (Abigail, Danforth)?
• Why is hypocrisy so common in repressive communities like Salem?
• Explain the irony of Hale’s position at the end of the play as compared to his actions at the beginning.   

Theme 2: Hysteria

The thematic significance of hysteria builds quickly as accusations of witchcraft proliferate throughout Salem.  The power of collective hysteria ultimately becomes insurmountable because it grows larger than the influence of the few rational voices in the community. The seeds are planted in Act 1, when Abigail is questioned about her activities in the woods and ends up accusing Tituba of witchcraft to avoid punishment.  The town, already primed with rumors of black magic, is quickly willing to accept that the first few women who are accused are involved in black magic because they’re beggars and slaves.  No one considers that the accusers are lying, partially because they’re seen as innocent children and partially because many “witches” confess to avoid the death penalty.

Armed with the false proof of these coerced confessions, the court officials aggressively persecute anyone who is accused.  Hysteria blinds the people of Salem to reason as they become convinced that there is a grand Satanic plot brewing in town, and they must not hesitate to condemn anyone who could be involved.   This is a lesson in how fear can twist perceptions of reality even for those who consider themselves reasonable under normal circumstances.   

Even before Abigail makes accusations, rumors of witchcraft have morphed into accepted truths in the minds of the more superstitious members of the community.   Ann Putnam jumps at any opportunity to blame supernatural forces for the deaths of her children.  Ann’s extreme conclusions are gradually accepted because rational people are too afraid to challenge the consensus and risk bringing accusations upon themselves.  Hale’s involvement is taken to mean that there must be a supernatural element to Betty’s illness.  Rational explanations are ground up by the drama of the rumor mill, and people see only what they want to see (whatever keeps them in the good graces of society and  makes them feel the best about themselves ) in situations that don't appear to have easy explanations.

The madness begins in earnest with Abigail’s claim that Tituba and Ruth were conjuring spirits in the woods.  Parris is extremely dismayed by this revelation because of the damage it will do to his reputation.  Thomas Putnam tells him to “Wait for no one to charge you - declare it yourself.”  Parris must rush to be the first accuser so he can place himself beyond reproach. It's a toxic strategy that causes panic to spread quickly and fear for one’s life to take the place of rationality.  Tituba is pressured to confess and name the names of other “witches” to avoid execution, which leads to Abigail and Betty’s accusations, now validated by a coerced confession.  This vicious cycle continues to claim the lives of more and more people as the play progresses.

By Act 2, there are nearly 40 people in jail accused of witchcraft.  Many people confess when threatened with execution, and this only heightens the paranoid atmosphere.  The authorities ignore any inconvenient logical objections to the proceedings because they, too, are swept up in the madness. The hysterical atmosphere and the dramatic performances of some of the accusers cause people to believe they have seen genuine proof of witchcraft.  Each new false confession is thrown onto the pile of “evidence” of a grand Satanic plot, and as the pile grows larger, the hysteria surrounding it is fed generously.

This hysteria-based “evidence” of witchcraft includes the discovery of the poppet in the Proctor household with a needle in it.  Elizabeth's side of the story is disregarded because Abigail’s testimony is far more dramatic.  "She sat to dinner in Reverend Parris's house tonight, and without word nor warnin' she falls to the floor. Like a struck beast, he says, and screamed a scream that a bull would weep to hear. And he goes to save her, and, stuck two inches in the flesh of her belly, he draw a needle out." (Cheever pg. 71). The idea that a witch's familiar spirit is capable of stabbing people is too scary for the superstitious and now hysterical people of Salem to give Elizabeth the benefit of the doubt. No one even considers Mary's statement about sticking the needle in herself. In this environment, whoever yells the loudest seems to get the most credibility.

The depths of the hysteria that has gripped Salem are revealed in Act 3 when John finally confronts the court. Danforth makes a shocking argument defending the way the trials have been conducted, insisting that only the victim’s testimony can serve as reliable evidence in this type of trial.   He is completely oblivious to the fact that the “victims” might be lying.  The court refuses to challenge anyone who claims to have been afflicted. 

When the petition testifying to the good character of the accused women is presented, the reaction from Danforth, Hathorne, and Parris is to arrest the people who signed it rather than considering that this might indicate that the women are innocent.   Danforth is convinced that “there is a moving plot to topple Christ in the country!” and anyone who doubts the decisions of the court is potentially involved.  They so fear the devilish consequences of challenging the accusers that they’re willing to take them at their word and ignore any defenses the accused have to offer.  Nowhere is there any consideration of ulterior motives.  

The power of mass hysteria is further revealed when Mary is unable to faint outside of a charged courtroom environment.  She believed she had seen spirits earlier because she was caught up in the delusions of those around her.  Abigail distracts the judges from any rational investigation in this act by playing into this hysteria.  Danforth, who has the most authority, is also the most sold on her act, and it only takes a few screams to persuade him that he’s in the presence of witchcraft.  This leads to Mary’s hysterical accusation of Proctor after she finds herself targeted by the other girls and about to be consumed by the hysteria herself if she doesn’t contribute to it. 

Danforth continues to demonstrate the effects of hysteria in act 4 even after things have died down a bit in Salem and there have been rumblings of discontent about the court’s actions.  As John gives his confession, Danforth says to Rebecca Nurse “Now, woman, you surely see it profit nothin’ to keep this conspiracy any further. Will you confess yourself with him?” (pg. 129)  He is still convinced that all the prisoners are guilty and is determined to force them to admit their guilt. 

Danforth also becomes frustrated with Proctor when he won’t name names in his confession : “Mr. Proctor, a score of people have already testified they saw [Rebecca Nurse] with the Devil” (pg. 130).  Danforth insists that John must know more about the Devil's dealings than he has revealed.  Though Rebecca Nurse's involvement has already been corroborated by other confessors, Danforth demands to hear it from John to confirm that John is fully committed to renouncing his supposed ties to Satan.

Here are a few questions about hysteria to consider now that you've read a summary of how this theme was expressed throughout the plot of the play:

• How does the hysteria in the play get started?
• What are some of the factors that feed the panic and suspicion in Salem, and why are officials (like Danforth) unable or unwilling to listen to reason?
• Is there any character besides John Proctor that represents the voice of common sense amidst the madness?
• Why is Cheever both astonished and afraid when he finds the poppet with the needle in it? Why is everyone so quick to believe Abigail’s story?
• Danforth explains that witchcraft is an invisible crime and that only the victims are reliable. How does this philosophy perpetuate hysteria?

Theme 3: Reputation

Concern for reputation is a theme that looms large over most of the events in The Crucible.  Though actions are often motivated by fear and desires for power and revenge, they are also propped up by underlying worries about how a loss of reputation will negatively affect characters' lives.   John’s concern for his reputation is strong throughout the play, and his hesitation to reveal Abigail’s true nature is a product of his own fears of being labeled an adulterer. 

Once there have been enough convictions, the reputations of the judges also become factors. They are extremely biased towards believing they have made the correct sentencing decisions in court thus far, so they are reluctant to accept new evidence that may prove them wrong.  The importance placed on reputation helps perpetuate hysteria because it leads to inaction, inflexibility, and, in many cases, active sabotage of the reputations of others for selfish purposes. The overall message is that when a person's actions are driven by desires to preserve favorable public opinion rather than do the morally right thing, there can be extremely dire consequences.

Reverend Parris' concerns about his reputation are immediately evident in Act 1. Parris initially insists that there are “no unnatural causes” for Betty’s illness because he fears that he will lose favor with the townspeople if witchcraft is discovered under his roof.  He questions Abigail aggressively because he’s worried his enemies will learn the full story of what happened in the woods first and use it to discredit him.  Parris is very quick to position himself on the side of the accusers as soon as Abigail throws the first punch, and he immediately threatens violence on Tituba if she doesn't confess (pg. 42).  He appears to have no governing system of morality. His only goal is to get on the good side of the community as a whole, even in the midst of this bout of collective hysteria.  

Abigail also shows concern for her reputation.  She is enraged when Parris questions her suspicious dismissal from the Proctor household.  Abigail insists that she did nothing to deserve it and tries to put all the blame on Elizabeth Proctor.  She says, "My name is good in the village! I will not have it said my name is soiled! Goody Proctor is a gossiping liar!" (pg. 12) The fi rst act of The Crucible  clearly establishes the fact that a bad reputation can damage a person’s position in this society severely and irreparably.

In this act, we learn more details about the accused that paint a clearer picture of the influence of reputation and social standing on the patterns of accusations.  Goody Good, an old beggar woman, is one of the first to be named a witch. I t’s easy for more respectable citizens to accept that she’s in league with the Devil because she is an "other" in Salem, just like Tituba.   When Abigail accuses Elizabeth, a respected farmer’s wife, it shows that she is willing to take big risks to remove Elizabeth from the picture.  She’s not a traditionally accepted target like the others (except in her susceptibility as a woman to the misogyny that runs rampant in the play).

In Act 2, the value of reputation in Salem starts to butt heads with the power of hysteria and fear to sway people’s opinions (and vengeance to dictate their actions).  Rebecca Nurse, a woman whose character was previously thought to be unimpeachable, is accused and arrested.  This is taken as evidence that things are really getting out of control ("if Rebecca Nurse be tainted, then nothing's left to stop the whole green world from burning." Hale pg. 67).  People in power continue to believe the accusers out of fear for their own safety, taking the hysteria to a point where no one is above condemnation.

At the end this act, John Proctor delivers a short monologue anticipating the imminent loss of the disguises of propriety worn by himself and other members of the Salem community.  The faces that people present to the public are designed to garner respect in the community, but the witch trials have thrown this system into disarray.   Proctor’s good reputation is almost a burden for him at this point because he knows that he doesn’t deserve it. In a way,   John welcomes the loss of his reputation because he feels so guilty about the disconnect between how he is perceived by others and the sins he has committed. 

John Proctor sabotages his own reputation in Act 3 after realizing it's the only way he can discredit Abigail.  This is a decision with dire consequences in a town where reputation is so important, a fact that contributes to the misunderstanding that follows.  Elizabeth doesn’t realize that John is willing to sacrifice his reputation to save her life.   She continues to act under the assumption that his reputation is of the utmost importance to him, and she does not reveal the affair. This lie essentially condemns both of them.    

Danforth also acts out of concern for his reputations here. He  references the many sentencing decisions he has already made in the trials of the accused. If Danforth accepts Mary’s testimony, it would mean that he wrongly convicted numerous people already. This fact could destroy his credibility , so he is biased towards continuing to trust Abigail.  Danforth has extensive pride in his intelligence and perceptiveness. This makes him particularly averse to accepting that he's been fooled by a teenage girl. 

Though hysteria overpowered the reputations of the accused in the past two acts, in act 4 the sticking power of their original reputations becomes apparent.  John and Rebecca’s solid reputations lead to pushback against their executions even though people were too scared to stand up for them in the midst of the trials.   Parris begs Danforth to postpone their hangings because he fears for his life if the executions proceed as planned.  He says, “I would to God it were not so, Excellency, but these people have great weight yet in the town” (pg. 118).

However, this runs up against Danforth’s desire to preserve his reputation as a strong judge.  He believes that “Postponement now speaks a floundering on my part; reprieve or pardon must cast doubt upon the guilt of them that died till now. While I speak God’s law, I will not crack its voice with whimpering” (pg. 119).  Danforth’s image is extremely valuable to him, and he refuses to allow Parris’ concerns to disrupt his belief in the validity of his decisions.

In the final events of Act 4, John Proctor has a tough choice to make between losing his dignity and losing his life. The price he has to pay in reputation to save his own life is ultimately too high.  He chooses to die instead of providing a false confession because he doesn’t think life will be worth living after he is so disgraced. As he says,  “How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (pg. 133)

Here are a few discussion questions to consider after you've read my summary of how the theme of reputation motivates characters and plot developments in The Crucible :

• How are characters’ behaviors affected by concern for their reputations? Is reputation more important than truth?
• Why doesn’t John immediately tell the court that he knows Abigail is faking?
• How does Parris’ pride prevent him from doing anything to stop the progression of events in the play?
• Why does Mary Warren warn John about testifying against Abigail? Why does he decide to do so anyways?
• Why does John decide to ruin his reputation in Act 3 by confessing to the affair?
• How is the arrest of  Rebecca Nurse a sign that the hysteria in Salem has gotten out of control?
• How does reputation influence who is first accused of witchcraft?

Theme #4: Power and Authority

The desire to preserve and gain power pervades  The Crucible as the witch trials lead to dramatic changes in which characters hold the greatest control over the course of events.  Abigail’s power skyrockets as the hysteria grows more severe.  Where before she was just an orphaned teenager, now, in the midst of the trials, she becomes the main witness to the inner workings of a Satanic plot.  She has the power to utterly destroy people’s lives with a single accusation because she is seen as a victim and a savior.

The main pillars of traditional power are represented by the law and the church.  These two institutions fuse together in The Crucible to actively encourage accusers and discourage rational explanations of events. The girls are essentially given permission by authority figures to continue their act because they are made to feel special and important for their participation.  The people in charge are so eager to hold onto their power that if anyone disagrees with them in the way the trials are conducted, it is taken as a personal affront and challenge to their authority. Danforth, Hathorne, and Parris become even more rigid in their views when they feel they are under attack.  

As mentioned in the overview, religion holds significant power over the people of Salem.  Reverend Parris is in a position of power as the town's spiritual leader, but he is insecure about his authority.   He believes there is a group of people in town determined to remove him from this position, and he will say and do whatever it takes to retain control.   This causes problems down the line as Parris allows his paranoia about losing his position to translate into enthusiasm for the witch hunt. 

Abigail, on the other hand, faces an uphill battle towards more power over her situation.  She is clearly outspoken and dominant, but her initial position in society is one of very little influence and authority.  One path to higher standing and greater control would be in becoming John Proctor’s wife.  When she can’t get John to abandon Elizabeth for her, she decides to take matters into her own hands and gain control through manipulating the fears of others. 

Abigail accuses Tituba first because Tituba is the one person below her on the ladder of power, so she makes an easy scapegoat. If Tituba was permitted to explain what really happened, the ensuing tragedy might have been prevented.  No one will listen to Tituba until she agrees to confirm the version of events that the people in traditional positions of authority have already decided is true, a pattern which continues throughout the play.   Tituba is forced to accept her role as a pawn for those with greater authority and a stepping stone for Abigail’s ascent to power.

By Act 2, there have been notable changes in the power structure in Salem as a result of the ongoing trials.  Mary Warren’s sense of self-importance has increased as a result of the perceived value of her participation in court.   Elizabeth notes that Mary's demeanor is now like that of “the daughter of a prince” (pg. 50).  This new power is exciting and very dangerous because it encourages the girls to make additional accusations in order to preserve their value in the eyes of the court. 

Abigail, in particular, has quickly risen from a nobody to one of the most influential people in Salem.  Abigail’s low status and perceived innocence under normal circumstances allow her to claim even greater power in her current situation.  No one thinks a teenage orphan girl is capable of such extensive deception (or delusion), so she is consistently trusted.  In one of the most well-known quotes in the play, John Proctor angrily insists that “the little crazy children are jangling the keys of the kingdom” (pg. 73), meaning the girls are testing out the extent of the chaos they can create with their newfound power.

In Act 3, Abigail’s power in the courthouse is on display.  She openly threatens Danforth for even entertaining Mary and John's accusations of fraud against her. Though Danforth is the most powerful official figure in court, Abigail manipulates him easily with her performance as a victim of witchcraft. He's already accepted her testimony as evidence, so he is happy for any excuse to believe her over John and Mary. John finally comes to the realization that Mary's truthful testimony cannot compete with the hysteria that has taken hold of the court.  The petition he presents to Danforth is used as a weapon against the signers rather than a proof of the innocence of Elizabeth, Martha, and Rebecca. Abigail's version of events is held to be true even after John confesses to their affair in a final effort to discredit her.  Logic has no power to combat paranoia and superstition even when the claims of the girls are clearly fraudulent.  John Proctor surrenders his agency at the end of Act 3 in despair at the determination of the court to pursue the accusations of witchcraft and ignore all evidence of their falsehood.

By Act 4, many of the power structures that were firmly in place earlier in the play have disintegrated.  Reverend Parris has fallen from his position of authority as a result of the outcomes of the trials.   He is weak and vulnerable after Abigail's theft of his life's savings, and he’s even facing death threats from the townspeople as a result of John and Rebecca's imminent executions.  In Act 1 he jumped on board with the hysteria to preserve his power, but he ended up losing what little authority he had in the first place (and, according to Miller's afterward, was voted out of office soon after the end of the play). 

The prisoners have lost all faith in earthly authority figures and look towards the judgment of God.  The only power they have left is in refusing to confess and preserving their integrity. I n steadfastly refusing to confess, Rebecca Nurse holds onto a great deal of power.   The judges cannot force her to commit herself to a lie, and her martyrdom severely damages their legitimacy and favor amongst the townspeople.

Here are some discussion questions to consider after reading about the thematic role of the concepts of power and authority in the events of the play:

• How do the witch trials empower individuals who were previously powerless?
• How does Reverend Hale make Tituba feel important?
• Compare and contrast three authority figures in this drama: Hale, Danforth, and Parris. What motivates their attitudes and responses toward the witch trials?
• What makes Danforth so unwilling to consider that the girls could be pretending?
• Why does Mary Warren behave differently when she becomes involved in the trials?  
• How do the actions of authority figures encourage the girls to continue their accusations and even genuinely believe the lies they’re telling?

A Quick Look at Some Other The Crucible  Themes 

These are themes that could be considered subsets of the topics detailed in the previous sections, but there's also room to discuss them as topics in their own right. I'll give a short summary of how each plays a role in the events of The Crucible .

The theme of guilt is one that is deeply relevant to John Proctor's character development throughout the play. John feels incredibly ashamed of his affair with Abigail, so he tries to bury it and pretend it never happened. His guilt leads to great tension in interactions with Elizabeth because he projects his feelings onto her, accusing her of being judgmental and dwelling on his mistakes. In reality, he is constantly judging himself, and this leads to outbursts of anger against others who remind him of what he did (he already feels guilty enough!). Hale also contends with his guilt in act 4 for his role in condemning the accused witches , who he now believes are innocent.

There's a message here about the choices we have in dealing with guilt. John attempts to crush his guilt instead of facing it, which only ends up making it an even more destructive factor in his life. Hale tries to combat his guilt by persuading the prisoners to confess, refusing to accept that the damage has already been done. Both Hale and Proctor don't want to live with the consequences of their mistakes, so they try to ignore or undo their past actions. 

Misogyny and Portrayal of Women 

Miller's portrayal of women in The Crucible is a much-discussed topic. The attitudes towards women in the 1950s, when the play was written, are evident in the roles they're given. The most substantial female character is Abigail, who is portrayed as a devious and highly sexualized young woman. She is cast as a villain. Then, on the other end of the spectrum, we have Rebecca Nurse. She is a sensible, saintly old woman who chooses to martyr herself rather than lie and confess to witchcraft. The other two main female characters, Elizabeth and Mary Warren, are somewhat bland. Elizabeth is defined by her relationship to John, and Mary is pushed around by other characters (mostly men) throughout the play. The Crucible presents a view of women that essentially reduces them to caricatures of human beings that are defined by their roles as mothers, wives, and servants to men . Abigail, the one character who breaks from this mold slightly, is portrayed extremely unsympathetically despite the fact that the power dynamic between her and John makes him far more culpable in their illicit relationship.   

Deception is a major driving force in  The Crucible . This includes not only accusatory lies about the involvement of others in witchcraft but also the lies that people consistently tell about their own virtuousness and purity in such a repressive society. The turmoil in Salem is propelled forward by desires for revenge and power that have been simmering beneath the town's placid exterior.  There is a culture of keeping up appearances already in place, which makes it natural for people to lie about witnessing their neighbors partaking in Satanic rituals when the opportunity arises (especially if it means insulating themselves from similar accusations and even achieving personal gain). The Crucible provides an example of how convenient lies can build on one another to create a universally accepted truth even in the absence of any real evidence. 

How to Write About  The Crucible  Themes

It's one thing to understand the major themes in The Crucible , and it's another thing completely to write about them yourself. Essay prompts will ask about these themes in a variety of different ways. Some will be very direct. An example would be something like:

" How are themes like hysteria, hunger for power, reputation, or any of a number of others functional in the drama? Choose a single character and discuss how this person embodies one of the themes. How is Miller’s underlying message revealed in one of these themes and through the character?"  

In a case like this, you'd be writing directly about a specific theme in connection to one of the characters. Essay questions that ask about themes in this straightforward way can be tricky because there's a temptation to speak in vague terms about the theme's significance. Always include specific details, including direct quotes, to support your argument about how the theme is expressed in the play.  

Other essay questions may not ask you directly about the themes listed in this article, but that doesn't mean that the themes are irrelevant to your writing. Here's another example of a potential essay question for The Crucible that's less explicit in its request for you to discuss themes of the play:  

" Most of the main characters in the play have personal flaws and either contribute to or end up in tragedy. Explain who you believe is the central tragic character in the play. What are their strengths and personal flaws? How does the central tragic character change throughout the play, and how does this relate to the play's title? How do outside forces contribute to the character's flaws and eventual downfall?"  

In this case, you're asked to discuss the concept of a tragic character, explaining who fits that mold in The Crucible and why. There are numerous connections between the flaws of individual characters and the overarching themes of the play that could be brought into this discussion. This is especially true with the reputation and hysteria themes. If you argued that John Proctor was the central tragic character, you could say that his flaws were an excessive concern for his reputation and overconfidence in the power of reason to overcome hysteria. Both flaws led him to delay telling the truth about Abigail's fraudulent claims and their previous relationship, thus dooming himself and many others to death or imprisonment. Even with prompts that ask you to discuss a specific character or plot point, you can find ways to connect your answer to major themes. These connections will bolster your responses by positioning them in relation to the most important concepts discussed throughout the play.    

What's Next? 

Now that you've read about the most important themes in The Crucible , check out our  list of every single character in the play , including brief analyses of their relationships and motivations. 

You can also read my full summary of The Crucible here for a review of exactly what happens in the plot in each act.

The Crucible is commonly viewed as an allegorical representation of the communist "witch hunts" conducted in the 1950s. Take a look at this article for details on the history and thematic parallels behind this connection . 

Want to improve your SAT score by 160 points or your ACT score by 4 points?  We've written a guide for each test about the top 5 strategies you must be using to have a shot at improving your score. Download it for free now:

Samantha is a blog content writer for PrepScholar. Her goal is to help students adopt a less stressful view of standardized testing and other academic challenges through her articles. Samantha is also passionate about art and graduated with honors from Dartmouth College as a Studio Art major in 2014. In high school, she earned a 2400 on the SAT, 5's on all seven of her AP tests, and was named a National Merit Scholar.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

Please login to system to use all resources

Search the forums now!

We have moved.

We want to extend a heartfelt thanks to everyone who has made the original ATAR Notes forum such a helpful, warm and welcoming place. Your contributions are appreciated and we will be leaving the forum in archive mode for posterity.

Please visit our new website and discussion area .

Welcome, Guest . Please login or register.

• ATAR Notes: Forum »
• National Education »
• Buying and Selling »
• Victoria »
• Selling »
• THE CRUCIBLE AND DRESSMAKER NOTES (40+ ENGLISH, A+ RESOURCES)

Author Topic: THE CRUCIBLE AND DRESSMAKER NOTES (40+ ENGLISH, A+ RESOURCES)  (Read 1341 times)  Tweet   Share  

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

vcesuperstar

• Fresh Poster

Recent Posts

• Essay Prompts

The Crucible and The Dressmaker

The crucible, john proctor.

Arguably one of the most flawed heroes in all of literature, John Proctor is known throughout the village as being an honest, hardworking and upright citizen. Six months prior to the commencement of the play, when his wife Elizabeth was unwell, John had an affair with the young housemaid Abigail Williams. His dalliance cost him dearly; Elizabeth’s suspicion causes a rift between them, but his own self-guilt is far worse. This guilt propels him to work tirelessly to please his wife and family and live quietly among the community.

At first, John is keen to stay away from the village proper when rumours of witchcraft begin to rise, but he is soon called to answer for his sins when his ambivalence to the trials is seen as suspicious. His absence from attending regular church sessions, brought on by his disdain of the Reverend Parris and his forthright manner of addressing the officials of the court, brings him under scrutiny. The play culminates in him having to admit his affair with Abigail and dash away his reputation to save his and Elizabeth’s life. John’s worst critic is himself, as he suffers immensely as a result of what he perceives has been weak behaviour on his part. At the last moment possible, John finds the strength needed to prevail and he mounts the gibbet to be hung, a man of goodness with God.

John Proctor Quotes

‘Abby, I may think of you softly from time to time. But I will cut of my hand before I’ll ever reach for you again.’ (Proctor to Abigail) Act 1

‘I cannot speak but I am doubted, every moment judged for lies, as though I come into a court when I come into this house!’ (Proctor to Elizabeth) Act 2

‘Oh Francis, I wish you had some evil in you that you might know me! A man will not cast away his good name. You surely know that.’ (Proctor in court after confessing to lechery with Abby) Act 3

‘I am not that man. My honesty is broke, Elizabeth. I am no good man. Nothing’s spoiled by giving them this lie that were not rotten long before.’ (Proctor just before he considers confessing) Act 4

Elizabeth Proctor

Goody Proctor is described as cold and critical, her demeanour is significantly removed from that of the more passionate women in Salem such as Goodwife Putnam, Abby and Mary Warren. Aware of her husband’s previous indiscretion with the young Abby, Elizabeth has dismissed the girl and has held onto the secret out of respect for her husband, of whom she still believes is a good man who was just misled. Audiences believe that it is because of John’s affair that an ‘everlasting funeral marches round your [her] heart’ (Act 2) and she remains chilly toward her husband throughout the play but as their affection for one another rekindles, Elizabeth admits that she ‘counted herself so plain, so poorly made… no honest love could come to me [her]’ (Act 4), and explains that her poor esteem meant she judged him under a constant cloud of suspicion.

Most notably, her refusal to agree with Hale when he suggests that anyone might fall under the devil’s spell during the ‘monstrous attack’ (Act 2) shows her to be a woman of great strength and conviction. In addition, she acts with wisdom and reason when faced with conflict, reasoning with Hale that she cannot believe ‘the Devil may own a woman’s soul… when she keeps an upright way’ (Act 2). In the same way, she shows great courage when she is parted from her husband and children under a false accusation and simply resigns that ‘I [she] think[s] I [she] must go with them’ (Act 2) and instructs Mary on how to tend for the boys and to make their breakfast. Her sensibility, which is perceived by many as coldness, is chastised by Judge Danforth when he questions the ‘wifely tenderness’ (Act 4) within her and comments that had ‘I [he] no other proof of your [her] unnatural life, your [her] dry eyes now would be sufficient evidence that you [she] delivered up your [her] soul to Hell’ (Act 4).

Goody Proctor’s loyalty to her husband becomes their undoing – she lies for the first time in her life and denies the affair, sentencing both John and herself to be hung.

Elizabeth Proctor Quotes

‘…I will be your only wife, or no wife at all! She [Abigail] has an arrow in you yet, John Proctor, and you know it well!’ (Elizabeth to Proctor) Act 2

‘In her [Elizabeth’s] life, sir, she have never lied. There are them that cannot sing, and them that cannot weep – my wife cannot lie. I have paid much to learn it, sir.’ (Proctor to the court) Act 3

‘Whatever you do, it is a good man does it. I have read my heart this three month, John. I have sins of my own to count. It takes a cold wife to prompt lechery.’ (Elizabeth to Proctor on the morning he is set to hang) Act 4

Abigail Williams

In direct comparison to Elizabeth’s sensibility and stoicism, Abigail’s manipulation of the court and her extraordinary efforts to gain back John Proctor, of whom she has been infatuated with since their affair, is what propels the narrative forward. Abby is relentless in her pursuit of her goal, to be rid of Goody Proctor and to claim John Proctor as her own, finally; she instigates and leads the hysterical pack of girls whom she threatens into submission. Her terrible threat to bring a ‘pointy reckoning’ (Act 1) in them all if they ‘breath a word, or the edge of a word about the other things’ (Act 1) paints her as vicious and capable of brutish violence in order to achieve her goals and keep her name clean in the village. We might have sympathy for a young girl, who having experienced the brutality of frontier life is made to reside with her self-obsessed uncle and is tossed aside by an older married man, but Abigail is hard to forgive when audiences see the devastation she causes in her wickedness.

Both clever and cunning, Abigail is cynical about the respectability of the town, she believes the town is hypocritical, pretending to be one way when in reality they have ambitions to be another – ‘I never knew what pretense Salem was, I never knew the lying lessons I was taught by all these Christian women and their covenanted men!’ (Act 1). Abby believes that her affair with John, whilst short-lived, awakened her sexuality and she considers that his affection and tenderness toward her during that time ‘put knowledge in her heart’ (Act 1) and refuses to let him ‘tear the light out of my [her] eyes’ (Act 1). Believing herself to be enlightened in some way, when Danforth questions her accusations she exclaims that she believes it to be her ‘duty [to] point[ing] out the Devil’s people’ (Act 3) and refuses to back down from her false allegations. But she misjudges her power, and in an effort to confirm it accuses Judge Danforth of being within the Devil’s grasp; this accusation was clearly out of order and she moves to distract the court once more by screaming that a spectre is attacking her and the other girls.

The way she sacrifices her friends, such as Tituba, cements her immorality and soon the only thing left for her to do is turn on John as well by denying the affair and sentencing him to the hangman’s noose. In a last resort for a new life, she robs her uncle of the parish funds and sets off to Boston.

Abigail Williams Quotes

‘My name is good in the village! I will not have it said my name is soiled! Goody Proctor is a gossiping liar!’ (Abby tries to defend her name when Parris asks her) Act 1

‘You drank blood, Abby! You didn’t tell him [Parris] that… you drank a charm to kill John Proctor’s wife! You drank a charm to kill Goody Proctor!’ (Betty Parris) Act 1

‘I saw your face when she [Elizabeth Proctor] put me out, and you loved me then and you do now!’ (Abby is still infatuated with Proctor) Act 1

‘I have been near to murdered every day because I done my duty pointing out the Devil’s people – and this is my reward? To be mistrusted, denied, questioned…’ (Abby in court) Act 3

‘Let you beware, Mr Danforth. Think you be so mighty that the power of Hell may not turn your wits?’ (Abby in court) Act 3

Reverend Samuel Parris

Salem’s resident minister hasn’t always been a man of the cloth, having resided in the Caribbean islands as a merchant at one time, Parris has yet to lose his materialistic manner and this is evident from the first act of the play. Within the first scene we see him fretting, not over the sudden illness of his youngest daughter Betty, or even the souls of his parishioners that he has caught dancing in the woods, but rather over the ‘faction [in the town] that is sworn to drive me [him] from my [his] pulpit’ (Act 1). Miller leaves no ambiguity over why Parris has enemies in the small village, as his notes teach us ‘there is very little good to be said for him’ and he does nothing to redeem himself further in the play.

He is the third minister in the last seven years in Salem proper, hence his anxiety at being ‘howl[ed]… out of Salem’ (Act 1); but rather unforgivably, he is a tyrannical man that barters over his allowance and demands the deed to his parishioners’ homes in order to secure his position. He is not respected by anyone within the town, and characters that enter the text throughout soon begin to disrespect him as well – Danforth finds him intolerable and Proctor lists a myriad of reasons why he ‘like it not that Mr Parris should lay his hand upon my baby [for baptismal]’ (Act 2). Proctor’s further concerns about Salem’s minister is his tendency to preach ‘only hellfire and damnation’ (Act 1), a term used to describe the practice of preaching about God’s judgement and eternal damnation in an effort to scare the attending congregation into obedience. He, and many other Salem citizens express their dislike of Parris’ materialistic tendency and prefer not to attend service when ‘the man dreams cathedrals, not clapboard meetin’ houses’ (Act 2).

His treatment of his slave Tituba (who he has purchased in Barbados to serve him in the ‘new world’ of America) speaks of a cruel man who quickly offers himself as punisher in an effort to try and force a confession from her – and she confirms this notion in a guised manner by stating that the devil has seen Parris and called him ‘mean man and no gentle man’ (Act 1).

Reverend Samuel Parris Quotes

‘We cannot leap to witchcraft. They will howl me out of Salem for such corruption in my house.’ (Parris) Act 1

‘Mr Corey, you will look far for a man of my kind at sixty pound a year! I am not used to this poverty; I left a thrifty business in Barbados to serve the Lord. I do not fathom why I am persecuted here?’ (Parris) Act 1

‘This way, unconfessed and claiming innocence, doubts are multiplied, many honest people will weep for them, and our good purpose is lost in their tears.’ (Parris is worried that he will be rejected if innocents hang) Act 4

Reverend John Hale

Summoned from the nearby town of Beverly, an appointed expert in medicine and the detection of witchcraft, Hale has faith in his own abilities to solve the mysteries of the demonic arts and is much anticipated by the townsfolk of Salem, who look to him for sound logic in the hysteria of it all. Beginning the play as somewhat conceited, he is dismissive of the concerns shared by Parris and denotes a familiarity with ‘tracking down the Old Boy’ (Act 1), a demeanour that puts many at ease. He is good intentioned and is disinclined to rumour or superstition, demanding that the citizens agree that he ‘shall not proceed unless you [they] are prepared to believe me [him] should I [he] find no bruise of hell’ upon the victims, a fruitless demand given how the play progresses. He shows that he is not at all tainted by prejudice when he takes Tituba’s hand during her emotional confession and expresses that she is ‘God’s instrument’ and has been ‘chosen to help us cleanse our village’ (Act 1), a declaration that proves his desire to be non-discriminate in his search for witchcraft in Salem.

Although their initial meeting is tense, Proctor and Hale come to share a similarly critical view on the court proceedings. Both place a high value on reason and upon interrogation, Hale believing Proctor and his household satisfied that they ‘keep a solemn, quiet way’ (Act 2). But upon Elizabeth’s arrest, Proctor calls him ‘Pontius Pilate’, a biblical reference to the leader of Jerusalem that ‘washed his hands clean’ of Jesus’ crucifixion and did nothing to stop the citizens from exacting their execution.

Despite his efforts to maintain reason and equity, justice escapes him as the hysteria of the court and the manipulation of the citizens force him to become a bystander, powerless to interject. He shoulders the blame for what happens to the citizens, in the end trying to convince Goody Proctor to save her husband despite this meaning she would admit to a lie, believing ‘myself [himself] his [Proctor’s] murderer’ (Act 4). He ends up a sad figure, wandering from house to house begging the accused to confess to save their lives, desperate to ‘have more time’ (Act 4) to gain confessions.

Reverend John Hale Quotes

‘Here is all the invisible world, caught, defined and calculated. In these books the Devil stands stripped of all his brute disguises…have no fear now – we shall find him out if her has come among us, and I mean to crush him utterly if he has shown his face!’ (Hale upon arriving at Salem) Act 1

‘Theology, sir, is a fortress; no crack in a fortress may be accounted small.’ (Hale when he is visiting the Proctor household) Act 2

‘There is blood on my head! Can you not see the blood on my head!!’ (Hale just before Proctor hangs) Act 4

‘Let you not mistake your duty as I mistook my own.’ (Hale to Elizabeth) Act 4

Giles Corey

Giles Corey, an elderly member of the Salem community, is a vexatious litigate, a man who proudly admits to being the plaintiff in court thirty-three times and who is considered ‘contentious’ (Act 3) by all who know him. Although he and Proctor ally together under the shadow of the witch-hunt, even John has known the sting of Corey’s legal obsession when ‘last month [Giles] collected four pound damages for you [Proctor] publicly sayin’ I [he] burned the roof off your [his] house…’ (Act 1) to which Proctor vehemently denies saying.

Giles Corey has a pioneering will to work but he is not a man of great learning and thus, when his third wife Martha begins the practice of the ‘readin’ of strange books’ (Act 1), his uneducated intolerance has dire consequences which eventually leads to his wife being swept up into the witch-hunt. When he realises that he has been the cause of her execution, Giles concludes that a way of redeeming his actions would be to shed light on the land-grapping conspiracy involving the Putnams. By refusing to name the man involved in the accusation, he condemns himself to torture and death. His fate is gruesome, yet borne with bravery and a stubbornness that we would expect to see from a tough pioneer who has spent his whole life working the land. By remaining silent until his death, he ensures that his sons will inherit his lands and they will not be forfeited to anyone such as Putnam (or any other property-grabber) to claim for a cheap price. Giles’ pride is his land, introducing himself to men of authority such as Danforth by exclaiming, ‘I have six hundred acres, and timber in addition’ (Act 3) and he proves himself keen to impress the learned men on more then one occasion. There is a bold, rustic simplicity about him which at times is embarrassing, and it makes him old-fashioned in the new Salem which has lost its pioneering honesty and close community spirit.

Giles Corey Quotes

‘It discomforts me! Last night – mark this – I tried and tried and could not say my prayers. And then she [Martha, his wife] closes her book and walks out of the house, and suddenly – mark this – I could pray again!’ (Corey to Hale and the Salem elders) Act 1

‘I’m never put upon; I know my rights, sir, and I will have them.’ (Corey in court) Act 3

‘I will give you no name. I mentioned my wife’s name once and I’ll burn in hell long enough for that. I stand mute.’ (Corey in court) Act 3

The Barbadian slave of Salem’s Reverend Parris has the ambiguous distinction of being considered psychic by the superstitious group of God-fearing Puritans. The citizens often consult her when it suits them but she is aware that she must remain wary if she is to stay clean of any accusation of black magic. Tituba’s stage notes speak volumes about her life in Salem. In the first scene she is said to enter the room ‘very frightened because her slave sense has warned her that, as always, trouble in this house eventually lands on her back’ (Act 1). Tituba’s affection for Betty is unquestionable as she quails ‘my Betty no goin’ die…’ (Act 1) but all this is soon dismissed when the blame is placed on her shoulders for the suspected ‘trafficked[ing] with spirits in the forest’ (Act 1) that she is said to have instigated. It doesn’t take long for other citizens to see an easy target in Tituba and as the strain of the accusations grows, even Abby begins to weave a deception that ‘Tituba conjured Ruth Putnam’s dead sisters’ (Act 1), feeding the suggestion to the girls who would do almost anything to avoid being whipped or worse.

The apex in Tituba’s storyline occurs when she is interrogated by Hale, who despite his relentless questioning claims to be doing so in order to help her realise her potential to ‘cleanse the village’ (Act 1). The right responses are fed to her and under scrutiny, she parrots Hale’s and Parris’ answers back to them and finally confesses to communing with the devil.

Tituba Quotes

‘Mr Parris’s slaves has knowledge of conjurin’, sir…she [Ruth] should learn from Tituba who murdered her sisters…’ (Ann Putnam to Hale) Act 1

‘You [Abigail] beg me to conjure! She beg me make charm… I have no power on this child [Betty], sir…’ (Tituba to Parris and Hale) Act 1

‘But he [the Devil] say, “You work for me, Tituba, and I make you free! I give you pretty dress to wear, and put you way high up in the air, and you gone fly back to Barbados!’’’ (Tituba when she is being questioned by Hale) Act 1

Deputy-Governor Danforth

Danforth is the civil deputy-governor and in the absence of the Governor himself he is the principal officer in charge of the overall pioneer state. In the Puritan community, he rules the theocracy in all aspects of law and order, civil and religious. By virtue of the fact that his speeches are longer in the play and there are more of them then any other character, Danforth is awarded more weight than his partner, the ‘bitter, remorseless Salem judge’ (stage notes) Judge Hathorne.

Danforth is a pious fanatic, overruling justice from his lofty position of high responsibility and is convinced of the legality and justice of the cause of the true religion. He will not stand for anyone that tries to undermine the court and believes any ‘defence [to be] an attack on the court’ (Act 3). He is hard, cruel and unrelenting; even contemptuous of these lesser Salem folk caught up in affairs beyond their comprehension – any opposing pleas he treats as contempt of court and any petitions that are mustered he uses as charge-sheets to swell the ranks of those arrested under suspicion.

From the moment he begins hearing the preceding evidence, he is convinced in the genuine presence of witchcraft and feels empowered to deal with it using the accepted means of harsh imprisonment, torture and death. Danforth inexorably pursues what he must believe to be right. He is dogmatic and bigoted, appalled when he discovers Proctor plows his field on Sunday, or that Abby often laughs at church. He admits the very nature of the crime of witchery as being ‘ipso facto… an invisible crime’ (Act 3), and feels obliged to rely upon the ‘victim’ Abby and her witnesses; he considers Abby and the other girls to be children, and that their innocence protects them from the lies of adults. Therefore when Elizabeth refuses to condemn her husband of lechery, Danforth is utterly reinforced in his original convictions.

He remains hard to the end, when he comments the condemned must feel the ‘perfection of their punishment’ (Act 4) and he believes himself to have been empowered, and he must help the other officials ‘draw yourselves [themselves] up like men and help me’ (Act 4) to exact justice in the name of God.

Many audiences interpret him as evil beyond reprieve but Miller’s depiction allows for contention that some men can be capable of monstrous evil because they do not fully know, or care to understand, exactly what they are doing. Danforth truly believes he is doing the will of God in ousting those hidden and afflicted by the Devil, and the history of religious and political persecution surely gives weight to this view. He must be seen beyond the play, both allegorically and symbolically – he sums up the human struggle between the individual and external authority. Danforth is not a fictional monster, but merely a product of the system; the law personified, a model of Puritan justice.

Judge Danforth Quotes

‘Children, a very augur bit will now be turned into your souls until your honesty is proved. Will either of you change your positions now, or do you force me to hard questioning?’ (Danforth to the girls in court) Act 3

‘Postponement now speaks a floundering on my part; reprieve or pardon must cast doubt upon the guilt of them that dies till now. While I speak God’s law, I will not crack its voice with whimpering. If retaliation is your fear, know this – I should hang ten thousand that dared to rise against the law…’ Danforth (Act 4)

‘Hang them high over the town! Who weeps for these, weeps for corruption!’ Danforth ( Act 4)

Thomas and Ann Putnam

The Putnams are characterised as vindictive, superstitious and deceitful. Their opportunistic ways see them not only survive amidst the chaos of the witch-hunt but flourish, having expanded their acreage after acquiring land from those that have been wrongly accused.

Goody Putnam’s obsession with having ‘laid seven babies unbaptised in the earth’ (Act 1) sees her riddled with guilt and eager to lay the fault on someone else. At first, she suggests that Tituba should be questioned about their deaths, then the blame shifts to Goody Osburn ‘who were midwife to me [Ann Putnam] three times…my babies always shrivelled in her hands’ (Act 1) and finally it is Rebecca Nurse that stands accused of the ‘the marvellous and unnatural murder of Goody Putnam’s babies’ (Act 2). Goody Putnam’s grief has addled her brain and she feels victimised at having lost so many children; a tragic situation to be sure but one that is once more abused in Salem city. Her husband Thomas however, is a powerful community leader that Miller describes as having a ‘vindictive nature’ (stage notes). His behaviour throughout the play indicates his fervent desire to seize the land of his neighbours and the witch-hunt merely provides him with the facilities to do so, with relative ease.

Thomas and Ann Putnam Quotes

‘For how else is she [Ruth] struck dumb now except some power of darkness would stop her mouth? It is a marvellous sign, Mr Parris.’  (Putnam) Act 1

‘You think it God’s work you should never lose a child, nor grandchild either, and I bury all but one?’ (Goody Putnam is envious of Goody Nurse’s prospering family) Act 1

‘That tract is in my bounds, it’s in my bounds, Mr Proctor… you load one oak of mine and you’ll fight to drag it home!’ (Putnam threatening Proctor and Corey about his land) Act 1

‘This man [Putnam] is killing his neighbours for their land!’ (Giles Corey accuses Putnam for his evil plots) Act 3

Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn

Sarah Good is a ‘drunkard and a vagrant’ (Miller’s stage notes) and Mary Warren accuses her of making her ill by ‘mumbling’ (Act 2) when she was refused anything to eat or drink.

Sarah Osburn, first accused by Tituba as being one of the names in the Devil’s book, was a midwife to Goody Putnam. Goody Putnam lost all her children but one and is looking for someone to blame for it. Goody Proctor also calls her a drunk.

Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn Quote

‘There be certain danger in calling such a name – I am not Goody Good that sleeps in ditches, nor Osburn, drunk and half-witted… she means to take my place, John.’ (Elizabeth believes Abigail has ulterior motives for accusing her) Act 2

Rebecca and Francis Nurse

The Nurse family are an atypical foundation in any pioneering village – morally strong, hard working and forthright. Rebecca Nurse attracts envy and resentment for being far more sensible and spiritual than most others and it is for this reason that she is an easy target. She warns Parris to stay calm and ‘let us go to God for the cause of it [the strife with the young girls]… let us rather blame ourselves’ (Act 1), a notion which would have sat uneasily with the more paranoid citizens who operated in the community. Hale, likewise, reaches this sensible conclusion when he suggests the community ‘counsel among yourselves [themselves], think on your village and what may have drawn from heaven such a thundering wrath upon you all’ (Act 3).

Miller’s note on the Nurses suggests that land disputes were the basis for naming Rebecca, but in testament to her character, others cannot believe that ‘such a one be charged’ (Act 2) and many are willing to testify to the good nature of her. It is a shame that her sensibility is not heeded from the outset of the play for she concludes that the children (Ruth and Betty) are merely playing at a game when they pretend to be ill, and that they will ‘wake when she [they] tire of it’ (Act 1), dismissing the severity that others such as Parris and the Putnams have leapt to and dismissing it as an act in their ‘silly seasons’ (Act 1). Her reputation as a wise and upright citizen is such that even Proctor ‘defers to her’ (stage notes, Act 1) when the conversation gets heated and he responds favourably to her when she tries to quell his fury at the Putnam’s claims.

The same goodness can be seen in Francis Nurse, when he attends the court with Giles and John to free their wives and he becomes fretful that he has ‘brought trouble on these people [those that signed the petition to the character of the women]’ (Act 3) when Danforth orders warrants drawn up for all those that are named in the deposition.

As his beloved wife is hung, Francis becomes the carer for the Proctor children and a more reliable caretaker there could not be. The Nurses act as a moral compass to those within the play, even as Rebecca mounts the scaffold she sets an example to Proctor by refusing to confess to ‘a lie’ (Act 4). Her humility is evident until the very end when she begins to collapse on her way to the gallows and excuses her reaction to Proctor, who catches her. In the same way, her compassion is indicated in her attempts to soothe her fellow accused with ‘let you fear nothing… another judgement waits us all’ (Act 4) marking her as a true Christian woman with no qualms about her own righteousness.

Rebecca and Francis Nurse Quotes

‘A child’s spirit is like a child, you can never catch it by running after it; you must stand still. And, for love, it will soon itself come back.’ (Rebecca) Act 1

‘There is prodigious danger in the seeking of loose spirits. I fear it, I fear it.’ (Rebecca) Act 1

‘My wife is the very brick and mortar of the church, Mr Hale…’ (Francis defending his wife when she is arrested) Act 2

Ezekiel Cheever

Ezekiel Cheever is the town tailor. As a member of the Salem society, Cheever’s decision to help the court carry out their process does not bode well for him. He is ambivalent and thinks nothing of arresting those who have been issued with a warrant.

Ezekiel Cheever Quote

‘You know yourself I must do as I’m told. You surely know that, Giles.’ (Cheever defending his actions in arresting his fellow neighbours) Act 2

Marshall Herrick

A law officer who appears to have a conscience about the happenings; he does his duty reluctantly but begins drinking in the fourth and final act when the strain of punishing neighbours and friends becomes too much and he tries to drown out his guilt.

Susanna Walcott is one of the girls who name the witches.

Mercy Lewis is the Putnams’ servant, who escapes during the night with Abby at the end of the play. In Miller’s stage notes, he observes that she is ‘closest in spirit’ to Abby and is also seemingly attracted to Proctor’s oozing masculinity.

Ruth Putnam is the Putnams’ last-living child and is afflicted by the ‘illness’ that befalls the two youngest members of the girls when they are caught dancing in the woods. Ruth, whether she wants to or not, is doing this for her father in order that he may seize the land cheaply from the accused.

Betty Parris falls into a coma-like state as well, literally paralysed by fear at being caught out doing the wrong thing. Interestingly, other than Proctor and Tituba she is the only other character that accuses Abby of drinking ‘a charm to kill John Proctor’s wife’ (Act 1) and lying about it.

Mary Warren is a simpler soul who seems genuinely caught up in the hysteria of the girls. She is the Proctors’ new maid and as such, delivers updates to them about the happenings in the court, allowing the audience to see how wrapped up in the ‘weighty work we [the girls] do’ (Act 2) and how easily they become drunk on the power. Uneasy in conflict, Mary has always been the weakest of the group, petrified from the beginning of the punishment, desperately trying to convince the others to admit that they danced. Her shift from one side to the next throughout the play foreshadows the eventual travesty, that she will inevitably dishonour the truth and condemn Proctor at the last minute in order to save herself from the rope.

The Dressmaker

Tilly (myrtle) dunnage.

Tilly (Myrtle) Dunnage is the glamorous outcast and the novel’s protagonist. As a child, she was banished from her hometown of Dungatar after the townsfolk believed she had murdered a fellow school student Stewart Pettyman. From her unhappy education at a school in Melbourne, Tilly ‘ran away… to London… then Spain, Milan, Paris’ (Part 2) and learnt the skill of creating haute couture outfits, training under the prestigious fashion designers in Europe.

Tilly offers the small-minded women in Dungatar the chance to transform themselves but this does little to alter their petty meanness and judgmental behaviours. Having experienced the world outside the parochial limitations of Dungatar, Tilly is worldly and understands the power of creativity and flair. Likewise, she is confident in her own ability and is not threatened whatsoever when she ‘see[s] there is a new seamstress in town’ (Part 3), Una Pleasance.

Despite the promise of promotion in Europe, Tilly is drawn back to her childhood home to care for her mother who in her absence has become a ‘skeleton’ (Part 1) with ‘sunken eyes’ (Part 1) and a mouth like a ‘charcoal hole’ (Part 1). Tilly navigates her mother’s madness expertly, treating her with a healthy dose of tough love as she cleans up both the decrepit residence atop The Hill and also the woman that the townsfolk have been referring to as ‘Mad Molly’ (Part 1). No task is too revolting or confronting as she ‘evicts snug families’ (Part 1) of pests from the house, cleans her mother’s dentures and ties her to the outside toilet with the rope of her dressing robe to avoid her wandering off. Although the relationship between mother and daughter is strong, Tilly, like many children of elderly and eccentric parents, resorts to sarcasm and derision as a coping mechanism. Mother and daughter banter back and forth but their reciprocal devotion for one another, albeit bruised, is evident. In the final chapters, Tilly’s adoration for her mother who endured so much hardship is still present and their commitment to one another is cemented when Teddy passes away and Tilly ‘got on her knees in front of her mother and buried her face in her lap… Molly stroked her head fondly and they wept’ (Part 3).

Tilly’s reluctance to become involved with her childhood friend Teddy derives from a belief that she is ‘cursed’ (Part 3) and that should she become involved with anyone, it would be to their detriment. Tilly believes that her actions as a child and the unfortunate death of Stewart Pettyman plagues her and this notion is precipitated by the townspeople who treat her with disdain and suspicion. Her belief in her ill-fated luck is only confirmed when she loses her own son Pablo, who she finds dead in his cot at seven months, whilst still living in Paris. However, Tilly’s strength of will is to be admired. Her devotion to her mother, her acceptance of those such as Sergeant Farrat and Barney McSwiney show her to be a woman of tolerance who has felt the brunt of societal stigma and is keen to be a far more accepting member of the town. Although the sudden loss of Teddy and her mother shake her resolve and she is at risk of being propelled along the same path as Molly, she dismisses the bitterness that begins festering inside her and channels an inner discipline and conniving spirit that allows her to wreak a havoc that provides satisfying revenge.

Tilly (Myrtle) Dunnage Quotes

Little Myrtle Dunnage had alabaster skin and her mother’s eyes and hair. She seemed strong, but damaged. (Sergeant Farrat upon seeing Tilly again as a grown woman) Part 1

‘It’s not that – it’s what I’ve done. Sometimes I forget about it and just when I’m… it’s guilt, and the evil inside me – I carry it around with me, in me, all the time.’ (Tilly speaking to Teddy about the affect her past has on her) Part 2

Bitterness rested on Tilly’s soul and wore itself on her face. (after Teddy’s death) Part 3

‘Well then I’m afraid you’ve made a mistake,’ said Tilly. ‘ I’m a qualified tailoress and dressmaker. You just need someone handy with a needle and thread.’ (Tilly to Una Pleasance) Part 3

She could tie up the loose ends, leave, go to Melbourne, take a job with the traveller who’d visited last autumn. Yet there was the matter of the sour people of Dungatar. In light of all they had done, and what they had not done, what they had decided not to do – they mustn’t be abandoned. Not yet. (Tilly considering to herself after Teddy and Molly have passed and she is on her own) Part 3

Molly Dunnage

Molly is first introduced to the reader through the eyes of her daughter, Tilly. She lives in a small shack on The Hill, an overwatch for the village that ‘was dank and smelled like possum piss’ (Part 1). At first, Molly is reticent to have her daughter help her and this is primarily because, despite missing her terribly, Molly had always hoped that her only daughter ‘wouldn’t come back to this awful place’ (Part 3).

Molly’s appearance is haggard, her ‘wayward grey hair’ (Part 1) and scrawny features belying her as a nervous, scattered woman suffering the first affects of dementia. Despite her mental infirm, Molly still has a fighting spirit and a wicked sense of humour, providing comedic relief to parts of the novel and teasing Tilly by constantly referring to her as her ‘captor’ (Part 1). Molly’s crudeness and impropriety is renowned and a constant cause of embarrassment for Tilly, such as when Molly insults the three visiting women from Winyerp with ‘there’s a bunch of old stools from out at fart hill trespassing out here’ (Part 3) and Tilly makes an attempt to disguise her mother’s incivility to the visitors – ‘can I help you… the ash is very good and we get the sun up here’ (Part 3). Nevertheless, Molly understands far more about the town dynamics then anyone, predicting the damage of the rumour mill – ‘you can’t keep anything secret here… everybody knows everything about everyone…’ (Part 1).

Despite the heartache, Molly is a kindly woman who makes cakes laced with drugs to alleviate Irma Almanac’s pain – ‘Irma felt light…she could hear her bones scraping inside her body but they no longer hurt and the aching had stopped’ (Part 2) and tolerates the simple-minded Barney McSwiney. She is staunchly proud of her daughter Tilly and her skills in dressmaking and the women share an affinity for creating things to enhance the dull life they find themselves in.

However, the sad story of ‘Mad Molly Dunnage’ is not known until the latter half of the novel when it is revealed that she got pregnant to Evan Pettyman and because she wouldn’t give her baby (Tilly) away, ‘I [she] had to leave my [her] home and my [her] parents’ (Part 3). But her humiliation was not complete there, Pettyman ‘came after me [her] and used me [her]’ (Part 3); in turn for this privilege, he supported Molly and Tilly in early childhood.

When Evan and Marigold’s only child Stewart died, Tilly had to be sent away. Molly’s admittance that she ‘went mad with loneliness’ (Part 3) for the loss of Tilly means she is seen as a character that evokes great sympathy – she has lost everything and had no where to run away to so living atop The Hill in squalor amidst rumour and prejudice became her only option.

Like many of the woman from Ham’s text, Molly is a product of her circumstances and is subjected to ridicule and insult unfairly; unlike Pettyman (the elected town councillor) who was just as much at fault for the illegitimacy of Tilly’s birth but escapes their wrath because of his gender and status.

Molly Dunnage Quotes

She [Molly] gestured at a crowd of invisible people around her bed. (When Tilly arrives and first sees her mother, she is shocked at how mad she is acting) Part 1

As food has nourished her body and therefore her mind, some sense had returned to her. She realised she’d have to be crafty, employ stubborn resistance and subtle violence against this stronger woman (Tilly) who was determined to stay. Part 1

‘Dunny’s mum’s a slut, Dunnybum’s Mum’s a slut.’ (Stewart Pettyman and the other school children tease Tilly as a child) Part 1

‘She has good days and not-so-good, but she’s always entertaining and things come back to her from time-to-time’. (Tilly talks to Farrat about her mother) Part 2

‘…we’re used to being badly treated.’ Part 3

Sergeant Horatio Farrat

Horatio Farrat was raised in inner city Melbourne that may explain his more open-minded approach to the town’s goings-on. His posting to the remote town of Dungatar was an urgent response to him approaching his superiors in the Metropolitan Police Force with patterns and swatches of a design for a new and improved police uniform. Naturally, he was swiftly reassigned to the community of Dungatar where he kept to himself, ‘settled at his Singer, pumping the treadle with stockinged feet, and guided the skirt seams beneath the pounding needle’ (Part 1) rather than attend the weekend football game. He is a kind character, who allows the guilt of sending Tilly away when the Pettyman boy died to riddle him and become the motivation for his befriending Tilly.

A complex character that is immediately attracted to ‘little Myrtle Dunnage’ (Part 1) and her perchance for fashion yet he is the first to observe that despite her guise, Tilly has returned to Dungatar ‘strong, but damaged’ (Part 1). Their affinity with fashion and the concept of transformation gives Farrat the confidence to emerge as a cross-dresser in a town that would undoubtedly shun his oddity instead of embrace him like the cosmopolitan Tilly does. The burden of holding this secret to himself explodes when he is in the presence of Tilly as ‘he clutched it to his heart and ripped the brown paper apart and freed yards of brilliant magenta silk organza’ (Part 2), before checking himself, his face reddened ‘appalled by his abandonment’ (Part 2). But with Tilly, Molly and even Teddy, Farrat finds a safe space to admit his skill with sewing and stitching. In return for their acceptance, when Molly and Teddy die, Farrat omits Tilly’s role in Teddy’s unfortunate accident and uses the burial as a platform to lecture the townsfolk in their treatment of outcasts, reminding them that they loved the outcast Teddy and therefore should try and find it within themselves to love another outcast – Myrtle Dunnage, just as Teddy had loved her.

Despite his attempts to make amends for his actions, Tilly remains unforgiving and Farrat re-groups with the other townsfolk to watch their town burn, and with it, all the frocks and fabrics he had cherished so secretly.

Sergeant Horatio Farrat Quotes

They [the townsfolk] were used to the sergeant’s bachelor ways; he’d often purchased materials for tablecloths and curtains. Muriel said he must have the fanciest linen in town. (Gertrude when Sergeant Farrat buys a bolt of blue gingham fabric from the Pratt’s General Store) Part 1

‘I don’t care, Tilly,’ he said. ‘I’m beyond caring what those people think or say anymore. I’m sure everyone’s seen what’s on my clothes line of the years, and I’m about due to retire anyway.’ (Tilly confirms that Farrat wants to attend Molly’s funeral in a black knee-length frock) Part 4

Evan Pettyman

‘Dungatar’s richest man’ (Part 3), Town Councillor Evan Pettyman is Tilly’s real father. We learn about his mistreatment of Molly later in the novel when it is revealed that upon getting her pregnant and coming to live in Dungatar, Evan ‘used me [her]’ (Part 3) in exchange for him keeping the two women, until the untimely death of his only son Stewart causes him to become vindictive and force Farrat to take Tilly away to a reform school in Melbourne.

Evan is a known philanderer who drugs and mistreats his wife, while scandalously parading with other women. His most recent affair is with Una Pleasance, the new dressmaker in town and direct business adversary to Tilly. His wife Marigold murders him viciously and upon inspecting the house, Farrat discovers a cornucopia of filthy movies and photos as well as illicit drugs in the house.

Marigold Pettyman

Marigold has compulsive OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), which was precipitated by the sudden death of her only son, Stewart. Marigold’s preoccupation with people leaving footprints on her bi-daily washed floor and the possibility the visitors might ‘leave fingerprints on her polish’ (Part 3) blinds her from seeing the truth of her horrid husband Evan. But her insistence of having Tilly make her a dress ‘better than everyone else’ (Part 4) means that like all the other townswomen, Marigold is vain and competitive.

Once reminded of Evan’s impregnation of the sweet Molly Dunnage and how he manipulated the blame of his son’s death to land on Tilly, Marigold’s repressed memories come flooding back and she goes on to seek terrible revenge on Evan. The reader’s initial perceptions of her as weak and mentally unstable are only suspended for a brief moment as she callously leaves her husband in the kitchen of their house bleeding out and she concocts a draught of a half bottle of her sleeping tonic and sherry in an attempt to end her own life.

Stewart Pettyman

A school bully, who relentlessly teased Tilly Dunnage when they were children and in an effort to wind her by running toward her like a bull, died by slamming his head into the wall. Even as a child, his vileness was evident as he often called her a ‘bastard’ (Part 3) and Edward McSwiney (Teddy’s father) recalled ‘your [Evan’s] Stewart [he] had the poor little thing [Tilly, Myrtle as was] cornered beside the library…’ (Part 3). The progeny of Evan, it is not hard to imagine the young boy as a brute bully who made Tilly’s childhood a living nightmare, in the same way as his father destroyed Molly’s life.

He is dead when the novel begins but is the reason why Tilly had been sent away from Dungatar. Any information we learn about him is in retrospect.

Teddy McSwiney

Despite his family’s status as outcasts, Teddy is the much-loved son of Dungatar. Captain of the local football team, his rambunctious ways seem to charm most of the residents. His involvement with ‘the card game on Thursday nights and two-up on Fridays… organising the Saturday night dances, owning all the sweeps on Cup Day and the first to raffle a chook if funds were needed’ (Part 1), Teddy was additionally ‘cheeky, quick and canny’ (Part 1) and incredibly kind to the undeserving townsfolk of Dungatar. His devotion to caring for Barney, his brother and inheriting some of the responsibility for feeding his impoverished siblings, Teddy takes it upon himself to care for Molly in Tilly’s absence. He is thrilled for the return of his school friend Myrtle and for weeks on end at the beginning stages of Tilly’s return, he delivers yabbies, eggs and Murray cod fillets to feed the ladies who had yet to establish a healthy income and avoided venturing into town for fear of ridicule. He even delivers a ‘freshly scrubbed’ (Part 1) wheelchair to The Hill for Molly’s use, a testament to his kindly nature.

His logical approach to Tilly’s soiled reputation is refreshing but Tilly is unconvinced that things are that easy and that all can be solved by ‘have[ing] a big wedding in Dungatar’ (Part 2). His flippancy is born of a naivety about the world and although at first Tilly finds this charming, she is reluctant to enter into a relationship because she does not want to tarnish his reputation as he aligns himself to the ‘murderess’ (Part 3). In his attempts to release her of this notion and to convince her that she is not cursed, Teddy childishly dives into what he believes to be a wheat silo to reinforce his devotion to her but sinks in the grain and dies by suffocation.

Teddy McSwiney Quotes

‘Girls like her [Tilly] need a bloke like me about.’ (Teddy speaks to Molly about wanting to go on a date with Tilly) Part 1

‘I can look after you… that is, if you want me to.’ (Teddy’s proposal to Tilly) Part 2

He could sell seawater to a sailor. (Teddy’s entrepreneurial skills) Part 1

She [Tilly] thought about Teddy McSwiney, and wondered if the rest of town would be as friendly. Part 1

‘…we’d jump into the grain trucks as they pulled out of the loading dock then stay on top of the wheat until we crossed the creek, where we’d jump in…’ (Teddy moments before he dies) Part 2

But it wasn’t a bin brimming with wheat. It was a bin filled with sorghum…. And Teddy vanished like a bolt into a tub of sump oil and slid to suffocate at the bottom of that huge bin in a pond of slippery brown seeds like polished liquid sand. Part 3

Barney McSwiney

Teddy’s younger brother, Barney, is considered an outcast amongst the community due to him being ‘… not quite finished… crooked, with an upside-down head and a crooked foot’ (Part 1). Despite his slow-mindedness, Barney is loyal and although he lacks the means to effectively communicate, he understands a lot more than people give him credit for. Although not fully understanding why, Barney is sensitive to the town’s aversion to Tilly and when her name is scribbled out on the table list at the town’s social gathering, he childishly writes his and her names at the bottom of the list in an effort to include her.

Barney is understandably distraught when Teddy dies; he’s lost his brother, best friend and someone who promised to always watch out for him. He leaves town with his family after Teddy’s funeral, leaving the family cow and a handful of chickens on Tilly’s doorstep as a gesture of peace between them.

Barney McSwiney Quotes

‘Mum says I’m not quite finished. Dad says I’m only five bob out of ten.’ (Barney explaining himself to Tilly) Part 2

She [Tilly] stood unsteadily and held out a hand to him [Barney] but his mouth screwed open and he turned and stumbled away, yowling, holding his arms across his chest. (The final time Tilly sees Barney after Teddy’s death) Part 3

Una Pleasance

A rival dressmaker that arrives in Dungatar; for a time the women prefer using Una as their tailor but her commissioned dresses lack the finesse and speciality that Tilly’s creations do – ‘…no one was ever displeased with anything you [Tilly] made them here, not like that Una…’ (Part 4). She has an affair with Evan Pettyman that ends quickly as Marigold discovers them and murders her husband.

Mr Percival and Mrs Irma Almanac

Being the town chemist, Mr Almanac has access to the citizens’ medical history and as such, believes he is in a more lofty position then the other residents. Ironically, advanced Parkinson’s disease has left him a ‘curved, mumbling question-mark, forever face-down…’ (Part 1) who comically bumps into most things in his shop and most people who roam the main street are wary of his ‘balding head’ (Part 1) hurtling toward them with unstoppable momentum.

Despite his comical relief throughout the novel, he is known to have beaten his wife Irma senseless and although as his condition worsened, her ‘injuries ceased’ (Part 1), the beatings haunt her and she is riddled with the guilt her husband plies her with, believing her to be a sinner and deserving of his violent wrath. Despite the hypocrisy of his claims, her husband believes it is her own sins that have crippled her thusly, and refuses to medicate her pain leading her to resort to eating food that Molly provides her that is laced with narcotics.

Her husband’s sinister methods of dealing with the medical afflictions of the townsfolk leave readers questioning his qualifications in pharmacy, choosing to treat any ailment with the ‘contents of his refrigerator’ (Part 1) and taking it upon himself to punish loose women – this is seen when Faith O’Brien attends the chemist with a vaginal itch brought on by promiscuity and he prescribes ‘White Lily abrasive cleaner’ (Part 1) in disguise. A pious man who embodies the traditional ideology of an aged era – ‘[Drugs are] addictive… all that’s needed is God’s forgiveness, a clean mind and a wholesome diet, plenty of red meat and well-cooked vegetables’ (Part 1).

In a freak accident, Mr Almanac drowns in the small creek in the back yard of his home. As he is retrieved from the mire by Sergeant Farrat, he forms a grotesque image with ‘yabbies’ clinging to his ear lobes and leeches hanging from his lips’ (Part 4).

In her older years, his wife Irma is riddled with arthritis but is still relied on by farmers as a means to predict the weather – a superstition that is not extraordinary in small rural towns.

Miss Prudence Dimm and Miss Ruth Dimm

As the schoolteacher of all the children in Dungatar, Miss Dimm is not thought of fondly, especially by Tilly who remembered her to be a nasty woman who bullied Tilly as a child – ‘Miss Dimm came, cuffed Myrtle [Tilly] over the head and dragged her from the room by her plait’ (Part 2). Typical of a small town, in addition to being the Dungatar teacher, Prudence also held the station of being librarian on Saturday mornings and on every other Wednesday.

Her sister Ruth, another meddlesome woman, works at the post office and telephone exchange and thinks nothing of opening Tilly’s mail and snooping around to unearth information on the other citizens of Dunagatar. Her taboo affair with the pharmaceutical assistant Nancy Pickett is ignored with most of the women refusing to acknowledge the possibility of a lesbian relationship in their midst.

Beula Harridene

Beula is the atypical sticky-beak that every small town has – relentless in her pursuit of gossip and hearsay, thriving off being a loud busybody that is difficult to please. As she lives a decidedly dull life herself, she finds pleasure in creating drama with others’ lives and is a problematic citizen to Sergeant Farrat who must constantly deal with her meddling complaints to him as the law in town. At times, Beula is more like a petulant child then a grown woman, ‘stamped[ing] her feet’ (Part 1) with disappointment that Tilly has returned to town. She is full of nervous energy, constantly ‘hopped[ing] from one foot to the other’ (Part 1) in an action that Farrat suspects is due to her being buck-teethed and therefore ‘starving… malnourished and mad’ (Part 1).

Gertrude (Trudy) Pratt

Beginning the novel as a shy girl who works diligently behind the counter of her parent’s general store, she is transformed by Tilly’s creation for her and insists her ‘gown’ (Part 2) will cement William’s affection for her and erase any suspicion that he was only marrying her because she was pregnant to him. Her ‘dark chestnut locks… swept up in a poised wave’ (Part 2) and ‘the bodice… wrapped firmly about her waist and snugly around her hips…’ (Part 2) is a sharp contrast to the ‘full-faced girl with [the] soft brown eyes’ (Part 2) who worked at the smallgoods counter of her father’s store and made every attempt to woo William by reapplying red lipstick in his presence and speaking in breathy tones.

Once this transformation has occurred, Gertrude (not unlike Tilly) changes her name to Trudy to symbolise her new self and insists everyone, including her family and new husband call her this. Interestingly, Ham is careful to remind us that glamour is fleeting as ‘pregnancy had added almost three stone to Trudy… her face had swelled… [and] fluid bobbed about her stern like lifebuoys of rough waves…’ (Part 2).

Power and ambition play havoc with her inherent ambition to elevate beyond her ranks and she becomes and casualty of these ambitions. By manipulating William into a hasty marriage, they grow further apart from one another until William finally admits over a drink at the bar that ‘I [he] don’t’ [doesn’t] really love my [his] wife’ (Part 3) to which the reply is ‘you’re [he’s] not alone there.’ (Part 3) Trudy is barely tolerated by her husband and his family, becomes an embarrassment to her father and mother and, rightfully, plays a dedicated portrayal of evil Lady Macbeth in the town play.

Gertrude (Trudy) Pratt Quotes

At home, Tilly sat by the fire with a glass of beer and a cigarette, thinking about her schooldays with dumpy little Gertrude who had to wear extra elastic in her plaits because her hair was so thick. Part 2

She let the tea-coloured silk negligee slide over her chilly nipples and looked in the mirror again. ‘I am Mrs William Beaumont of Windswept Crest,’ she said. Part 2

Trudy stepped close to Elsbeth and, leaning down over her, yelled, ‘ You’re always telling me what I can’t do. I can do anything I want.’ (Trudy as the play director) Part 4

Elsbeth Beaumont

Elsbeth is a controlling woman who resides outside of Dungatar on her husband’s farm. Despite her having high hopes that her ‘travelled… worldly’ (Part 1) son William will ‘need to look much further than here to find suitable companionship’ (Part 1), he gets Gertrude Pratt pregnant and there is a hasty wedding to disguise their infidelity.

Predictably, she and her daughter-in-law Gertrude argue about most things and when it is established (albeit foolishly) that the cast of the Eisteddfod no longer require Elsbeth’s funding for the play, she exits the novel calling the residents ‘a bunch of fools… half-wits… uncouth, grotesque and common…’ (Part 4) in a sudden barrage of truths.

William Beaumont Junior

William, an eligible bachelor in the Dungatar town, returns from agricultural college in the first half of the novel. Although Gertrude is originally infatuated with him, William is relatively ambivalent toward the ‘girl leaning over a bin shovelling chaff into a hessian sack’ (Part 1) and believes a man who has ‘mixed in society’ (Part 1) will be able to snag a wife from better circles than the Pratts. William, typical of many young men of the era is pressured to be successful and his mother reminds anyone that will listen that he must ‘work towards our [his family’s] future’ (Part 1) but self-doubt overwhelms him and although he toys with the idea of Tilly as a potential match, in an effort to lose himself in blissful oblivion, he and Gertrude sleep together and a hasty marriage much ensue. Interestingly, in the Eisteddfod, William is cast as King Duncan in the Scottish play, a role of the great King that is betrayed by his loyal friends and dies in the first act.

William Beaumont Junior Quote

‘My future,’ muttered William determinedly, ‘I will make a life worth living here.’ Then self-doubt engulfed him and he looked at his lap, his chin quivering. Part 1

Muriel and Alvin Pratt

The Pratts are owners of the Pratt General Store, the mercantile shop in the centre of Dungatar. Alvin was said to have ‘a courteous manner, but he was mean’ (Part 1) and this is probably why he was not liked by the townsfolk and they usually turned their backs on him. He refers to his daughter as a ‘great calico bag of water…’ (Part 1) and exhibits very little affection toward her throughout the rest of the novel.

His wife Muriel is a pushy snob. She is a meddler and an opinionated gossip who, despite her husband’s insistence that there’s no ‘chance of unloading her [their daughter, Gertrude] to anyone’, pushes her daughter to attend the dance on Saturday in hopes to strike a connection with the town’s newest bachelor, William Beaumont.

Muriel and Alvin Pratt Quote

‘This is the Pratts’ store,’ said Lesley, breaking the trance. ‘The only supply outlet for miles, a gold mine! It’s got everything – the bread monopoly, the butcher, haberdashery, hardware, even veterinary products…’ (Lesley introducing the town to Una) Part 3

• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

©2024 Green Bee Study Guides

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

It’s Couture O’Clock at Chanel

A new collection of watches takes inspiration from the founder’s history as a dressmaker.

By Sarah Royce-Greensill

The trappings of dressmaking — including thimbles, thread, scissors and measuring tapes — feature in a new 20-piece Couture O’Clock watch collection by Chanel, inspired by the house’s couture workshops on Rue Cambon in Paris.

Arnaud Chastaingt, director of Chanel’s Watchmaking Creation Studio, wrote in an email that he had chosen to focus on the “roots of the House” by reimagining the brand’s core watch designs, including the J12, the Première and the Boy.Friend.

The collection, available in Chanel boutiques in June, includes seven limited-edition versions of the J12, in varying combinations of steel, 18-karat gold, black and white ceramic and diamonds (starting at $7,000 for the 33 millimeter in white ceramic).

On three of these, the time is indicated by a pair of scissors and a sewing needle. Three others feature a cartoon depiction of Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel wearing a suit and pearls. The seventh has a plainer, diamond-set dial.

The J12 Couture Workshop Automaton watch (price on application) is powered by the Caliber 6, Chanel’s newest in-house caliber and the first automaton complication to be created at the brand’s watchmaking facility in La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland. When the automaton is activated, the cartoon couturier appears to dance, scissors in hand, next to her dressmaking dummy.

It is a reminder, Mr. Chastaingt wrote, that “Mademoiselle Chanel thought of herself first and foremost as a seamstress.”

The Couture O’Clock collection also includes two new iterations of the Première, Chanel’s first watch design, which debuted in 1987. The Première Ruban Couture, priced at $9,650, features a double wraparound leather strap with the lines and numerals of a metric tape measure. The Première Charms Couture, for $10,300, has the same octagonal dial, but it dangles from a woven leather and gold-plated steel bracelet alongside steel and enamel charms of items like a spool of thread and a thimble.

On the new $10,300 Boy.Friend watch, the dial features a dressmaker’s pattern for a classic Chanel tweed jacket, while its bezel is adorned with an 18-karat gold chain, a reference to the chains sewn into the hems of those jackets.

The collection also includes four long 18-karat gold-and-diamond pendant watches, with dials hidden at the base of a thimble; inside a safety pin; in the waist of a couture dressmaker’s dummy; or within a pincushion-shaped medallion.

Chanel’s couture heritage was “an obsession, that I’m constantly taking into new territory that you don’t necessarily expect,” Mr. Chastaingt wrote.

Hence, that medallion pendant is also one of four new additions to the house’s Mademoiselle Privé collection. (That collection previously explored the theme of couture through the Bouton range , in which dials are hidden beneath bejeweled buttons on tweed and leather cuffs, and in the pincushion-inspired Pique-Aiguilles range.)

But the “masterpiece” of the Couture O’Clock collection, Mr. Chastaingt said, is a musical table clock and automaton called the Musical Clock Couture Workshop. At 34.2 centimeters (about 13.5 inches) tall, it features five dressmaker’s dummies, each adorned with an 18-karat gold and diamond brooch.

Powered by an automaton movement made by the Swiss company Reuge, the dummies rise, fall and swivel beneath a miniature gold and diamond chandelier, to the tune of “My Woman,” a song from 1932.

The time is displayed along a tape measure at the base, and the clock is wound using an 18-karat-gold key set with 221 diamonds, which hangs from a separate necklace that is set with 132 diamonds.

Mr. Chastaingt called the piece a “miniature world,” one that “suggests the eternal race of time.”