Arthur Millers play Essay Example for Free

Arthur Millers play Essay Arthur Millers play The Crucible is, on the surface, a play about a real life historical event that took place in the small American town of Salem in 1692. A mass hysteria gripped the town because of accusations of witchcraft and compacting with the devil. This led to many innocent people being hanged. However, some people believe that if you look deeper into the play you can see clear parallels with 1692 Salem and 1950s America. After the end of the Second World War most of Europe was devastated and left trying to recover. This left the USA and the USSR as the two dominant superpowers, both of these heavily armed nations were extremely scared of the other attacking them and so came an arms race to try to beat the other side. Diplomatic relations between the two powers broke down and widespread fear of communism took over the USA. So began the Cold War. Senator Joseph McCarthy set up the House Un-American Committee to root out communists and their sympathisers. This included anyone who had remotely left-wing views. Many actors, writers and musicians were brought before the committee including Miller himself. If you remember a crucible is a dish used to heat out the impurities from metals, you can see how it relates to Proctor in court being heated to provide names and confessions. This is much the same as what happened to Miller who was also asked to name names (but refused). To answer the question it has to be remembered that Miller intended that the play be performed on stage and not read like a book. He uses stage directions to convey to the audience some of the feelings characters are experiencing. On page 108 stage directions for Proctor say With great force of will, but not quite looking at her. The shows the audience that Proctor still cannot forgive himself for his affair with Abigail. It also shows the conflict between Proctor and Elizabeth and also Proctor and Abigail. Proctor also has a conflict with Parris, who he correctly believes is an incompetent fool. In addition to this he also has conflict he also a conflict with all the girls because he knows they are faking the whole thing. Miller shows this by having Proctor go to court to try and prove the girls liars. He brings Mary Warren into Court saying, She never saw no spirits. He also has conflicts with judges Haythorne and Danforth. On page 113 he says I speak my own sins, I cannot judge another. (Crying out with hatred) The stage directions for this quote clearly shows this conflict. These conflicts are all of one particular type, conflicts with other people, except for the conflicts with Judges Haythorne and Danforth who could also represent Proctors conflicts with Authority.  Reverend Hale has a conflict with Proctor because he believes that Proctor should sign the confession to live and not die for his pride. At one point he shows his anger at Proctors decision to tear up his confession says Man, you will hang! You cannot!.  A lot of characters especially Proctor have conflicts with authority. Proctor has a huge conflict with the courts and also the church, although the two are very close together. This is where Miller uses him to explore his own conflict with McCarthyism and his own experiences before the House Un-American Committee. On page 114 stage directions for Proctor read Proctor has finished signing when Danforth reaches for the paper. But Proctor snatches it up and now a wild terror is rising in him, and a boundless anger this shows very much how much Proctor hates the courts and could also show us something of Millers feelings towards McCarthyism. This is because both Proctor and Miller know that the courts/government are almost trying to bribe people into giving the names of others even if the others are innocent people that are being named to get them out of trouble or being named for some kind of revenge purpose. To add to his long list of conflicts Proctor also has a conflict within himself about whether or now he should sign the confession and name people to save his life or to protect others and his honour and die. Miller also faced this (although he was only threatened with jail not death) but like Proctor he refused to name people and escaped without severe punishment.  Elizabeth Proctor also has conflicts within herself as to whether or not to help John Proctor in his decision to sign the paper or not. In the end she does not help him and he must do it himself. This may show how alone you could feel when being questioned about your Un-American Activities in 1950s/60s America. In the end of the play Proctor is hung for not confessing or naming names. This ending solves many of the conflicts in the play. It solves all Proctors conflicts with people and authority and also other people conflicts with him. However it could spark of new conflicts within people such as the girls who faked the whole thing and must be wondering whether they should have said something before people were killed or whether to say something now. I think Miller is using his characters to show us different conflicts in society and the problems with people and how they can do things they ordinarily wouldnt to gain an advantage or to escape trouble. He also uses the conflicts to show problems with high authority and how they could collapse if they were revealed to be wrong about serious things like the witch trials. I think Miller is trying to tell us something we should all probably learn from.

Comparing Home in Richard Fords I Must Be Going and Scott Sanders Hom

Comparing Home in Richard Ford's I Must Be Going and Scott Sander's Homeplace Most people define home as a comfortable setting which provides love and warmth. In Scott Sanders â€Å"Homeplace† and Richard Ford’s â€Å"I Must Be Going† the concept of home is defined in two different ways. Sanders believes that by moving from place to place, the meaning of home has been diminished. Sanders believes that America’s culture â€Å"nudges everyone into motion† (Sanders 103) and that his â€Å"longing to become an inhabitant rather than a drifter† (103) is what sets him apart from everyone else. Ford prefers to stay on the move. His argument is life’s too short to settle in one place. He believes home is where you make it, but permanence is not a requirement. Sanders argues that â€Å"in our national mythology, the worst fate is to be trapped on a farm, in a village, or in some unglamorous marriage† (Sanders 102). Ford is a prime example of someone who believes this myth. In all of Ford’s moves from place to place, he has been in search of something better. He says that all of his moving is a result of â€Å"longing that overtakes me like a fast car on the freeway and makes me willing to withstand a feeling of personal temporariness† (Ford 109). Ford acts on his feelings without realizing that he will only be there for a short time. Sanders associates yearning for some other place as being wrong. He quotes Henry Thoreau saying, â€Å"The man who is often thinking that it is better to be somewhere else than where he is excommunicates himself† (104). Ford does believe staying in one place is normal, â€Å"One never moves without an uneasiness that staying is the norm† (110). However, Ford blam es growing up in Jackson, Mississippi as his reason for wil... ...t people Rushdie mentions here. Ford is the person who â€Å"roots† himself in ideas because he is always looking for that special place but can never find it. Sanders would rather commit himself to one spot because he feels any one place is as good as any. Sanders gains this mentality based on the discoveries of Copernicus and that Earth is not the center of the universe. He believes, â€Å"any point is as good as any other for observing the world† (Sanders 103). Ford finds no truth in this statement as he continues to move â€Å"toward someplace we badly need to go† (Ford 111). Works Cited Sanders, Scott â€Å"Homeplace.† Seeing and Writing. Donald McQuade and Christine Mcquade. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2000. 101-104 Ford, Richard â€Å"I Must Be Going† Seeing and Writing. Donald McQuade and Christine McQuade. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 109-111

Waiting for Godot: Proven as a Tragic-Comedy

Is the label tragic-comedy truly suitable for the drama Waiting for Godot? A tragic-comedy by definition, is a work which intertwines elements both tragic and comic in nature. This characterization can be questioned as to its legitimacy in its application to Waiting for Godot. However, such skepticism of the classification will soon be expunged. Necessarily, examples of tragic and comic techniques, as well as theme, will be identified and confirmed as content within the story. Body A Tragic-comedy is a play which claims a plot fit for tragedy but which ends happily like a comedy.The action is serious in theme and subject matter and tone also sometimes, but it seems to be a tragic catastrophe until an unexpected turn in events brings out the happy ending. The characters of a tragic-comedy are noble but they are involved in improbabilities. In such a play tragic and comic elements are mixed together. Fletcher, in his Preface to the Faithful Shepherdess, defines a tragic-comedy as: â₠¬Å"A tragic-comedy is not so called in respect to mirth and killing, but in respect it wants death which is enough to make it no tragedy. Shakespeare’s ‘Cymbeline’ and ‘The Winter’s Tale’ may also be categorized as tragic-comedy. Time is clearly presented as a tragedy and creates many hardships in Waiting for Godot. Waiting is generally perceived negatively and is the central focus of the story. The two main characters Estragon and Vladimir, are forced to waste away their days while awaiting the arrival of a man who never comes. Estragon and Vladimir have nothing to do in the meantime and in result time becomes a dreaded inevitability that they must endure. Because they extensively repeat the same actions, time is cyclical. Each character seems to have a faulty memory, which further proves problematic.For example, this is seen in a conversation between Vladimir and Estragon: Vladimir: â€Å"That passed the time. † Estragon: â€Å"It wo uld have passed in any case. † Vladimir: â€Å"Yes, but not so rapidly. †. Time loses meaning and value when the actions of one day are without purpose or certainty on the next. Tragically, Estragon is regularly beaten, he admits: â€Å"Beat me? Certainly they beat me. †. And Vladimir suffers from kidney troubles. Estragon’s feet and Vladimir’s kidneys are also taken to be granted. They both resent that they should be asked whether it still hurts. It is implied that it hurts all the time.When Vladimir asks Estragon whether his boots are hurting him, he responds: â€Å"Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts! †. Estragon then asks Vladimir of his kidney trouble and comically Vladimir responds: â€Å"Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts! †. In actuality his trouble is so great that it does not even permit him to laugh. The comedy in Waiting for Godot quickly turns into tragedy at the thought of the helplessness Estragon and Vladimir now face. The two are waiting for someone who never arrives. In order to pass time they participate in irrelevant, meaningless activity.Their lives are impossible to control and are without pleasure and their lifestyles are extremely tragic as it is. The source is the situation of pointless waiting of Estragon and Vladimir. They do not know who Godot is and even do not know what will happen if they stop waiting. Lack of essential knowledge makes them totally impotent and powerless. The total atmosphere of the play is very bleak to dark-comedy. For example, Vladimir is determined not to hear Estragon’s nightmare. However, Estragon still pleads with him in vain to hear him, saying that there is nobody else to whom he may communicate his private nightmares.The situation of Lucky is comically pathetic, especially in view of his glorious past, as Pozzo describes it. Lucky is apparently frustrated and obsessed with life and the struggles himself and people as a whole must endure and begins to rant: â€Å"†¦ the flames, the tears the stones so blue so calm alas alas on on the skull the skull the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis, the labors abandoned left unfinished graver still abode of stones in a word I resume alas alas abandoned unfinished the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis the skull alas the stones Cunard tennis †¦ the stones †¦ so calm †¦Cunard †¦ unfinished †¦Ã¢â‚¬ A comic moment involves Estragon putting off and on his boots, as well as Vladimir’s game with his hat which appears as if he was performing at a circus. He also suffers from a prostrate problem and walks with stiff and short strides. The two each seem to engage often in unsure banter and easily influenced decisions, for example: Estragon: â€Å"Let’s go. † Vladimir: â€Å"We cannot. † Estragon: â€Å"Why not? † Vladimir: â€Å"We are waiting for Godot. † (They do not move. ) Estragon and V ladimir put on and take off each other’s hat as well as that of Lucky again and again.It shows that in the world of tramps, there is no place of significant actions. The most farcical situation in the play is the one where the tramps are testing the strength of the cord with which they wish to hang themselves and the cord breaks under the strain. Waiting for Godot consists of two men unable to act, move, or think in any significant way while they kill time waiting for a mysterious man, Godot. The characters fail to realize that this very act of waiting is a choice; instead, they view it as a mandatory part of their daily routine.This habit of uncertainty extends even to the most extreme of decisions, for example: Vladimir: â€Å"We’ll hang ourselves tomorrow†¦unless Godot comes. † Estragon: â€Å"And if he comes? † Vladimir: â€Å"Then we’ll be saved. † Their inability to make conscious decisions can be viewed as tragically unfortunate, while at the same time it can also create humor. Conclusion In conclusion, multiple comic and tragic schemes were identified, as well as the theme of the drama; confirming Waiting for Godot as a tragic-comedy.Certain events and dialogue between characters throughout the story promoted tragic and comic scenarios successfully and proved to be legitimate examples. While Waiting for Godot contains tragedy and comedy, is this the expectation for all dramas to qualify as a tragic-comedy? Finally, all and every story should be precisely and attentively observed before generalizing it within a label, to prevent pre-determined opinions and encourage personal perspective.

Click and Drag a Delphi Form Without the Caption Bar

The most common way to move a window is to drag it by its title bar. Read on to find out how you can provide dragging capabilities for Delphi forms without a title bar, so the user can move a form by clicking anywhere on the client area. For example, consider the case of a Windows application that doesnt have a title bar, how can we move such a window?  In fact, its possible to create windows with a nonstandard title bar and even non-rectangular forms. In this case, how could Windows know where the borders and the corners of the window are? The WM_NCHitTest Windows Message The Windows operating system is heavily based on handling messages. For example, when you click on a window or a control, Windows sends it a wm_LButtonDown message, with additional information about where the mouse cursor is and which control keys are currently pressed. Sounds familiar? Yes, this is nothing more than an OnMouseDown event in Delphi. Similarly, Windows sends a wm_NCHitTest message whenever a mouse event occurs, that is, when the cursor moves, or when a mouse button is pressed or released. Code to Input If we can make Windows think that the user is dragging (has clicked on) the title bar rather than the client area, then the user could drag the window by clicking in the client area. The easiest way to do this is to fool Windows into thinking that youre actually clicking on the title bar of a form. Heres what you have to do: 1. Insert the following line into your forms Private declarations section (message handling procedure declaration): procedure WMNCHitTest(var Msg: TWMNCHitTest) ; message WM_NCHitTest; 2. Add the following code into the implementation section of your forms unit (where Form1 is the  assumed form name): procedure TForm1.WMNCHitTest(var Msg: TWMNCHitTest) ;begin   Ã‚   inherited;  Ã‚   if Msg.Result htClient then Msg.Result : htCaption;end; The first line of code in the message handler calls the inherited method to obtain the default handling for the wm_NCHitTest message. The If part in the procedure intercepts and changes your windows behavior. This is what actually happens: when the operating system sends a wm_NCHitTest message to the window, together with the mouse coordinates, the window returns a code that states which portion of itself has been hit. The important piece of information, for our task, is in the value of the Msg.Result field. At this point, we have an opportunity to modify the message result. This is what we do: if the user has clicked in the forms client area we make Windows to think the user clicked on the title bar. In Object Pascal words: if the message return value is HTCLIENT, we simply change it to HTCAPTION. No More Mouse Events By changing the default behavior of our forms we remove the ability of Windows to notify you when the mouse is over the client area. One side effect of this trick is that your form will no longer generate events for mouse messages. Captionless-Borderless Window If you want a captionless borderless window similar to a floating toolbar, set the Forms Caption to an empty string, disable all of the BorderIcons, and set the BorderStyle to bsNone. A form can be changed in various ways by applying custom code in the CreateParams method. More WM_NCHitTest Tricks If you look more carefully at the wm_NCHitTest message youll see that return value of the function indicates the position of the cursor hot spot. This enables us to play some more with the message to create strange results. The following code fragment will prevent users to close your forms by clicking on the Close button. if Msg.Result htClose then Msg.Result : htNowhere; If the user is trying to move the form by clicking on the caption bar and dragging, the code replaces the result of the message with a result which indicates the user clicked on the client area. This prevents the user from moving the window with the mouse (opposite to what we were doing in the begging of the article). if Msg.Result htCaption then Msg.Result : htClient; Having Components On a Form In most cases, well have some components on a form. Lets say, for example, that one Panel object is on a form. If Align property of a panel is set to alClient, the Panel fills the entire client area so that it is impossible to select the parent form by clicking on it. The code above will not work — why? Its because the mouse is always moving over the Panel component, not the form. To move our form by dragging a panel on the form we have to add few lines of code in the OnMouseDown event procedure for the Panel component: procedure TForm1.Panel1MouseDown  Ã‚   (Sender: TObject; Button: TMouseButton;  Ã‚   Shift: TShiftState; X, Y: Integer) ;begin   Ã‚   ReleaseCapture;   Ã‚   SendMessage(Form1.Handle, WM_SYSCOMMAND, 61458, 0) ; end; Note: This code will not work with non-window controls such as TLabel components.