English 351
Character Analysis Paper
Directions + Model
Overview: The Character Analysis Paper is the final project of
character analysis for The Crucible unit. Composed of 4
paragraphs, this assignment combines 1) an adjusted character
motivation paragraph, 2) a STEAL Charts 1-2 & 3-4
Comparison paragraph, 3) a STEAL Charts 1-2 & 3-4 Contrast
paragraph, & 4) a conclusion.
 Introduction (Motive) Paragraph: In (author’s name)
(type of literature) (title), (character’s name) is motivated
by (character’s motivation). This is evident through
(character’s name)’s (one part of the character analysis
chart) & his/her (another part of the character analysis
chart) throughout the (type of literature). However, while
(character’s name)’s (part of chart that is the same
through Acts 1-2 & 3-4) remain(s) the same throughout
Acts 1-4, his/her (part of chart that is different between
Acts 1-2 & 3-4) differ(s).
 STEAL Chart Comparison Paragraph: Similar to the the
Equiano/Douglass comparison/contrast assignment, the
topic sentence must discuss what element of the STEAL
Charts you are comparing (word this as you like)–if it’s
thoughts, speech, actions, etc. The following sentences
repeat a cycle: quote sentence with a lead-in & quote from
each chart, followed by an analysis sentence to explain your
quote’s significance & what this quoted example says about
your character between Acts 1-2 & 3-4 (repeat this cycle
once). Provide an evaluative concluding sentence that
explains why you believe this character maintained the
same characteristic between Acts 1-2 & 3-4.
 STEAL Chart Contrast Paragraph: Follow the method
above but contrast instead.
 Formula for the above paragraphs: Topic sentence.
Lead-in + quote. Quote analysis sentence. 2nd lead-in +
quote. 2nd analysis sentence. Conclusion sentence that
explains why.
 Conclusion Paragraph: This is the 4th & final paragraph
that simply explains your final thoughts on your character
to evaluate your character’s motivation & explain why he
or she did or did not reach his or her goal. Overall, was he
or she a hero, a villain, or is it more complicated than
that? Why?
Total: /60  1) 5 points for Acts 1-2 STEAL Chart 2) 5
points for Acts 3-4 STEAL Chart 3) 5 points for rough
draft 4) 5 points for peer review 5) 10 points for MLA
citation, format, & mechanics 6) 30 points for properly
formatted & developed content
Example: Flip this side over to see example
Doe 1
Jane Doe
Mr. Emery
English 351-1
24 September 2013
Character Analysis Paper
In Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible, Reverand Hale is motivated by the
need to do what he feels is truly right. This is evident through Hale’s speech
and his actions throughout the play. However, while Hale’s speech remains the
same throughout Acts 1-4, his actions differ.
Hale’s speech reflects a critical and analytical character who studies the
people and the situation in Salem to form his own conclusions of right and
wrong. For example, in Act 2 Hale visits the Proctor household as an attempt to
decide if the Proctors are innocent or potential witches: “Proctor, let you open
with me now, for I have a rumor that troubles me. It's said you hold no belief
that there may even be witches in the world. Is that true, sir” (1140)? This
quote illustrates Hale’s method of questioning characters’ beliefs and values.
Hale’s evaluative process is again witnessed through his speech in Act 3
regarding Mary Warren’s confession that the witchcraft phenomenon is a sham:
“But this child claims the girls are not truthful, and if they are not–” (1189). He
is thinking aloud, processing Mary Warren’s confession; here he begins to form
the conclusion that witchcraft in Salem is false and that innocents will die for a
lie. Focused on justice based in reality and logic, Hale critically evaluates
situations, a characteristic that foils Danforth.
Doe 2
While Hale’s speech portrays consistency in his character, his actions in
Acts 1-2 contradict those in Acts 3-4. Portrayed as a member of the court bent
on exorcising the witchcraft infestation in Salem in Acts 1-2, Hales naturally
antagonizes Proctor in the process: “Proctor, if [Elizabeth] is innocent, the
court–” (1131). Hale’s disbelief of Proctor depicts a contrast of a moral man
and an immoral man on two sides of the witchcraft debate. However, in Acts 3
Hale quits the court proclaiming, “I denounce these proceedings” (1213).
Angered by the unjust and illogical court towards which he previously sided,
Hale storms out and then evolves into a defender of the imprisoned. As their
defender, Hale’s tension with Proctor dissolves, and he instead tries to save the
man throughout Act 4, an action that transforms Hale into a dynamic character
who beckons sympathy with the reader mirroring Proctor’s change in the
second half.
Hale finds himself in Salem doing God’s good work, working to hunt
and exorcise the town of witches. Unlike others such as Danforth, however,
Hale’s motivation and set of beliefs based around his motive to do what is
“truly” right ultimately proves to be the protection of the people of Salem, a
situation he enters as a result of his evolving nature and critical decisionmaking; Since Hale finds himself at odds with those he once sided with–even
quitting the court–Hale become a force of good from beginning to end,
heroically working to save the lives of those who even damn themselves
(Proctor). He no longer opposes Proctor by the end of the play, and he
maintains his sense of morality and justice, even if the logistics are redefined.
Hale achieves his motive, and is even transformed by it, for he relentlessly
pursues this motive even though he fails in his goal to save Salem’s citizens.