“The Same Privilege As a Sponge”: Individualism and the True Heroes in The
Crucible and Inherit the Wind
Literature illustrating the intense heat and drama surrounding a courtroom trial renders a
definition of justice, and explores the complexities of human nature. In courtroom dramas, it is
often not a person, but an idea or a belief being put on trial. These courtroom dramas allow
individuals to show vehement courage by standing up for their beliefs and defying social norms.
In Arthur Miller's The Crucible and Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee's Inherit the Wind, the
courtroom trials revolve around the right of people to think and the right to protect oneself from
false accusations. While the verdict for both characters resembles a loss in the legal sense, both
individuals attain a great moral victory and inspire others to fight society’s demand for
conformity. Though the main characters are markedly different as John Proctor is figure standing
for pride in light of previous failings, and Berty Cates is a figure that embodies the undying
desire for knowledge, both are deemed to be guilty in a society that condemns opposition. They
actually emerge, however, as the true victors by standing for the discovery of the truth and
perpetuating human courage.
The quest for truth is a significant theme within both plays. In The Crucible, the undying
desire to discover the causes behind mysterious sicknesses leads everyone to believe in the
common witchcraft theory. In Inherit the Wind, the struggle for truth is over the creation of
humans in a society where a religious background is accepted as the sole explanation for human
existence. Subsequently, the courts suppress a man's right to accept evolutionary concepts and to
think for himself. In both plays, a conception of the truth serves as a necessary foundation for the
attainment of security. Individuals take solace in what they perceive to be the truth because the
truth gives answers, is self-assuring, and eliminates insecurities and the threat of the unknown.
As a result, in both plays, many people struggling to find the truth rashly become set in their own
traditional mindsets which condemn dissent, because tradition often equates with a sense
security. Men like Brady and Parris go so far as to refuse to accept any form of opposition in a
world where “falsehood has achieved the status of an institution” (Bonnet 36).
Since the search for truth is pervasive within both plays, once a large group of people
follow the same conviction, the others become submissive and abide by the majority opinion. For
example, in The Crucible, what starts off as an absurd lie by Abigail William soon becomes a
common belief shared by the entire town. When Abigail “sees images” of men and women being
possessed by the devil, the town and the courts readily accept them as fact. Taken to an extreme,
this hysteria of the majority hinders everyone from successfully defying the accusation of
witchcraft. When wrongfully accused of having spoken with the devil, most individuals concur.
For various reasons varying from a genuine belief in the accusation to an understandable desire
to avoid execution, the majority refrain from telling the real truth. In Inherit the Wind, even the
possibility that evolution might have some validity behind it is thrown out because it challenges
everything the people of the town have ever known. It is an affront to their religious background
and system of beliefs. In both cases, submissiveness makes a coward of everyone as they refuse
to even acknowledge the possibility of other explanations.
Though the inherently conformist nature of humankind is predominant, a few individuals
serve as exceptions. These are the ones who work to bring about change. John Proctor and Berty
Cates understand that everyone has the right to think, and they proceed to challenge existing
beliefs and serve as role models. Within both plays, both are conceived to be denouncing
religion. Brady falsely exclaims, “ I'll tell you what he's [Cates] trying to do! He wants to destroy
everybody's belief in the Bible, and in God!” (Lawrence 98). On the contraire, the trial was in
effect about the right to think and not the condemning of religion. Likewise, in The Crucible
Danforth accuses Proctor of turning away from God when he says “You are combined with antiChrist, are you not? I have seen your power; you will not deny it!” (Miller 111). Proctor is
accused of witchcraft, when in actuality this accusation stems from another's desire for revenge
and the hysteria of the majority. Aware of their innocence and the false accusations that beset
society, Proctor and Cates exemplify strength and courage.
Cates from Inherit the Wind teaches his students Darwin's theories of evolution and how
they may have some merit in explaining the creation and evolution of humans. This ability to
share and present new information isn't a right under the state law, subsequently making teaching
Darwinism illegal. Religious values are clearly more favored as when Brady announces, “There
will be a prayer meeting tonight on the courthouse lawn, to pray for justice and guidance”
(Lawrence 48). Anyone who digresses from the confines of religion is neglected, even in the
courtroom. In a truly remarkable fashion, Berty Cates teaches evolution and declares his
innocence in spite of a keen awareness of the consequences. Cates is an admirable character for
his defiance in the face of prosecution. As Drummond argues, Cates was simply fighting for the
“faculty which lifts man above all other creatures on the earth: the power of his brain to reason”
(Lawrence 93). All Cates wanted was to “be accorded the same privilege as a sponge” (94)--the
right to think. He additionally wanted to advocate the Constitutional value of separation of
church and state. An agnostic trying to stand for justice in an overwhelmingly intolerant society,
Berty Cates is a character worthy of admiration and a heroic label.
John Proctor from The Crucible makes the ultimate sacrifice of life to promote
righteousness and the truth. He ultimately refuses to falsely admit to the sin of witchcraft--an
admission which would release him from the impending execution. The story is one wherein “the
underlying movement is one of man’s search for vindication in the sight of God and himself”
(Collins 123). The influences of Giles Corey and Rebecca Nurse are strong and Proctor simply
cannot bear the thought of betraying them and his own self as well. John's name becomes the key
component of his decision to hang instead of falsely confess. His name means everything to him
for it is the one thing he has left. It is symbol of his reputation, his goodness, and his morals.
When Proctor says he will hang instead of sign away his name, Hale exclaims, “Man, you will
hang! You cannot!” (Miller 133). Proctor then declares, “I can. And there's your marvel, that I
can. You have made your magic now, for now I do think I see some shred of goodness in John
Proctor” (Miller 133). Within this telling dialogue, the influence of Proctor’s past failings is
evident. Having participated in an extramarital affair with Abigail Williams, Proctor is a
complex character burdened by his misgivings. His staunch opposition to forfeiting his name
reveals his desire to prevail in the name of goodness, in light of his past mistakes. Indeed, his
wife Elizabeth Proctor exclaims after he rips up the oath, “He have his goodness now. God
forbid I take it from him!”(134). As a matter maintaining pride, Proctor makes the ultimate
sacrifice. Though he is executed, his defiance of compliance and conformity makes him a victor.
He is “heroic in maintaining [his] innocence at a time when false confession was likely to save
[his life]” (Popkin 141).
The main characters of The Crucible and Inherit the Wind men face tyranny of the
majority, false accusations, and inevitably a loss in the courtroom. Throughout all of this,
however, they persevere and stand strong for their morals and ideals. It is people like this who
give hope to others and inspire reform. They give courage and hope to others to stand up for the
same cause. Proctor gives courage to other people who refuse to sign a lie and instills reason in
the minds of many so consumed by the mass hysteria they lack clarity. As critic Jean-Marie
Bonnet keenly observes, Proctor’s victory is one that will prevail after the death (Bonnet 36).
This idea is revealed in the line, “Shall the dust praise him? Shall the worms declare his
truth?”(Miller 134). Additionally, even though at the end of the Scopes trial Cates is fined, he
and Drummond still emerge as victors. When Cates asks if he won or lost, Drummond replies, “
You won…Millions of people will say you won. They'll read in the papers tonight that you
smashed a bad law…You don't suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you? Tomorrow
it'll be something else--and another fella will have to stand up. And you've given him the guts to
do it!” (Lawrence 123).
In conclusion, the quest for truth is a battle everyone comes into contact with in the
dramas The Crucible and Inherit the Wind. While most conform to either existing ideologies or
are drawn by the others into a frantic hysteria, a few individuals do rise above this and fight for
their rights and the truth. In effect, the dramas are stories of “individuals trying to assert their
individuality” in a “strangled…web of social constraints” (Bonnet 36 ). They are stories of
universality. They are stories portraying how no matter the circumstance, there will be a few men
and women who will continue to fight against injustices. They are stories of men like Cates and
Proctor who embody human goodness and courage, and give hope to society and bring about
change. These moral victories establish them as men who can be considered nothing less than
heroes and true victors.
REFERENCES
Bonnet, Jean-Marie. Society vs the Individual in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. English Studies.
Academic Search Premier. 1982. 63:1. 32-37.
Collins, Anthony R. Arthur Miller and the Judgment of God. The South Central Bulletin. 1982.
120-124.
Popkin, Henry. Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” College English. JSTOR.1964. 26:2. 139-146.
REFLECTION
The assignment for this paper was to pick two works and compare and contrast them using the
assistance of scholarly articles. Since The Crucible and Inherit the Wind are two of my
favorite plays, and have a lot of common, it only seemed natural to make them the focus
of my paper. The main characters John Proctor and Berty Cates serve as prime examples
of characters whose legal misgivings seem minor in comparison with the great moral
victories they have attained. My first paper was fairly decent, but after receiving very
helpful feedback, I decided to expound upon the differences between the two men. In my
first paper, I had grouped them together, and assumed they were driven by the same
motives. In the second paper, I changed my thesis a little bit to account for the character
differences, but indicated that in spite of these differences the two characters were still
bound by the same desire for the perpetuation of truth, and inspired others to act in
righteous ways. I also elaborated in some areas to make the flow of my argument better,
and took out fanciful language that didn’t really add to the argument. All in all, I think it
is now a much stronger argument.