The Crucible and Equus
Compare and contrast the ways in which ‘The Crucible’ and Equus’ follow when religious faith turns into religious mania. How far does the two text attempt to present a more positive attitude to a life lived in faith?
The plays ‘Equus’ and ‘The Crucible’ both explore the positive aspects of religion and its damaging qualities. The critic Mitchel Hay suggests that ‘The parental, adolescent and professional conflicts exhibited by Peter Shaffer’s Equus need not be disruptive. They can be fed into a crucible of growth.’ The plays reflect the situations in American and British society during the time in which they were written. ‘The Crucible’ investigates the effects of religion universally accepted and how the unknown leads to mass anxiety and distress; Arthur Miller states ‘I believe that the reader will discover here the essential nature of one of the strangest and most awful chapters in human history.’ By contrast Equus reveals how mental instability can lead to a different type of religious mania, which destroys both the individual and those around him. Peter Shaffer’s opinions are expressed though this quotation from ‘Amadeus’, “what use, after all, is man, if not to teach God His lessons?’ Both plays project intense religious faith and its fatal consequences however they also illustrate examples of positive worship, such as Rebecca Nurse, whose faith is genuine and never corrupted. Perhaps unexpectedly we are also able to sympathise with Dora’s Christianity, despite it being a pivotal contributor to Alan’s religious mania. Despite these small insights into religion’s positive impacts, there is still strong evidence in both plays to suggest that when religion collides with issues such as sexuality, tyranny, envy, deceit and conflict it results in mania.
Abigail Williams is a vital character in ‘The Crucible’. Her insight into the lies and hypocrisy of the puritan church, leads directly to her exploitation of its power. Sarah Lasko, one actress playing the
The plays ‘Equus’ and ‘The Crucible’ both explore the positive aspects of religion and its damaging qualities. The critic Mitchel Hay suggests that ‘The parental, adolescent and professional conflicts exhibited by Peter Shaffer’s Equus need not be disruptive. They can be fed into a crucible of growth.’ The plays reflect the situations in American and British society during the time in which they were written. ‘The Crucible’ investigates the effects of religion universally accepted and how the unknown leads to mass anxiety and distress; Arthur Miller states ‘I believe that the reader will discover here the essential nature of one of the strangest and most awful chapters in human history.’ By contrast Equus reveals how mental instability can lead to a different type of religious mania, which destroys both the individual and those around him. Peter Shaffer’s opinions are expressed though this quotation from ‘Amadeus’, “what use, after all, is man, if not to teach God His lessons?’ Both plays project intense religious faith and its fatal consequences however they also illustrate examples of positive worship, such as Rebecca Nurse, whose faith is genuine and never corrupted. Perhaps unexpectedly we are also able to sympathise with Dora’s Christianity, despite it being a pivotal contributor to Alan’s religious mania. Despite these small insights into religion’s positive impacts, there is still strong evidence in both plays to suggest that when religion collides with issues such as sexuality, tyranny, envy, deceit and conflict it results in mania.
Abigail Williams is a vital character in ‘The Crucible’. Her insight into the lies and hypocrisy of the puritan church, leads directly to her exploitation of its power. Sarah Lasko, one actress playing the