Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sabrina Butler
Mr. Pace
C Block
2 May 2023
To be civil means to follow societal and cultural rules, norms, and expectations that a society
has. To disobey means to obstruct or protest these societal, cultural, or civil norms. In every
society, there is the fundamental question: “When should one rebel against the norm?” One
should rebel against the norm when they feel they are being oppressed. In the excerpt from
“Civil Disobedience”, Thoreau highlights how it is crucial for citizens to challenge the
government when they deem it appropriate in order to maintain a democracy; however, Miller
reveals in his play, The Crucible, that fear, and hysteria can often give positions of authority the
power to oppress.
According to Thoreau, the laws of a society are that of a living tissue, it grows with the
constantly changing ways of society. On page 2, Thoreau said, “Action from principle, the
perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially
revolutionary, and does not consist wholly with anything which was”. This statement highlights
how society is ever-changing and the rules and principles of old ways do not necessarily align or
fit with the new ways in society. Therefore, society “does not consist wholly with anything which
was” meaning that society never stays the same compared to how it was in the past. The
“perception and performance of right” will not always be synonymous, the perception of right
might mean to follow the laws and societal expectations but to perform, or act, in the right way
can mean to challenge and protest certain unjust systems in a society. Real change is made
Butler 2
through action, not principle. Nothing changes if nothing changes. It is only when a person dares
to speak up about what seems unjust that society develops and changes to satisfy and include all
members it consists of. On the other hand, in Miller’s play The Crucible, the antagonist, Abigail,
uses fear and hysteria to corrupt society rather than improve it. In an attempt to get John
Proctor’s wife, Elizabeth, out of the picture, she staged her for evidence of witchcraft. In Act 2,
Elizabeth forces the Proctors’ servant, Mary Warren, to ‘gift’ Elizabeth a doll that had a needle in
its stomach. She then stabbed herself in the stomach to make it appear as an act of voodoo
witchery. Hale came to Elizabeth Proctor to confront her about the doll, “Abigail were stabbed
tonight, a needle were found stuck into her belly-” [Elizabeth]: “And she charges me?” [Hale]:
“Aye” (Miller 72). Abigail’s wicked actions highlight how sometimes society can be controlled
by fear and hysteria, and that fair systems are not always the default in a government. Hundreds
of lives and reputations were ruined because of the magnitude of power Abigail and the other
girls had with their witch allegations. Abigail did not have consideration for anyone but herself.
In the context of The Crucible witch hunt, those who tried to resist and speak up against the
corruption put themselves in jeopardy because they would then become vulnerable to getting
accused of witchcraft. There was no way to win against injustice because fear, hysteria, and
corruption overpowered any attempts to expose the truth and achieve justice. While Thoreau
emphasizes that citizens need to speak up against corruption, Miller stresses the idea that
challenging the government is unwise. However, the ideas highlighted in these two writing
pieces are based on very different circumstances. In the context of The Crucible, gender roles of
the time were prominent, leaving young girls like Abigail at the bottom of the social hierarchy.
This circumstance played a significant role in the motives of Abigail and the girls accusing
others of witchcraft. They became the center of attention, the court looked to them for answers -
Butler 3
their voices were heard and respected for once. While this doesn't excuse the fact that they ruined
many lives, it helps explain the reason behind their wicked actions. On the other hand, in the
context of “Civil Disobedience”, Thoreau was speaking on racial inequities in society, which
required active resistance in order to be changed. To speak up against racism wouldn’t result in a
sentence of being hung, as citizens have freedom of speech. Nonetheless, there was still major
violence that could threaten one’s life, but it was necessary and effective to achieve justice and
change society.
Furthermore, Thoreau stresses the idea that one should break the law in order to fight
against injustice, “Let your life If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank,
exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than
the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another,
then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine” (Thoreau 2). As
stated by Thoreau, one can create change by rebelling against societal norms that they want to
change. When one decides to speak up and go against the path of least resistance, eventually
others will join in on their fight for justice. Oftentimes, many people just follow what is expected
of them, they would rather be miserable and not stand out than fight for a better life. Many
people are scared to challenge authority, so they sit and suffer, missing out on opportunities and
watching injustice play before them. It is critical for citizens to disobey societal norms and speak
up if they want to be represented and recognized in society, even if it may lead to punishment.
However, in The Crucible, John Proctor’s fate of being hung shows that his efforts to resist and
achieve justice ultimately failed. Up until the end of the play, Proctor held strong to his beliefs
and actively challenged the court on corruption. He even went as far as to confess his crime of
adultery to try to expose the truth that the witch allegations were all lies. Unfortunately, despite
Butler 4
confessing to his sin, the court did not accept it because Elizabeth said he did not commit
adultery. He was then left with a sentence to be hung for witchcraft. At this point, he was left
with no choice but to play by the game of court and falsely admit to partaking in witchery.
However, in Proctor’s case, Judge Danforth demanded he sign his name on a document of
confession. Proctor refused to sign because he didn’t want his confession to be pinned on the
church doors. Danforth said, “Then explain to me, Mr. Proctor, why you will not let-” [Proctor]:
“Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself
to lies! … [Danforth]: “Is that document a lie? If it is a lie I will not accept it!” (Miller 133).
Because of this confession, he was then sentenced to be hanged. Proctor’s story shows that
despite fighting against corruption, no progress was made. Even when he surrendered to the
authorities and confessed to witchcraft, he still had to sacrifice his life. His fate highlights how
resistance doesn’t always achieve justice, and oftentimes, sticking up for the right thing leads to
major consequences, in this case, death, regardless if it is fair or not. The excerpt “Civil
Disobedience” and the play The Crucible bring forth two very different perspectives on
disobedience. Thoreau stresses the importance of breaking the law in order to create change,
while Miller illustrates that breaking the law can only lead to doom. Thoreau believes that
nothing will change if nothing changes, and that citizens voice their needs in order for the
government to recognize them. Miller emphasizes that fear and hysteria can facilitate corruption
and the only way to stay safe is by abiding by the rules and playing the “game” along with
everyone else. Both of these works illuminate different perspectives on civil disobedience and its
consequences, however, there is no doubt that civil disobedience is what ultimately makes
history and causes change, even if you’re not there to see it.