|
|
Post by rebeccapl116 on Oct 1, 2012 15:59:43 GMT -5
Did anyone read the scene in the appendix of the play that was taken out by Miller? I was confused as to why he decided to take it out. John goes to see Abby and she seems to be almost possessed by her new found power. She seems to truly believe in witch craft now and that Elizabeth meant to hurt her. Is it an act that she's putting on or is she going somewhat mad? Why did Miller remove it? Perhaps it will be more clear once we read act III. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by sophiago116 on Oct 1, 2012 16:55:44 GMT -5
Like we said in class, Abigail seems to be an antagonist in the play. She is a character that we don't feel sympathy for. However, if Abigail is actually insane, then it would be harder to feel sympathy for her.
I think it was a smart decision for Miller to remove the scene from the play.
|
|
|
|
Post by maryri116 on Oct 1, 2012 17:14:17 GMT -5
Maybe Miller deemed the scene unnecessary? Although I do think that it provides further insight into what the characters are thinking and feeling, the scene only reiterated what the reader was to find out in the rest of the book / what the reader already thought (even maybe in the corner of their mind).
|
|
|
|
Post by nickme112 on Oct 13, 2012 21:39:47 GMT -5
Clearly, Miller is trying to demonstrate that in many scenarios, such as this period or during McCarthyism, one is either within the consensus or he/she is not. Essentially, Miller is trying to convey a tone that suggests that a tyranny of consensus shatters society, which causes a break in social interaction amongst different groups. By Abigail conversing with Proctor, and telling him that she does not enjoy being in the consensus, she is essentially contradicting the overall message of the play on the subject matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by jingyanxi116 on Oct 14, 2012 12:54:05 GMT -5
I was also confused as to why Miller decided to take out Act 2 Scene 2; it seems to cement the idea that Abigail is manipulating the crisis in order to gain power and to gain what she wants, which is be Proctor's wife. She clearly believes that Proctor is "this moment singing secret hallelujahs that (his) wife will hang" (152). However, when I was reading the passage, I felt pity for Abigail because she truly seemed to believe she was doing the right thing and a little insane, and we shouldn't feel bad for her, so maybe it was to get rid of any possibility of sympathy for Abigail?
|
|
|
|
Post by juliana112 on Oct 15, 2012 20:20:39 GMT -5
I believe that Miller was right in taking out Scene II of Act II. As I was reading it, I felt a little pity for Abigail even though we (the readers) are not supposed to since she is an antagonist. A reader could feel pity for Abigail during this removed scene for two reasons: (1) it makes her seem insane and (2) it shows how she genuinely loves Proctor and his blatant rejection of her. If she was insane, it would be difficult for the reader to condemn her without considering that it isn't entirely her fault. Both of these options lead the reader to conclude that Abigail is doing what she thinks is right. Therefore, Miller had to remove the scene in order to eradicate any doubt, and ensure that the reader knows that Abigail is at fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by laurensc116 on Oct 15, 2012 20:58:19 GMT -5
I agree with the points that this scene both causes sympathy for Abigail and is not extremely relevant to the plot. I also feel that without this scene, the play is more shocking because the plot leads the reader to believe that Abigail did not expect Proctor to come to the courts to try to sell her out. Then, it is interesting for the reader to see how Abigail acts in response to Proctor's actions. With the inclusion of this scene, it almost gives away part of the storyline before it occurs, so without this scene the play can be seen as more shocking and exciting.
|
|
|
|
Post by rebeccaki116 on Oct 15, 2012 21:07:29 GMT -5
While I seem to agree that Miller was wise in removing Act II Scene II, I had different reasons for believing so. After reading the scene I felt Abigail left the same manipulative and ruthless impression on me as in the rest of the play (perhaps this was a more hyperbolized representation of her personality, but a representation nonetheless). The character that left me questioning was indeed Proctor. Although our protagonist appears to be dragging his heels at this point in the play, he is our still the hero of the story. I feel the choice language (Miller 152) he uses against Abigail lessens my respect for him, even if he is a radical. I don’t believe Proctor is the kind of person who would let someone bring out this color on him when his anger does nothing to heighten his argument (like in the courts). Miller was right in taking this scene out of the play because, in my opinion, it casts a bad light on the play’s hero.
|
|
|
|
Post by leiade116 on Oct 16, 2012 21:10:23 GMT -5
I also believe that it was smart of Arthur Miller to remove Act II scene II. Throughout the play, Abigail is seen as a devilish, conniving character who is aware of exacly what she is doing, exactly like McCarthy in the 1950's. In Act II scene II, however, Abigail is seen as delusional, on the verge of insanity, if not already insane. This takes away from the McCarthy relation that Abigail had to him throughout the play and almost makes her behavior excusable due to her mental state that is portrayed in this deleted scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by meganp112 on Oct 17, 2012 15:25:49 GMT -5
Going along with what others said, I beleive Act II scene II was taken out becuase it takes away from the way Abigail had already been described in the atcs before it. Readers picture her as being evil and being very good at blaming others to get what she wants. She is depicted almost like an evil genius. I think Act II scene II also takes away from her intellgence and manipulative mannner because Proctor tells Abby on page 151 that he is going to tell to court. Here he is giving her time to think over a plan to save herself. However, without this scene, Abby sees she is in trouble in Act III and quickly thinks of a way to turn the blame away from herself. So the ommitted scene takes away from the idea that she can quickly come up with lies for self preservation and thus it takes away her manipulative manner. Therefore, Miller chose to leave this scene out because he wanted Abigial to be evil, maniuplative, and fully aware of what she was doing.
|
|
