John Proctor and John Hale - Good Person vs. Good Citizen

        In The Crucible, Arthur Miller portrays the two main characters, whoremonger monitor and grand legerdemain Hale as sound custody. The term good men in this turn is ambiguous. Reverend John Hale was a good man in the sense of being the perfect and good citizen of Massachusetts in the 1600s. He was pious, aider to the laws and beliefs, and a good prude Christian. John observe, on the contrary would not be considered the greatest citizen. He was not so religious, nor the perfect Christian, and was not so adherent to the Puritans laws and beliefs. However, he was still considered a good man, as a person rather than being an ideal Puritan citizen. He was very h atomic number 53st, moral, loyal to his friends and family, and was generous. The major difference among the two are good citizen vs. good person.

        The most beta trait to prove that John Proctor was a good person was his satin flower. In every scene in the play that John Proctor is in, his commendable honesty stands out. It didnt matter how much(prenominal) trouble he would bring himself into, his philosophy was I whitethorn speak my heart (Miller, p.30). Proctors honesty eventually lead to his ruin and death.

        The first incident in the play where we see Proctors honesty is after the affair he had with Abigail. He realized his error and was honest and admitted it to his wife Elizabeth. In the next situation where Proctor is involved he tells the Reverend Parris why he does not like him, and it also gets him into trouble. He tells him, Can you speak one minute without we land in conflagration again, Im sick of hell! (p. 30). He is honest, yet disrespectful to his reverend. While in court, John Proctor is too honest to the judges.

If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay



If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.