The Modern Puritan

               The Puritans, as a religion, obviously do not exist today as they did in the late 1600’s and early 1700’s in the American colonies. The most similar in appearance are the modern Amish, who, like the Puritans, live in isolated communities separated from the more modern, more moderate outside world. While there are clear similarities between the Amish and the Puritans, there are enough differences that they should not be clumped under the same umbrella.

However, I would argue that there are religious groups that subscribe to Puritanical beliefs to this day. While the intentions of the Puritans were good, most of these groups, as the Puritans did during the Salem Witch Trials, spread their message through intolerance. The Westboro Baptist Church preaches “Hell and Damnation” and holds the Puritanical belief that God damns all sinners (meaning that the larger community they are a part of is going to Hell). Their intolerance towards LGBT people and towards the soldiers that protect our country is parallel to the views of many Salemites during the witch trials towards witches. Also, similarly to the Puritans, they are thought of as fanatics by the majority of the population. Another example would be the radical Islamic views held by certain groups in the Middle East, including Iran. Iran is a full-fledged theocracy—just like the Puritan communities. Religious dissent is usually not tolerated and adultery usually results in the execution of the adulteress (a punishment that could have befallen Hester Prynne).

While the Puritans did not stand the test of time, their ideas live on and exist in several places in this world. Is this humanity dooming itself to make the same mistake twice? Or is this the expression of humanity’s incredibly strong piety and faith? Only time will tell what will come of the Modern Puritans.
Edit: I realize this sounds very negative. I do not believe that Puritanism in and of itself is a negative thing, however, I do feel that the way it has been expressed historically and even into modern times has been through intolerance of those who do not share the same beliefs. I believe that being a "Puritan" involves striving to make not just yourself, but also others, better people, not to vilify those who do not agree with your beliefs.

John Proctor: Hero or Stooge?

I don’t pretend that John Proctor is a hero, or anywhere close to perfect. But he’s definitely a lot closer to “hero” than he is to “stooge.” In fact, outside of Hale (as we reach the end of the play), I would say he is probably the closest character to “hero.”

In the end, he is hung for witchcraft. He obviously did not commit this crime. The two crimes he committed were his affair with Abigail (which, along with Parris catching the dancing in the forest, was a key part of the setup that led to Abigail’s “confession” and subsequent accusations), and lying (which did get a bit out of hand at points). He also had an unfortunate tendency to rip up official court documents that he did not like.

But other than that, I believe he was a good person. His wife Elizabeth refuses to attempt to convince him to confess again, saying that “He have his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him!” (1358). This is the truth of the matter—by not confessing, he tells God and the world that the true story is the one he had Mary Warren begin to tell in Act III, which is in fact the truth. Despite his lies, he goes to his grave holding to the true story.

Additionally, he is guided by the idea expressed in Act II that “the magistrate sits in your heart that judges you.” Elizabeth furthers this by telling him that “there be no higher judge under Heaven than Proctor is!” He doesn’t want the public to see his confession, and I think that may be because he in his heart was confessing to adultery, even though on paper he was confessing to witchcraft. I think he has confessed to himself and God and that is all he feels that matters. I realize that this is a theory that lacks solid evidence, but I feel that it might be the best explanation for him confessing, but refusing to take it public and subsequent destruction of his confession.

While John Proctor is a very complex character and I cannot even begin to go into detail about him, I feel that this short summary is a good approximation of his beliefs and ideas as he goes to his grave—that is, he is right by God and right by himself (both through not lying and through his confession), so he has no regrets in that sense.

"Arrivals...there goes the neighborhood" (or not)

               I have a major problem with this quote, and that’s that it’s somewhere between “misleading” and “completely false.” The one time it is accurate was when the Native Americans were being kicked out by the explorers, but I doubt that thought even came into the Native Americans’ heads until it was too late. I believe that at most points in history—especially the ones where this quote has been used to try to prevent new people from entering a community—new arrivals have helped the community out in numerous ways.

               Now, obviously, the basis for this assignment is the white explorers coming across the Atlantic, setting up colonies, and kicking the Native Americans out. That would be a case of arrivals taking over a neighborhood. However, I would be surprised if the Native Americans thought that was going to happen well before it actually did happen. I think they were more excited about the new ideas that the explorers brought over, and the possibility for trade. The problem was simply that the explorers said something more along the lines of, “Natives…This is our neighborhood.”

               The ironic thing is that the descendants of those explorers, who most unceremoniously and violently kicked the Native Americans out of their neighborhood, were very gung-ho about preventing new arrivals to enter their lands. Obviously, the Puritan groups would only accept Puritans, which is logical given their history of persecution. But later on, after the American Revolution, there have been numerous waves of new immigrants, all of whom have faced discrimination. The Irish, for example, were discriminated against by the British immigrants and Americans of British descent. “No Irish Need Apply” was commonly seen in the help-wanted ads in newspapers. The Americans feared that the Irish would destroy their civilization. Obviously, that didn’t happen. Other European groups have faced similar discrimination as they came to America, mainly because people feared the new arrivals would destroy their culture and their way of life—in other words, their neighborhood. On the West Coast, Asian immigrants were also discriminated against because whites felt that they might take over the neighborhood with their non-European culture and appearance.

               The aforementioned examples occurred around the turn of the 20^th century or earlier, for the most part. But does that mean people don’t say “Arrivals…there goes the neighborhood” today? I think they still do. Hispanic immigrants, if you ask some whites, are going to be the downfall of America. Some say that they will take all of our jobs for cheaper wages, therefore leaving the whites, who were here “first” out of luck. I find this statement incredibly hypocritical in addition to completely baseless. Firstly, anyone who is not Native American has immigrated to this country after the year 1492, and their ancestors have either been a perpetrator or a victim of this discrimination. Secondly, if we look throughout our own city, some of the most vibrant, active neighborhoods are immigrant neighborhoods. So yes, while immigrants may change the landscape of a neighborhood, this is for the better, proving that “Arrivals…there goes the neighborhood” should really be “Arrivals…here comes a new neighborhood” if applied to our times.

 

I know this is a bit longer than 400 words…sorry, but I feel like this is an important point I would like to make.