Global Issues and broader connection

Culture, identity and community

The internal conflict individuals face when their personal morals and integrity clash with external pressures - Cerjak did not directly talk about the individual’s internal conflict. - Many typical plots demonstrate this issue: Proctor’s final struggle, Mary Warren’s fear to accuse Abigail, etc.

The societal obsession with reputation, and how it can drive individuals to act against their own morals or cause them to silence their true beliefs - Cerjak mentioned the means of the ‘manifestly ridiculous men’ to protect themselves is to accuse others, so that they do not get accused. This act can be interpreted as a way to defend their own ethos. - In the play,

Politics, power, and justice

The manipulation of moral authority by individuals or groups to accuse others falsely and gain power or control over them. Some groups act as victim to control others. - DEI accuses others falsely, saying others are racists or discrimination.

The role of fear and mass hysteria in shaping public opinion and causing widespread panic. Pandemic for example

The marginalization of women in patriarchal societies

The potential for injustice within legal systems, particularly when influenced by corruption, bias

Broader Connection

Susan C. W. Abbotson dismantles the idealized image of John Proctor as an unambiguous hero by foregrounding his moral ambiguities and personal failings. Rather than presenting him as a pure figure of resistance against tyranny, she reveals a man marked by hypocrisy and self-interest. For instance, she points out that Proctor demands honesty and truthfulness from his community while he himself is deeply flawed—having lied repeatedly to Elizabeth about his actions with Abigail, and having committed adultery without expressing genuine remorse for the harm it causes (e.g., his cavalier remark comparing his promise to Abigail to “the promise that a stallion gives a mare”). Such examples illustrate that his so-called “goodness” is not an innate, heroic virtue but rather a later rationalization of his guilt.

In her analysis, Abbotson interrogates the comparisons critics and audiences have made between Proctor and cultural icons like Jesus Christ and John Glenn. The film version’s visual allusions to Christ’s crucifixion, with Proctor positioned as a martyr similar to Jesus—complete with outstretched arms and a sacrificial posture—suggest an almost redemptive nobility. Likewise, Herbert Blau’s likening of Proctor to John Glenn casts him as a “true cultural hero” worthy of imitation. However, Abbotson argues that these comparisons oversimplify his character. Instead of embodying divine purity or heroic perfection, Proctor resembles the conflicted, flawed protagonists found in works like Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ. These juxtapositions serve not to elevate him unequivocally but to underscore the tension between public heroism and private moral failure, inviting readers to see his character as a composite of both admirable resistance and troubling human frailty.

Finally, the famous line from Elizabeth—“He have his goodness now”—is treated with deliberate skepticism. Abbotson encourages readers to question this assertion because Elizabeth herself is shown to be capable of deceit (her courtroom lie, for example), and her statement may be more an act of self-serving redemption than an objective appraisal. Rather than marking Proctor’s death as a clear moral victory, Abbotson suggests that his final act is better understood as an acknowledgment of his inherent badness—a final attempt to atone for sins that never fully vanish. In doing so, she challenges the societal standards of morality depicted in the play, which often demand a neat separation between heroism and sin, and instead exposes a more nuanced, conflicted reality.

Overall, Abbotson’s critique invites readers to move beyond the simplistic hero-worship of Proctor and to recognize the layered, often contradictory nature of his character—a man whose public martyrdom is as much an admission of his personal guilt as it is a statement against oppressive systems.