The Crucible

 

When: 5th October 2022 (Matinee)

Where: National Theatre, London

Writer: Arthur Miller

Director: Lyndsey Turner

The Crucible is a classic play studied by many at GCSE, and disliked by many who studied at at GCSE. I however have always loved it, the history behind it the themes and ideas that it portrays there is something so thrilling and yet so relevant about it, no matter the point in time. Whilst I have read the play a number of times, I had never had the opportunity to see a production of it until now. 

What cannot be denied about this production is the spectacle it is. From the moment you take your seats there is tension within the room, the mist and falling rain create an image that makes you question before it has even started. It is clever, but it annoyed me, whilst it looks stunning it is only really used during scene changes. I have noticed recently one of the things that annoys me about productions is when they do something super cool, but it doesn't actually have any reference to the story or piece, it simply looks cool whilst they change the scene. I think the rain has some relevance don't get me wrong, it is used as a form of pathetic fallacy, and it creates a box encapsulating the stage highlighting the trapped nature of the town of salem, but these are things which could have been shown in a much more cost effective manner. The rest of the set was brilliant as well. I loved the shape of the stage, this protruding rectangle that played with viewpoints and distortion, with the set being being realistic but simple, it created this idea that the story was being imagined on the spot and being projected outwards almost like a hologram from behind. This fits so perfectly with Arthur Millers intentions for the piece and his hope of reflecting the hysteria of the McCarthyism period within a different setting. The idea of projection emphasises his idea of projecting the same issues on a different setting and that is what makes this play so relevant at any point in time. The other thing I loved about about the staging of the play, was the use of depth and the smaller stage that was nestled in the background used to create misty and shadowy images and scenes in the background. This was beautiful and it had a film like nature to it, it added to the mysterious nature of the piece. It showed scenes that were not written into the script but were mentioned in a way that gave depth to the story without imposing an idea of what happened on the audience, giving them evidence to make the judgement themselves, how Miller had intended. 

Whilst I loved the set and the way in which the story was presented for me there was something off putting about many of the characters that I can't quite put my finger on. When reading it previously Abigail Williams has always stood out as the main character, leading the way through the story, and the tralier for this production presents it like that as well. However watching it, she felt quite insignificant, yes she was the leader of the group of girls, but out of all of them Mary Warren felt like the key figure we were following through the story. Many of the scenes which I previously believed were focused on Abigail, no seemed to focus their attention to John Proctor or Reverend Parris. Where I had once though Judge Hathorne to be a minor character and Reverend Hale as a external character forcing these twisted beliefs on the town, in this production these roles felt very much reversed. I also rememeber the affair between John Proctor and Abigail to have much more of a driving force within the story, with many more scenes taking place between them, and whilst the intial scene revealing the affair took place, and it being a reason for Elizabeth Proctors downfall, it didn't feel like the driving force it once had when I was reading it. Perhaps this is how it was always intended, as with any script they are meant to be performed on stage and therefore can be percieved differently when read, but having studied it in school I thought I had a strong understanding of the storyline of the play. 

After saying all this, the acting was suberb each character was brilliantly brought to life by their respective actor. They were infused with life, the small nuiances that make us human and this added brilliantly to the idea that they were simply a small village of people. Some of the characters that stood out to me were Giles Corey played by Carl Johnson and Reverend Hale played by Fisayo Akinade. Both found the human in the character written on the page and created people that were heart-felt and relatable. 

I was confused about some parts of the story and I don't think this helped my feelings towards the piece. Whilst I felt there was an accuracy and human-like nature to it, I felt some of the energy that was portrayed throught the text and the idea of hysteria wasn't as forceful and pressing as I would have liked. I still very much enjoyed the play and if you get a chance to see it I highly reccommend it, but I'm not sure it was the out of this world production I had hoped for or been led to expect by the 5 stars reviews being thrown around the internet. With a few tweaks in the driving forces of the story and the messages and themes hoping to be portrayed, this play could be spectacular.