My Main Ideas and Points

         Often with historical events, it is hard to know the exact facts, especially when they happened over two centuries ago. However, in my opinion, it is possible that authors are aware of true facts and simply choose to overlook them in favor of fiction that fits their concepts better. To illustrate and prove this concept, I chose two well known pieces on the Salem Witch Trials: "The Crucible," by Arthur Miller, and "Wicked Girls," b Stephanie Hemphill.

My main points/ questions are:

~How do these two novels deviate from the true story, most accurately told by Roach's chronicle of the trials?
~Why do these two novels differ from the true story?
~ How are these two novels different from each other?
~For what purpose did these authors write their pieces?
~How qualified is Roach to write this non-fiction work?
~How does this connect to reading historical fiction novels?

Other Sources

      As I mentioned previously, I have some outside information that I learned through various history classes and general reading through the years. I know that the trials weren't contained to Salem, that there is a questionable theory about a harvest that resulted in an altered mental state of the New Englanders, that the "afflicted"'s conditions could have been a condition caused by stress and/ or fear, and more. This outside knowledge will surely factor into my opinion of the trials in general and also help me draw conclusions from other sources.

      The second non-book source is Arthur Miller's "The Crucible." This is the source that I am comparing to both "Wicked Girls" by Hemphill and the true story of what happened during the witch trials, found in Roach's chronicle. This play is based on a ridiculous notion of the trials that most people with knowledge on the topic could, and should, dismiss with regards to fact. As stated earlier, I have previous knowledge on the trials. I know that Abigail was a young girl, no more than 12, and I also know that even at that time, 12 year old girls did not have affairs with older, married men, especially not in Puritan New England. So since it is fairly straightforward to compare(or, more accurately, contrast) fact and fiction, the weight falls on comparing the two works of fiction and finding how the stories contrast and then, using facts, conclude why the authors did what they did.

       The next source is from a book on the Trials, an excerpt concerning John Proctor: http://www.salemwitchmuseum.com/blog/index.php/2011/08/john-proctor/. The excerpt mentions how Arthur Miller changes Abigail's age and invents a non-existent relationship between them in order to write the play he wanted to. A play which, by the way, was actually a way to get out a play with subtle hints to communism without being caught by McCarthy and his red scare. Miller only used the Salem Witch Trials as means to an end. He did not intend to construct an accurate representation, nor expand upon the general public's view. This is all detailed in an edition of the New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1996/10/21/1996_10_21_158_TNY_CARDS_000373902

Second Book Summary: "The Salem Witch Trials: A Day-by-Day Chronicle of a Community Under Siege"

                 There is no greater treasure trove of knowledge about the Salem Witch Trials available to the general public than Roach's chronicle. This author spent 10 years in libraries, searching old journals, letters, and more, looking for bits of information to collect. Her book encompasses not only Salem Village and Salem Town, but also Ipswich, and other witch trial locations that are often passed over because of mainstream belief that the trials were limited to one area. The book includes a list of all the "afflicted," all the condemned, and all known residents of the towns where witch trials were held in addition to the day by day account of occurrings in each village. Roach also keeps an open mind about what really happened in Salem in the 1690's. She neither accuses the afflicted of acting for their own purposes nor does she write off the hysteria to a psychological condition. This integrity and unbiased view concerning the trials is refreshing in a subject that is often twisted by personal opinion and mainstream myths. There is no greater source of information concerning the trials. Thus, it is the best book the compare to "The Crucible" and "Wicked Girls."

First Book Summary: "Wicked Girls"

      This book has been one of my favorite books for a good period of time. I've read it thrice and could still read it another time without losing interest. This novel by Stephanie Hemphill is a fictional account of the Salem Witch Trials through prose. The simple formatting makes it easy and quick to read, while still being a lengthy and interesting book. The book seems to follow the normal timeline of the trials and even mentions the trials occurring in other Massachusetts towns, something books on this period seldom do. In this novel, Mercy Lewis is the Putnam's servant and her parents were killed by Native Americans, she is described as beautiful. Anne Putnam is the leader of the group, though she eventually loses control and looks up to Mercy. Margaret Walcott is Anne's cousin. She is in love with a boy named Isaac and dislikes Mercy, mainly because of jealousy. Her stepmother is very harsh with her, as a result, she sees the trials as an opportunity to end her stepmother's abuse. The next character is what got me thinking about writing this paper. In "Wicked Girls," Abigail Williams is a young girl around 11 or 12 who is not a main girl in the trials. However, in Arthur Miller's play "The Crucible," Miller portrays Abigail as a grown, adolescent girl. He was certain she had an affair with John Proctor and that she persecuted his wife in order to be with him, though that obviously backfired. In any case, there are many incongruities between the fictional works. Why and how would an author change fact in favor of fiction? How does this apply to the Salem Witch Trials and pieces written on that period in history? From my previous knowledge, "Wicked Girls" seems to be more historically accurate. That connection to fact vs. fictional inserts is the point of this research.

The Salem Witch Trials in Literature

                      I've always loved historical fiction because I can use what I already know about a subject and apply it to a story, understanding it on a deeper level. However, two stories of the same period of history will often have different takes on how history really went around, at least in their story. The most noticeable case of this is fictional literature concerning the Salem Witch Trials.  There is a monumental difference between even two pieces on the Salem Trials. Stephanie Hemphill's "Wicked Girls" and Arthur Miller's "The Crucible" could not be more different. Though both about the trials, the two stories share little more. Miller insists Abigail was actually having an affair with John Proctor. Hemphill classifies Abigail as a twelve year old child. Hemphill also believes Anne looked up to her servant, beautiful Mercy. Miller described Mercy Lewis as fat and sly. How and why do these two stories differ so much? Over the next month or so, I'm going to try my best to answer that question.