Arthur Miller’s The Crucible is a timeless tragedy, depicting historical figures but concerning the modern world as well. John Proctor, the protagonist, though fitting several of the characteristics of the Aristotelian tragic hero, is actually a much more complex tragic hero. The primary differences between John Proctor and the classic tragic hero are obvious, such as the lack of noble birth, his not being in a position of leadership, and the inevitability of his fate. These differences are necessary, as Arthur Miller attempts to convince his audience that his protagonist is an everyman and is worth sympathizing for. In Arthur Miller’s more complex world, a more complex tragic hero is needed.
Accepted meals and pies from well- wishing neighbors.” (pg. 17). As proven in the story, the narrator Artemisia takes the role of her mom making sure everyone is being tended to. When her brothers were sick, she was there to help and when even when the bills became unbearable she held on. By taking charge, Artemisia was forced to distance herself from her childish life to take care of her reptile family.
Arthur Miller’s writing of Death of a Salesman does correctly fit the title of a tragedy because his main character, Willy Loman, does possess the qualities needed to be considered a tragic hero according to modern-day tragic heroes. Hamlet and Oedipus are the well-known tragic heroes from the past. They relate more to Aristotle than Willy Loman does and that is what causes the controversy in these tragedies. Aristotle had written down some of the common tragic hero characteristics for Greek tragedies, but those do not relate to more modern tragedies that have been written. Miller’s main character Willy Loman does deserve to have the title tragic hero.
Some of the characteristics of a tragic hero include greatness, a weakness or a flaw, an undeserved fate, and a punishment exceeding the deed committed. Jay Gatsby encompasses all of these characteristics of a tragic hero. Although, the author tries to portray Gatsby as a perfect person, there are still some noticeable flaws. Gatsby’s great life unwinds with the death of the tragic hero. Gatsby was portrayed as esteemed by the way others spoke of him.
Oedipus Rex as an Example of Aristotle’s Tragic Hero Liberty University Engl102-B21 LUO “Oedipus the King”, or “Oedipus Rex” is a good example of a tragic hero as defined by Aristotle in his work “The Poetics”. Sophocles meets the three basic rules for creating a character that is no better than anyone else, falls into misfortune and comes from nobility or money. Oedipus Rex as an Example of Aristotle’s Tragic Hero The tragic hero as defined by Aristotle should be “neither distinguished for excellence and virtue.” (Aristotle, 1968) In other words he is just a man, as any other, who is not distinguished or pitiful. The tragic hero should be common and recognizable to all who see the play. The tragic hero has to fall in misfortune “but not though vise or baseness but through either a blunder or flaw in character.” (Mullens, 1938) The hero cannot be one who is of good fortune and falls into misfortune or one who is evil falling into good fortune.
All in all education should be something people should take advantage of. The value of family was very important to Puritans in the 1600’s. I have this value because I hold my family very near to my heart. For example I visit my eighty-four year old grandmother everyday after school and get her groceries or take her places she needs to go. I also help out my parents that both work by taking care of the house and making dinner so they can relax when they get home from work.
With the death of Macbeth, William Shakespeare shows an insight of a perfect example of a classic tragic hero. Despite bending a few rules, Shakespeare illustrates that if a character is not held by fate, causes their own downfalls and realizing it was their own fault, they are what many call a tragic hero. Being a tragic hero isn’t limited to just stories or plays, but can be applied in the real world as well. Richard Nixon was thought to be a great man, but after following the same road Macbeth had taken, they both found themselves destroyed by guilt, and are now considered, “Tragic
Erik Chung Tragedy of Death of a Salesman The great Aristotle’s definition of tragedy is still heard and used today from over 2000 years ago. Aristotle defined a tragedy as a reversal of fortune of a great and noble man to a man that is brought to ruin due to a tragic flaw. The fall of the “hero” creates pity and fear in the audience, but in the play Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, one would possibly think otherwise. Our “tragic” hero in the play is Willy Loman, an unsuccessful man left abandoned by those he thought that loved him. Yes, although many would think we are supposed to pity this man, I simply cannot.
This leads to Willy fatal flaw in Aristotle’s definition of a tragedy – his hamartia throughout the play – his self delusion. He is obsessed with living the American Dream, with being successful, with materialistic success and being well liked – the whole American Dream. He fails to see that he is the opposite. As Fletcher says in Death of a Salesman ‘ Miller dramatically presents the complex moral world of mid-nineteenth century American values and beliefs’. Juxtaposed to this is his older brother Ben.
Arthur Miller begins by criticizing a Aristotle's belief that “someone of the common mold cannot be a true tragic hero.” Arthur Miller sees this an old quote that is no longer relevant due to the fact that Aristotle said this many centuries ago, in a much different world than what we know today. His thesis statement is excellent in that it molds the entire paper, by stating that Aristotle was a genuis, but in his own time; “Things do change, and even a genuis is limited by his time and the nature of his society.” In the next paragraph Miller also justifies Aristotle's logic, with his own “simple logic.” On the grounds of his simple logic, Miller denies Aristotle's contentions only because he lived in a slave society. Miller also make a clear distinction between stature and rank, which according to Miller are often confused. The question of rank is significant only as it reflects the question of the social application of the hero's career. A great exampled used by Miller was that of an opening scene of a movie.