On Death of a Salesman as an American Tragedy

954 Words4 Pages
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. The opening scene might be the main character doing a bunch of “ordinary” things, but is then seen to be the President of the United States of America, and suddenly his actions assume a much greater magnitude, than if he was just the corner grocer. “But at the same time, his stature as a hero is not so dependent upon his rank that the corner grocer cannot be considered as a “more tragic” figure, providing that grocer's career engages issues that the President does, such as survival of the race, etc. Miller states that he intedns to point out a historical fact which must be taken into account in any consideration of tragedy, and that is the sharp change in the meaning of rank in a society between present time and the distant past. Human's have a need to face the fact of death in order to strengthen ourselves for life, and using this in a tragic viewpoint,
Open Document