Portesi 1 Kielyanne Portesi 28 March, 2010 Death of a Salesman Arthur Miller s highly debated 1949 play Death of a Salesman tells the tale of Willy Loman. The salesman, Willy, is overwhelmed by life and driven, by circumstances and his own flaws, to a tragic end. Scholars debate, however, whether or not Willy is a tragic hero and if his play can be considered a literary tragedy. A student of Plato and great Greek philosopher in his own rights, Aristotle was unlike like his teacher in that he was an advocate for poetry and the arts. In his famous piece The Poetics, Aristotle defends poetry as being cathartic for the reader. He says that [t]ragedy, then, is an imitation of action that is serious, complete and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in he form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions (23; sec 7). In doing this, he also creates guidelines for what a tragic poem should be, so that it might achieve its cathartic ability; the tragic hero, the tragic flaw, tragic stature, unity of plot and the all important catharsis. On the surface, many would consider Miller s play Death of a Salesman to be tragic, rife with struggles and ending with death, but does Willy and his story contain the Aristotelian attributes and standards necessary to create a true tragedy? Aristotle defines clearly what is expected of any play or piece of poetry in order to be considered a tragedy and despite Miller s insistence in Introduction to Collected Plays that he set out not to write a tragedy in this play but to show the truth as [he] say it Death of a Salesman is continually held up by critics and readers alike to the classic Aristotelian standards of tragic stature, tragic flaw, unity of plot and, more importantly, catharsis (164). The question asked is this whether or not Death of a Salesman
Portesi 2 achieves the Aristotelian standard but the question should be whether or not divergent from the standards has removed the necessary cathartic attribute? When examining Death of a Salesman and its main character, Willy Loman, the reader must first and foremost understand of what is expected of the piece. Here, a familiarity with the three Oedipus plays would prove useful, as Oedipus and his tale serve as a well defined model of the Aristotelian tragedy. A good and honorable man of high station, Oedipus is burdened with one flaw that, ultimately, leads to his downfall. This downfall is brought about by attention being paid to to the law of necessity or probability, which Aristotle describes with the statement of what has not happened we do not at once feel sure to be possible: but what has happened is manifestly possible, otherwise it would not have happened (26; sec.9). He explains that this the difference between a poet and a historian is that the historian relates what has happened while the poet relates what may happen and to keep credibility with his audience the poet must be sure to keep his plot plausible (26; sec.9). It is only when the poem or play is relatable and can be taken seriously when catharsis can take place. The plot must, then, abide by the probable and necessary. For instance, when Oedipus pride pushes him forward to find the murderer of late King Laius, it is inevitable that the truth of his origin comes to light. When the epiphany sticks it stirs within the audience pity for Oedipus and fear for their own vices. Following this demand of probably and necessity, the Oedipus plays create the tragic hero, the good intended Oedipus, place in within the tragic stature, as king and prince and gift him with his tragic flaw, his pride and temper. Thus, this play offers an outline of the main elements necessary for an Aristotelian tragedy and offers the critic something definite to compare Death of a Salesman to. At first glance it would seem that Willy Loman and Oedipus have very little in common for instance, while the king holds stature, the salesman has none but a characters or play s defining element
Portesi 3 should not be on the details but, rather, on catharsis. Despite the laws, if any play is unable to stir up and clear out fear and pity in the audience, then it is not a tragedy. When the critic understands catharsis and its purpose, he is able to better understand the other qualities and requirements of a tragedy. By definition, a perfect tragedy should, as we have seen, be arranged not on the simply but on the complex plan. It should, moreover, imitate actions which excite pity and fear, this being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation (29; sec. 12). This stirring of emotions is called catharsis and it is a cleansing for the audience. Plato, Aristotle s teacher, argued emotions were not positive things, as they were illogical and since poetry stirred emotions it, in turn, was not positive. Aristotle encourages poetry and plays for this very reason, as he feels that the audience will benefit from such an effect. Negative emotions, such as self-pity and judgment of others, are turned on their heads when the audience watches the tragic hero s plight. When the tragic hero falls, his spectators pity him and in this forget pity to pity themselves. Likewise, there is fear inspired in the audience as the see their own faults in the hero and realize that, if fate were to have it, they too could suffer a punishment for their flaw. Watching his suffering, then, motivates them to change their behaviors two-fold, so that they may not come to the same tragic end. In the case of a tragedy, the pity must be aroused by unmerited misfortune and the hero must have his misfortune brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty (29; sec.13). In order for catharsis to be achieved, the character must have an isolated flaw that ruins an otherwise true or brave life for his change of fortune should not be from bad to good, but, reversely, from good to bad. It should come about as the result not of vice, but of some great error or fragility [ ] (29; sec.13). This life altering flaw is called hamartia and while some translate the word as error or frailty, it is theorized by others that Aristotle meant it to be a
Portesi 4 sin. Aristotle states that the tragic hero must not be brought down by a vice but by something inevitably inside of him, a flaw that he cannot shake, just as sin is. When the audience realizes their own sinful nature they realize that they too can be ruined. Sin is inheritably a part of human nature and the hero and his audience is both destined to struggle with it, thus the tragic hero s fall in unmerited in that he is a good man with one tragic flaw. Though often small, it is this flaw, or sin, that remains consistent throughout the play or poem and is the one thing that brings the tragic hero to his misfortune. Tragic flaw serves as a catalysis for the law of probably and necessity. One flaw leads to an inevitable action, which leads to the next and so on and so forth. The tragic hero, then, is destined to reach their tragic ending because it is probably and necessary for each of his actions to equal the next, his flaw encouraging the downward spiral. Aristotle insists that any tragic plot must be consistent in its actions and the tragic hero should act out only the probable. He explains, As in the structure of the plot, so too is the portraiture of character, the poet should always aim either at the necessary or the probable (31; sec.15). Without the tragic flaw to inspire and continue this chain reaction, the downfall would seem unreasonable, which would remove the possibility of catharsis in the audience, for tragedy is an imitation, not of men, but of an action and of life [...] (24; sec.6). Given the necessities of the tragic hero, Plot is an important matter for Aristotle. He discusses the proper of structure of Plot, since this is the first and most important thing in Tragedy (25; sec.7). Since tragedy is an imitation of action that is complete and hole, and of a certain magnitude there must be a while that is wanting in magnitude (24; sec.7). This is Unity of Plot, which involves the previously mentioned law of probably or necessity and its medium of tragic flaw and Aristotle recommends that the writer create an outline: As the story, whether the poet takes in read made or constructs it for himself, he should first sketch its general
Portesi 5 outline, and then fill in the episodes and amplify in detail (33). With a plotted beginning, middle and end, the poet or screenwriter is better able to maintain the flow of actions rooted from the hero s tragic flaw clear and consistent. Traditionally, this outline offers the reader and audience an observable cause and effect, but the typical outline of Greek plays has started to wane in recent years. Today, the expected beginning, middle and end have become predictable and more complex, to and fro plot lines are becoming more favorably among audiences. Death of a Salesman serves as the example in this instance, through the use of flashbacks. While Aristotle states that a well constructed plot, therefore, must neither being nor end haphazard, but conform to these principles, Arthur Miller bold diverges from this prescriptions, encouraging more criticism. But this is not the only way in which Miller turns away from the traditional while still adhering to the heart of a tragic play. His main character, Willy Loman, through tragic stature or therefore lack of, is further example of how a modern play can stray from the Aristotelian standards while remaining true to tragedy. There are two components of tragic stature; socio-economic stature and moral standing. Aristotle states that the tragic hero must be good and must have propriety (31; sec. 15). In the case of socio-economic stature Aristotle clarifies that the hero must be one who is highly renowned and prosperous a personage like Oedipus, Thyestis, or other illustrious mean of such families (29; sec.13). Because the tragic hero must fall from a high place such as the station of a king or a man of prestige to a low place where he loses everything, it is only when the hero possess the role can he lose it. In this misfortune the tragedy is all the more heartrending and catharsis is achieved. Station and power also serve as a catalyst for the hero s tragic flaw. In the instance of Oedipus, he is king and thus able to act on his stubborn and prideful impulses. It is only necessary that this single flaw continue to influence the tragic hero into further poor
Portesi 6 reactions and decisions. The audience is not revealed the entire plot at the start, but it is through Oedipus flaw pushing the story forward that the tragic realizations of his fate are made, for tragedy is an imitation of not only a complete action but of the vents inspiring fear or pity (27; sec.9). When Oedipus power and position enable his fall, the audience, then, not only witnesses the misfortune but also pities him for it, twice over fulfilling the needs of a cathartic reaction. A high and powerful stature, then, is vital on two fronts. The second side of Aristotelian stature is the moral stature of the tragic hero. Aristotle presents a delicate balance for the hero to achieve. First, the hero must not be a virtuous man brought from prosperity to adversity: for this merely shocks. Next the hero must not be a bad man passing from adversity to prosperity; for nothing can be more alien to the spirit Tragedy. And lastly the downfall of the utter villain should not take place, as this would not provoke pity or fear. With these three requirements, Aristotle finds a man who is not eminently good and just, yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty ; this tragic flaw. This is our tragic hero and so it is not merely his position the gives him stature but the accomplishment of Aristotle s equilibrium (29; sec.13). In order to inspire catharsis in the audience, the hero must be near the top of this moral continuum. If an admirable man, the audience will grow found of him and pity his tragic end all the more. Also, his flaw and fall will seem more so unmerited. Fear and pity, again, key; fear that the audience can suffer just as a great man had and pity for that great man. Critics, with this foundation of the expectations of an Aristotelian tragedy, turn their attention to Miller s Death of a Salesman with critical eyes. The question most often asked is whether or not Willy Loman fulfills the role of the tragic hero and if not, then does his divergence for the traditional keep the story from being a tragedy? Ultimately, if the main
Portesi 7 character of the play cannot inspire pity or fear, then his play cannot be considered a tragedy. Willy appears to be missing some of the necessary elements, but when confronted with this argument Miller disagrees. In his own way, Miller argues, Willy Loman contains both the tragic stature and the tragic flaw of the traditional tragic hero, but in an unorthodox way, this tragic flaw and stature are one in the same. To begin with, Miller establishes his disagreement that power and prosperity are necessary for tragic stature. The playwright points out that while wealth once meant prestige and power, the world s population is no longer predominantly slaves. It is now choice, he claims, that gives the tragic hero his stature, not property. Miller makes his sentiments clear by stating in his essay Introduction to Collected Plays, so long as the hero may be said to be alternatives of the magnitude to have materially changed the course of this life, it seems to be that in this respect at least, and he cannot be debarred from the heroic role (164). This is a contrast to Aristotle s demand for a prosperous man (29; sec.13). Much like Oedipus ability to act on his flaw, what defines the tragic hero is the freedom to make significant life choices. It is when the hero pursues these choices that he earns the stature he will fall from. In some way, Miller s case does ring true when he state that it matters not at all whether a modern play concerns itself with grocer or a president if the intensity of the hero s commitment to his course is less than the maximum possible (166). Miller s idea of this persistence, intensity in the character, oddly mixes tragic flaw and tragic stature in a way that Aristotle may not have intended. Aristotle called for the tragic hero to be good and prestigious, which created and allowed a passion or sin that destroyed him. Miller removes the necessity for prestige and mixes stature with flaw. His character Willy Loman achieves his stature through the choice his flaw drives him towards.
Portesi 8 In this, the audience is allowed to see in Willy Loman s flawed obsession with success as his fulfillment of moral stature. Many critics and audience members alike feel that Willy is not a moral man, but rather a selfish liar and adulterer, based off of his actions through-out the play. Willy is told by his neighbor Charley that he ought to be ashamed of [himself]! (47; Act1) and his son Biff, upon discovering his father s infidelity yells [ ] you-liar! [ ] You fake! You phony little fake! (121; Act2). Willy is so focused on success and being well liked that he loses track of what is important his family and is driven insane when he is unable to achieve his goals. It can be argued, however, that Willy is so intense in his cause because he wants to provide for his family and make them proud. Though he is not a man of high stature or a noble person, he is passionate and has the choice to follow that passion, thus initiating the tragic hero s ability to fulfill the law of probability or necessity. Linda Loman, his wife, cries out this idea at the end of the play, I didn t say he s a great man. Willy Loman never made a lot of money. He was never in the paper. He s not the finest character that ever lived. But he s a human being, and a terrible thing is happening to him. So attention must be paid [ ] Attention must be paid to such a person (56; Act1). This, in Miller s opinion, fulfills the characteristics of a tragic hero. Willy s stature, which is ability to life altering choices, enables him to choose a life based off of the law of success, where-in the value of life is based solely off of success. This worldview is Willy Loman s tragic flaw and it makes it a tragic hero by Aristotle s standards. Miller supports this idea when he states in his article Introduction to Collected Plays that so long as the hero may be said to have had alternatives of the magnitude to have materially changed the course of his life, it seems to me that in this respect at least, he cannot be debarred from the heroic hero (165).
Portesi 9 It is not only the tragic flaw and tragic stature of Willy Loman at question in this debate, however; as a play on the whole, Death of a Salesman is examined critically for the Aristotelian law of probability and necessity. Miller acknowledges the difference between his play and the expectations of Aristotle s tragedy in his essay Introduction to Collected Plays, but he explains and the supposed lack of unity by saying, The Salesman image was from the beginning absorbed with the concept that nothing in life comes next but that everything exists together and at the same time with us [ ] (156). Aristotle had stated that the play contains a whole and that whole is that which as a beginning, a middle and an end something that Death of a Salesman does not follow (25; sec.7). This is a pivotal point for scholars. If they are willing to accept that Death of a Salesman does not require a chronological cause and effect, then the play can be considered a tragedy in that area. If, however, the probably and unity can must be limited to clear plots and that move from one point to the next then Death of a Salesman does not accomplish this. Despite the different layout, Miller s play can remain true to the heart of what a tragedy must achieve; that the audience is able to follow a clear flow of cause and effect. Aristotle continues his description of the plays whole by commenting that a beginning is that which does not itself follow anything, by causal necessity, but after which something naturally is or comes to be. An end, on the contrary, is that which itself naturally follows some other thing, either by necessity, or as a rule, but has nothing following it (25; sec.7). While Aristotle presents a traditional cause and effect plotline, Miller accomplishes the same whole through the use of flashbacks as the other things an ending follows. In fact, Miller states that there are no flashbacks in the play but only a mobile concurrency of past and present ( Introduction 158-9). The connection between present and past serve to enrich the plot and explain the hero s tragic flaw retrospectively. Given the cliché phrase that hindsight if
Portesi 10 20/20, this set up allows the audience more relation to the characters. No longer are they simply witnessing a tragic ending, but the audience is allowed insight into the beginning and how that ending was reached. For instance, through the use of a flash back, Willy s passion for success is explained through the existence of his brother. On multiple occasions Ben, Willy s brother, arrives in hallucinations and preaches about fame and glory. At one point, Ben tells Willy s son Why boys, when I was seventeen I walked into the jungle, and when I was twenty-one I walked out. And by God I was rich! and for this Willy proclaims him a great man! (48; Act1). Likewise, from the onset the pain and tension of the Loman household is clear, but contrasting flashbacks of better day arouse more pity and sympathy. When Willy is imagining earlier years when his boys were younger, the audience witness s a lively scene between him and his sons. When his wife enters she states And the boys, Willy. Few men are idolized by their children the way you are (37; Act1). This is a clear contrast to the current squabbling between father and son and explains Linda s broken heartedness with the situation. Another flashback explains the reason for the anger between Biff and Willy. But does the Miller s intermixing of tragic flaw and tragic stature accomplish catharsis, the mark of a tragedy? Some critics argue that Willy is not a tragic hero, does not contain a tragic flaw and, ultimately, inspires neither fear nor pity. For these critics, he does not stand on Aristotle s thin line between a good man with one fateful sin and a bad man with many. They view Willy as an utter villain, selfish and prideful, and by Aristotle s standards the downfall of the utter villain [should] be exhibited. A plot of this kind would, doubtless, satisfy the moral sense, but it would inspire neither pity nor fear (29; sec.13). Other critics, however, who do pity Willy and even fear for themselves when they watch his fall apart on the stage. Willy is a prideful man who has set his heart and mind on a specific goal, which i success through wealth
Portesi 11 and being well liked and this desire is common for many people. The audience, then fears for its own flaws and pities Willy because he is a man like ourselves (29; sec13). Miller takes the stance of the latter, stating I think that tragic feeling is evoked in us when we are in the presence of a character who is ready to lay down his life, if need be, to secure one thing his sense per personal dignity (144). This desire for dignity is a common desire of audience members today it makes Willy s flaw relatable. In the end, perhaps the most important thought to consider is whether or not Willy Loman was a victim or if he had choice. If Willy was a victim of society, then the audience must feel pity for him. His world, like the prophecies that plagued Oedipus life, left him without choice, no matter the decisions made. Willy himself complains of the pressure that he feels from the world around him at the start of play. He says to his wife, Linda, The street is lined with cars. There s not a breath of fresh air in the neighborhood. The grass doesn t grow anymore, you can t raise a carrot in the backyard. They should ve had a law against apartment houses (17; Act1). Though his complaints do not specifically reference American society, his setting is symbolic of it. In his way, Willy is driven by the fates of American life but, paradoxically, he still does not lose Miller s vital element of choice. In a flashback, Will is offered the opportunity to follow his brother to Alaska where fame and fortune were to be found. When Linda pleads with her husband saying that he s doing a beautiful job here and he s doing well enough Willy chooses his family. Further inspired by his wife s encouragement that that he is well liked and the boys love [him] and some day why, old man Wanger told him just theother day that if he keeps it up he ll be a member of the first Willy proclaims, It s contacts Ben, contacts! The whole wealth of Alaska passes over the lunch table at the Commodore Hotel, and that s the wonder, the wonder of this country, that a man can end with diamonds here on the basis of being
Portesi 12 liked! (86; Act1). By choosing to stay Willy demonstrates his right to choose, his passion for success and his love for his family. Even if the salesman is not a great man, he is still a good man who is only fighting for the best. Death of a Salesman is a modern play that critics hold against the ancient and traditional standards that Aristotle set forth, including tragic stature, tragic flaw, the law of probably and necessity and catharsis. Willy Loman is a tragic character who must fight for his title for a tragic hero and in many ways, the man and his story do not meet the expected norms, however, with allowances and adjustments for a new literary world, the salesman can claim each of the required Aristotelian characteristics. Willy s flaw and stature are one in the same, his passion for success and decision to follow that passion and this passion leads him through the law of probably or necessity. But it is catharsis, the pity and fear inspired in the audience when they witness Willy s fall, which can testify to his place as a tragic hero. Though some may not see Willy as a man like themselves, his situation is all too familiar in an image based world. The need to be well liked influences us all and when Willy s son Happy says at this father s funeral I m not liked that easily. I m staying right in this city, and I m gonna beat this racket![ ] I m gonna show you and everybody else that Willy Loman did not die in vain. He had a good dream. It s the only dream you can have to come out number-one man. He fought it out there, and this is where I am going to win it for him the audience know that they two have a dream that they are willing to die for.
Portesi 13 Works Cited Aristotle. The Poetics. Trans. S. H. Butcher. Criticism: Major Statements. Eds. Charles Kaplan and William Anderson. 4th ed. Boston: Bedford-St. Martin's, 2000. 18-46. Print. Miller, Arthur. Death of a Salesman. Viking Compass Edition. New York, NY: The Murray Printing Company, 1968. Print. ---. "Introduction to Collected Plays. Death of a Salesman: Text and Criticism. By Arthur Miller. Ed. Gerald Weales. New York: Viking-Penguin, 1967. 155-71. Print.