This essay, written by Arthur Miller called "Tragedy and the Common Man" discusses what tragedy within literature means now compared to before. The essay starts by talking about tragedy's usual connection to nobility and power, but Miller says basically that we do this in order to make it almost not relatable to ourselves at all. We want to distance ourselves from tragedy in order to make it somewhat enjoyable or even comedic. Miller then goes on to explain that even though we attempt to distance ourselves, the feelings within the stories evoke emotions that everyone can relate to. I actually think Miller's view of the tragedy are very insightful and helpful. In line 29-30 he says this "Tragedy, then, is the consequence of a mans total compulsion to evaluate himself justly." I think this is a very perceptive definition or maybe even explanation of tragedy. I think what Miller means by this is that by attempting to evaluate themselves fairly the heroes cause themselves a great deal of struggle.Each hero has a "tragic flaw", Miller explains how this "flaw" isn't always a weakness, it usually has to do with an "inherent unwillingness" to give up on the challenge or to fail on getting to his "rightful status". Miller then states that technically only the passive or those who accept what they are and what they have without retaliation are "flawless", he believes this is another way that regular people can relate to tragedy because there are plenty of people who act against the process, even today. In many ways this essay confirmed what I had thought about tragedy but it also gave me new perspective on what exactly makes up tragedy and why we like reading/seeing it.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|