Category: Arthur Miller

Arthur Miller was a renowned playwright who lived from October 17th, 1915, to February 10th, 2005. His literary career began when he was a student at the University of Michigan. He was the recipient of multiple Tony Awards, a Pulitzer Prize, and the Praemium Imperiale Prize (“Arthur Miller”). Miller was also briefly married to Marilyn Monroe and was furthermore notorious for not “naming names” during the Red Scare, despite the repercussions (“Arthur Miller”). Arthur Miller worked hard to “[combine] social awareness with a searching concern for his characters’ inner lives” (“Arthur Miller”), and his work was therefore not just able to make an impact within its own time, but to achieve a literary legacy that allows for his works to still be significant, and discussed, to this day.

Arthur Miller contributed a great deal to the literary field, not only in the quality of his work but also in the quantity. His works range from plays to novels to short stories to screenplays. Miller was able to use an array of mediums to tell the tales he thought to be important. All My Sons (1947), The Death of a Salesman (1948), The Crucible (1953), A View from the Bridge (1955), The Misfits (1961), After the Fall (1964), Incident at Vichy (1964), I Don’t Need You Anymore (1967), The American Clock (1980), Timebends (1987), Mr. Peters’ Connections (1998), Resurrection Blues (2002), and Finishing the Picture (2004) are only a few of the many works that Miller accomplished throughout his lifetime. Looking closely at one of his more well-known works, The Crucible, we can see the impact that he had not only on the literary field, but also more specifically on the ghost-story genre.

Arthur Miller’s works were influenced greatly by the era he grew up in. Having borne witness to the great depression, the holocaust, the second red scare, and the anti-Vietnam/anti-war movement to name a few, Miller was able to draw on the political and social movements around him in order to create impactful works of literary significance. In this way, Miller’s works contribute greatly to the ghost-story genre, especially of American literature, because it draws attention to the haunting that history can have on a nation. When Miller was working on and later presenting, The Crucible, McCarthyism was in full-effect. Miller was able to use the haunting of past events to draw attention to (then) current events, in order for people to make the connection that the “witch hunts” they deem so unjust, a social culling that they place in the past, were still very real and thriving around them, if only they would open their eyes and see it. This is recognized in a paper discussing Miller’s work, wherein it states that: “in the 1950s, The Crucible helped the readers and the audience to create a distance from their immediate present and form an historical perspective of their times by viewing the politics of their present as history. The Crucible is an artifact that not only frames the past in the present context, that is, the 1950s, but it does so in a pointed way, through its performance, and puts the perception of the present at a distance as a result of which it can be had as history” (Aziz 184).

Looking more closely at the issue of the 1950’s, that of the “Red Scare”, or communism rising, one can see that it is inherently no different from the Salem witch trials. The Crucible helped to put things into a specific perspective wherein people could recognize that “the alleged crimes were invisible” (185), being based on little more than allegations. Whether discussing witchcraft of the 1600s or “espionage and political subversion” (185) of the 1950s, the “state” in either case acted much in the same manner. Fear-mongering, scapegoating, relying on those who are accused to accuse someone else in order to save themselves, and those who are “innocent” to accuse another not only to keep perpetuating the fear, but also to keep attention away from themselves. Most notably even, the similarities between the spectacle of the court are present in both cases. Where Salem used their judicial system as a spectacle by way of enrapturing the entire town, television worked much in the same way for the court hearings of the 50s (190). It has been noted that, “At the time of [The Crucible’s] publication, few thought that McCarthy was heading for his downfall. Yet he went down, and Miller’s history of Salem predicted it” (192). Again, this substantiates the significance of Miller’s texts working to acknowledge the haunting of American history and to deliberately draw attention to the repetitive nature of historical events, as they re-enact themselves within the present. America is haunted by historical events that they continuously re-enact, and Miller’s work did a great deal in recognizing and showcasing this connection. His work is significant within the ghost-story tradition of American literature not only because of its recognizing of a non-conventional “haunting”, but more importantly its success in implementing it.

I think Arthur Miller’s ‘Death of a salesman’ is a tragedy and it is a modern tragedy. Arthur Miller’s play ‘Death of a Salesman’ is based on such a dream-breaking story. An American salesman has always dreamed of financially comfortable and debt-free living for himself and his family, but that dream ends with his life. The lifelong dream of the common middle-class and lower-middle-class fathers of this capitalist society is reflected in the children’s dream of success. But his ability to fulfill his dream is hampered by the fact that in the end, the father leaves the mark of his last effort for the children through death. In this way, ‘Death of a Salesman’ is formed by combining the story of the life and death of thousands of dreams with one death. That’s why we can say it is tragedy and tragedy is shown by Willy, who is plagued by his American Dream which is unrealistic and impractical. He is obsessed with glitz and fascination, wanting success through recognition. Willy who believes in recognition as the way to success lives his life as an inappropriate salesman. His spiritual redemptions make him struggle his life and eventually commits suicide to leave his legacy upon his son Biff. Arthur Miller, the author of this play refers tragic hero as a common person. He clearly explains this using Willy as his character, which successfully identifies the tragedy of his life.

Now, we can say it is a modern tragedy. Because modern tragedy is also more likely to focus on society, rather than fate or fortune, as that which oppresses the hero. However, the modern tragedy retains a highly solemn tone and focus on matters of grave and ultimate importance, features common to tragedy throughout its history. As Willy Loman didn’t do anything special for his future so he didn’t get any good results. Here nothing based on his luck. So it’s not a greek tragedy it’s a modern tragedy.

We can see the picture of our current society from here. There are many people in our country like Willy who can’t live their own lives. So this is also a modern tragedy.

People all over the world are now moving to cities. From the village, from the muffs all, people are now migrating to all the big and busy cities with dreamy eyes. In these big cities, there are huge buildings, mills, factories, factories, and companies that have sprung up like frog umbrellas. This enormity speaks of wealth, fame, and recognition of the abundance of wealth.

A classical Greek tragedy is the story of a hero who experiences a reversal of fortune set in motion by the gods as a result of hubris. Now This was the tragedy of willy’s life. Now the greek tragedy is a play where a disaster happened to the protagonist. And in a modern tragedy, it’s all about suffering. Another thing is a greek tragedy is based on luck but modern tragedy flew with the character’s decisions. In Greek tragedy, the main character or protagonist. A tragic hero is a person of high rank who accepts his or her downfall with dignity. But we can see Willy is a common man who works as a little salesman and can do little for his family.

The ancient Greek tragedy believes in the idea of fate or a destiny preordained by the gods no matter what action a person takes in the presence of fate. More were three goddesses who determined the length of a person’s life and how much suffering it would contain Greeks believed that no one could escape their fate out even the God’s themselves. But in this play, Willy Loman didn’t do anything special for his future so he didn’t get any good results. Here nothing based on his luck. So it’s not a greek tragedy it’s a modern tragedy. Medieval tragedy mostly took the form of narratives, rather than plays, and focused on the fall of great men caused, not by a tragic flaw, but instead by the spinning of fortune’s wheel. Renaissance tragedy took its inspiration from classical tragedy, while changing the form in important ways, by including subplots, comic relief, and expanding the possibilities for the tragic hero.

So finally we can say that Arthur Miller’s ‘Death of a salesman’ is a tragedy and it is a modern tragedy We understood that from the above discussion.

Thesis statement: The play, ‘The Crucible,’ was written by American author Arthur Miller in 1953. The Crucible is set against the backdrop of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692 when a group of girls thought to be demonically possessed in the strongly religious Puritan village of Salem accused a series of local women of practicing witchcraft. This led to widespread hysteria, a trial was set up, and multiple people were sent to the gallows after being found guilty of practicing witchcraft (Miller, 112). The Salem Witchcraft Trials share similarities with the Communist trials of the 1950s in that unsubstantial claims ruined many lives, mass hysteria led to both events, and innocent persons were singled out and persecuted in both events.

Why Miller Wrote “The Crucible.”

The author of the Crucible found the Salem Witch Trials inspiring, especially his situation after he was accused of being a “witch” himself. A crucible is a big metal plate where metals or other substances are subjected to very high temperatures. Since pure metals usually have different melting points, a crucible is an efficient way of separating metals from impurities. Miller used the term “crucible” as a metaphor. Given that the Crucible is used to separate pure metal from impurities, Miller likened the Salem Witch Trials to a crucible because of its role in separating the puritans from the witches. In the mid-20th century, after the Second World War, both America and Russia, two countries of enormous military might and conflicting political ideologies, came to be such intense rivals (LaFeber, 124).

America was scared of Russia’s nuclear arsenal, and Russia was equally scared of America’s nuclear might. Meanwhile, America was a capitalist state, a social leaning that it took great pride in. On the other hand, Russia chose to adhere to the Marxism discourse, and together with China, became a very staunch communist state (Bette, 215). Due to the rivalry with Russia, and the ideology of freedom and hard work on which America was founded, patriotic American citizens were not only contemptuous of communism, and they were frightened of the idea. Somehow they believed that communism could creep into their country and dismantle its social and political structure. The mid-twentieth century, referred to as The Second Red Scare, was characterized by a campaign spreading fear of communism and heightened political oppression (Schrecker, 204). The hysteria of communism spreading to the US was so high that the American government established a committee whose sole purpose was to investigate Un-American Activities (communism) from spreading in America. The chair of the Non-American Committee was none other than the infamous Senator Joseph McCarthy (Schrecker, 312).

McCarthy soon started accusing people who had leftish political leaning of being communists. Moreover, people were also outing one another. Celebrities were not spared, and many were outed as communists’ spies, including Arthur Miller, who was accused of being a communist because of his liberal political views (Schrecker, 414). Miller was furious, likening the shambolic way that McCarthy’s Committee operated to the Salem witch trials of the late 15th century. Many people that were accused of being communists lost their jobs, and reputations and were blacklisted although they were not communist spies. Miller wrote “The Crucible” to portray the stupidity that he thought surrounded the communist hysteria that existed in America in the 1940s and 1950s (Carson, 208). Miller wanted the public to reflect on how the witch hunts ruined many innocent lives during that dark part of American history and liken it to the prevailing political atmosphere of his time. The moral of Miller’s story is not to support something because the more significant majority is already supporting it. Meanwhile, Senator McCarthy’s name is forever etched in the English vocabulary, referring to the process of making subversive and treason accusations without regard for evidence (Ward & Butler, 265).

Investigations and Trials in the Salem Trials and McCarthyism Hearings

During the McCarthyism investigations, the committee largely ignored the rights of the accused, and the norms of the fair trial were thrown out the window (Schrecker, 245). Constitutional rights no longer applied, and new laws were implemented that oppressed personal freedoms. For instance, people suspected of being communists during McCarthyism were subject to very intense and unorthodox investigations; their phones were illegally tapped and were subject to rigorous questioning before government committees, agencies, or private industry panels (Schrecker, 271). Just like Salem started by targeting women, those targeted in the 1940s and 1950s were government employees, revered members of the entertainment industry, activists of the labor union, and academicians. Arthur Miller blacklisted himself three years after he wrote ‘The Crucible.’ The level of threat accorded to those accused or suspected of being communists (Carson, 21). Most of whom were people with leftish political views, were greatly exaggerated.

Anyone who happened to appear within the radar of the House of Un-American Activities’ suspicion of communism immediately received a subpoena. During the hearings, the suspects were often grilled, after which they were expected to give out names of communist conspirators (Schrecker, 211). Any names that were provided were immediately issued with subpoenas, and the committee’s scope widened. Some people who appeared before the HUAC had not committed espionage acts, but had in the past expressed communist ‘thoughts.’ People that refused to answer the committee’s questions or give away names were often sent to jail (Schrecker, 253). Moreover, subjects that invoked their Fifth Amendment Rights were often portrayed as guilty.

Likewise, in the Salem Witch Trials, confessions from a series of delusional girls who were more afraid of the punishment that their shameful acts would get them decided to subvert the blame to innocent members of the society as their testimony was the only investigation required (Miller, 123). Just like communist suspects of the 1950s threats were extremely exaggerated, and the accused “witches” of Salem faced overwhelming and easily faked evidence; consider the spectral evidence that held about the witches’ spirits visiting the victims (Hill, 112). Furthermore, the McCarthyism hearings expected those who had been found guilty to give away the names of others, and many former communists must have denounced others as being more communist than they were to obtain absolution for themselves. A young Caribbean n slave girl by the name of Tituba confessed to being a witch with the thought that she would be spared the gallows if she cooperated. Tituba became an informer just like the many communist suspects. Just like Tituba, more alleged witches confessed to gain absolution (Hill, 536).

Singling Out Persons for Persecution

Several people were singled out in the Crucible as well as during the 1950s McCarthy hearings for practicing witchcraft or being communists, respectively. A striking similarity in the singling out of individuals and the fate that followed between the two separate events can be that of Rebecca Nurse and the Hollywood Ten, who refused to cooperate with the communist trials. Rebecca Nurse was a real person that was persecuted and eventually hung during the real Salem Witch Trials whom Miller chose to include in his play. In ‘The Crucible,’ the Nurse is married to Patrick Nurse and is portrayed as a sensible and upright elderly woman. The nurse is initially held in high regard by the Salem community. Even Reverend Gale, a non-Salem dweller is not immune to her exemplary character; he says about Nurse, ‘It is strange how I knew you, but I suppose you look as such a good soul should. We have all heard of your great charities in Beverly.” (Miller, 152).

Miller sets Rebecca as the moral high ground from which his other characters can be measured. When she is accused of witchcraft (having allegedly killed seven through her spirit), she refuses to confess or give out names. She has too much integrity to drag anyone down with her. In 1947 when HUAC widened its scope to the entertainment industry, it accused ten Hollywood members of promoting communist influence in motion pictures (Schrecker,212). These ten men Hollywood men publicly denounced the shambolic tactics employed by HUAC, refused to cooperate or give out names of ‘fellow’ communists and were eventually blacklisted from ever working in Hollywood after being handed jail sentences (Schrecker, 234).

The social conditions that made Salem and the Communist “witch” hunt Possible

The belief that the devil could give individual humans supernatural abilities to harm fellow humans was widespread in Europe in the 14th century onwards, a belief that was also shared in New England. Life was also not easy in the rural community of Salem (Hill, 114). The member residents were still recovering from the effects of the British-French wars in the American colonies, the village had just been hit by a smallpox epidemic, and most were scared that Native Americans could attack anytime (Hill, 115). Among such conditions, the trials could have been sparked by the slightest of resentment, suspicion, or fear of outsiders, and they did. John Proctor tries to get the court to fathom the madness fueled by suspicion, resentment, and malicious agenda by saying,

“Why do you never wonder if Parris be innocent, or Abigail? Is the accuser always holy now? Were they born this morning as clean as God’s fingers? I’ll tell you what’s walking Salem-vengeance is walking Salem. We are what we always were in Salem, but now the little crazy children are jangling the keys of the kingdom, and common vengeance writes the law! This warrants vengeance! I’ll not give my wife to vengeance!” (Miller, 86).

Proctor wants the court to know that nothing has changed in Salem, the only thing out of the odd is that young girls with spirits of vengeance are now running around falsely accusing innocents and the court wants to believe them. Biblical principles of justice have been put aside as vengeance now writes the law.

After the Second World War, the United States lost its sense of national-self identification. Many had seen the effects of the great depression and associated it with capitalism and as such, might have expressed a little admiration for communism. The United States feared that communism might encroach within its systems. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union was growing in power, Moreover, eastern Europe was a conglomerate of communist states, and the US believed a nuclear threat surrounded it. Coupled with the fear of nuclear war with Russia. Paranoia led to the formation of HUAC (Schrecker, 286).

Can Mass Hysteria Happen Today?

Mass hysteria such as the ones that happened in Salem in the 1690s and in the United States during the 1950s led to more harm than good can happen anytime and anywhere. Furthermore, I have seen it happen in some places in the world. For example, the Arab Spring Revolution that began in the early 2010s was sparked when a man set himself ablaze in Tunisia in protests of an oppressive regime and low living standards; this soon led to full-blown protests that spread throughout the Middle East. Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Bahrain, followed, and some of these nations are far much worse than they were before the revolution (Noueihed & Warren, 17). Moreover, I have seen hysteria spread because of mysterious contagious diseases such as the Bird Flu hysteria of 2006 that led to mass quarantine and communication breakdown but eventually faded away without substantial damage. Mass hysteria is most likely to happen today due to the anxiety and psychological stress caused by mysterious diseases.

Why the Crucible failed in Averting the “Red Baiting”

One of the reasons why I believe that Arthur Miller’s book could not stop the red-baiting caused by the communist scare was because politicians took advantage of the public’s fear and used it to advance their agenda. Politicians are of a more significant influence than playwrights and they especially take advantage of the illiterate and ignorant to further their agenda. It has always been easier to appeal to fear than to reason, and politicians took the advantage of the underlying conditions to gain electoral support, by creating an aura for the public to associate what they opposed (communism) with something deeming and alarming. Arthur Miller could have written “The Crucible “in the form of a screenplay and made it into a movie immediately since motion pictures have a wider immediate audience. Maybe then, more people could have paid attention.

In conclusion, the play, “The Crucible,” is a play that was written by American author, Arthur Miller, in 1953. The Crucible is set against the backdrop of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692 when a group of girls thought to be demonically possessed in the strongly religious Puritan village of Salem accused a series of local women of practicing witchcraft. The Salem Witchcraft Trials share similarities with the Communist trials of the 1950s in that unsubstantial claims ruined many lives, mass hysteria led to both events, and innocent persons were singled out and persecuted in both events.

References

1. Betts, Richard K., ed. Conflict after the Cold War: arguments on causes of war and peace. Taylor & Francis, 2017.
2. Carson, Neil. Arthur Miller. Macmillan International Higher Education, 2008.
3. Hill, Frances. A delusion of Satan: The full story of the Salem witch trials. Tantor eBooks, 2014.
4. LaFeber, Walter, and Brian Abbott. America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-1975. Wiley, 1972.
5. de Medeiros, Julian. ‘The Battle for the Arab Spring: Revolution, Counter-Revolution and the Making of a New Era (Updated Edition).’ (2014): 115-117.
6. Schrecker, Ellen. ‘McCarthyism: Political repression and the fear of communism.’ Social Research (2004): 1041-1086.
7. Ward, Jerry W., and Robert J. Butler, eds. The Richard Wright Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO, 2008.

Chaos breaks out in the town and rumors of witchery spread. Teenage girls let out savage screams and shake uncontrollably. Everyone is panicking and blaming one another. In ‘The Crucible’, a historical fiction play written by Arthur Miller, set in 1693 Salem, Massachusetts, John Proctor, a respected farmer, tries to get the truth out and end the witchcraft madness. Arthur Miller wrote the play about the Salem Witch Trials, which started when a group of young girls were accused of being possessed by the devil and are said to be affected by witchcraft. They start accusing several women in the town of witchcraft. Miller depicts John Proctor as a dynamic character over the course of the play by showing how Proctor changes as a person who only cared about his reputation and public appearances, to someone who is concerned about his inner self and integrity.

John Proctor was a very well respected and strong person in his community. His good name and reputation are very important to him, but that starts to change throughout the play. At the beginning of the play, the protagonist, John Proctor, had an affair with a teenage girl named Abigail Williams, while his wife was ill. John later does not want anything more to do with her, and wants Abigail to tell the truth so the innocent people that were accused don’t get hurt. However, she doesn’t care about what’s right or wrong, and is only interested in winning Proctor back. John begins to realize what Abigail is doing after many people, including his wife, are accused and tries to put an end to the trials. Even though he is ashamed of himself, guilt takes over him and so he tells his wife, Elizabeth, about the affair with Abigail. Proctor tries to please Elizabeth and begs for her forgiveness saying that “he cannot speak without being doubted, and judged for lies, as thou he comes into a court when he comes into the house” (Miller 54-55; Act 2). He is sorry for what he has done and shows how much he wants to please Elizabeth. In Act 3, Proctor shows that he is willing to prove how sorry he was by admitting his affair with Abigail to Hawthorne. He was afraid to admit to having an affair with Abigail at first because he feared it would hurt his reputation in society.

John realizes that by confessing, he has an opportunity to start anew in his marriage and show how much he truly cares about his wife. During the accusations of witchcraft going around, Abigail found the perfect opportunity to get revenge on Elizabeth. Abigail firmly believes that Elizabeth was the reason why her affair with Proctor ended. She uses this opportunity to accuse Elizabeth of witchcraft, so she could have Proctor to herself. Upset when knowing that Elizabeth has nothing to do with the devil and would be unfairly accused, Proctor tries everything he can do to defend her. He tried to get Mary to reveal the truth about the puppet and the needle, but he realizes that her testimony can’t save his wife. So, he decides to confess his adultery, although it could ruin his reputation. This shows how much he loves and cares for Elizabeth. He says to Judge Danforth and the court to get revenge on Abigail: “She thinks to dance with me on my wife’s grave! And well she might, for I thought of her softly. God help me, I lusted, and there is a promise in such sweat. But it is a whore’s vengeance, and you must see” (Miller 110; Act 3). John Proctor has changed since the beginning of the play and decides to give up his own name and image, to save his wife from getting hanged and to prove the court wrong.

At the end of the play, Proctor’s desire to keep his integrity led him to accept his death sentence without signing his name to the false confession, when he could’ve lied to save his life. John asks his wife to forgive him for what he has done, but she says that her forgiveness wouldn’t matter “if he’ll not forgive himself” (Miller 136; Act 4). She confesses that she feels guilty for her coldness towards him in their marriage, and she trusts that Proctor has found the goodness in him. In order to live, he is forced to lie and is asked to name other witches, but he refuses to accuse innocent Christians. Judge Danforth forces him to sign the confession and when Proctor finds out that it will be nailed to the church door, he thinks about how he can teach his sons to be men if he “sold his friends” (Miller 143; Act 4). Therefore, he tears up his confession and cries to Judge Danforth, “How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” (Miller 143; Act 4). By refusing to give up his name and choosing to die in order to protect those around him, he redeems himself for his faults and dies with honor and integrity.

In conclusion, John Proctor’s transformation over the course of the play plays an important role in our understanding of Miller’s message about the Witch Trials in Salem. Miller expresses Proctor’s changes from only caring about his good name to understanding who he really is and protecting his integrity. At the beginning of the play, we learn about his affair with Abigail Williams, which was one of the main issues that caused the hysteria. Abigail accuses Elizabeth of witchcraft and John realizes that he must confess his affair with Abigail to save his wife, although it could ruin his reputation. At the end of the play, he refuses to confess to witchcraft and accuse his innocent friends in order to protect his integrity. This shows how he has changed significantly and no longer cares about what the people of the town think of him, but what he thinks of himself. The depiction of John Proctor as dynamic in ‘The Crucible’, revealed much about the plot and furthered our understanding of it.

In the beginning of the play, Miller introduces the character John Proctor as an individual that remains unalterable with Proctor’s stance on honesty and integrity, unlike the narrow-minded Salem community. In Act I, Miller presents John Proctor as a bold man, standing up to hypocrites. Further on, Proctor argues with the Putnams and Reverend Parris due to bizarre accusations about witchcraft. Miller exhibits John Proctor’s indications that Putnam cannot chide the devil for his children’s deaths arguing. “I see none dying. This society will be to be a bag to swing around your head, Mr. Putnam”. This shows that John Proctor thinks rationally about other people’s actions. Proctor is standing up to egocentric Putnam because he is trying to get land for himself and also using the community’s hysteria as a weapon to achieve personal gains. This portrays his sharp and quick-witted persona and also displays the dangers of ideologies in Salem, in which the innocent is condemned for their land and the wealthy get wealthier. The quote also shows Proctor is confronting the Putnams towards blaming their misfortunes on witchcraft at the same time. The word ‘swing’ shows that hysteria is being swung around Salem and people are accusing each other for their own good. Miller explores the power of hysteria as a contagious emotion that can tear a community apart. Through the ending of the quote “bag to swing around your head”, shows how Putnam can recklessly accuse innocent people in Salem, also presenting how Putnam thinks the Salem community is at his disposal due to the influence he has in the church. This develops John Proctor as being a morally correct individual by not spreading hysteria. Following on, Proctor tells Putnam: “Vote by name in this society, not by acreage”. This shows that Proctor is demanding democracy and not who has the most land. Proctor’s democratic words show that everyone in Salem should have an equal stance because the corrupt individuals are the ones that are ‘well off’; while the morally veracious individuals such as Proctor are poorer. The word ‘acreage’ presents the avaricious nature of Salem as certain characters exploit others and aim to prosper from the suffering of others, and Miller conveys how traditional social structures are overturned by accusations through “it is the Devil’s fault that a man cannot say to you good morning without you clapping him for defamation?”. Miller’s intentional derision created by Proctor signifies Proctor’s uncertainty about the claims of witchcraft as he says it is the “devil’s fault” that he cannot say “good morning’ to Giles – which also mocks the fact that Parris and the others are using the ‘devil’ as a scapegoat for bad events that happen in Salem. Also, the use of diabolic language such as ‘devil’ in contrast to a positive greeting ‘good morning’ in the same sentence could amplify the overall illogicalness of the situation such as 1950’s America, as the hunt for communists presented illogical behavior.

In the beginning of Act two, Miller features the human need for clemency by presenting the rocky relationship between Elizabeth and Proctor. Miller sets the play in Proctor’s house-hold but it quickly gets obtureded by Mary, which impels anxiety and difficulty into the house. Proctors inflicted guilt is deepened in this part of the play, as Proctor feels conflicted due to the past affair, so he acts hesitant to Elizabeth. Proctor returns home for the day “he goes to her and kisses her. Elizabeth receives the kiss with certain disappointment he returns to the table”. The stage directions directly present their relationship as disconcerting as soon as they are introduced. Elizabeth fails to compensate for Proctor’s love for her, conveying a lack of familiarity in the relationship; which leads to an awkward standoff. The passive verb ‘receives’ shows the rigidness in their relationship, as there is no answer from Elizabeth. As a consequence, Proctor is laden with ‘certain disappointment’ which refers to the disappointment he has in her for her inability to forgive him even though he knows Elizabeth is the correct one in the room, emphasizing Proctors weight on his shoulders due to the affair, as the hysteria dominates Proctor. However, the double entrance also embodies Proctor’s personal defeat in himself for having the affair, asserting his guilt which is prejudicial to him. The fact that he kisses her and therefore feels beaten shows how Proctor yearns to be intimate with Elizabeth again and wants to rebuild his morals and marriage. This exhibits Proctor’s adherence to never give up and do the right thing presenting his core values. The intimacy that Proctor aspires for is cut off by the lack of forgiveness from Elizabeth. The stage direction ‘returns to the table’ shows how Proctor is giving her space. This declares the firm sense of forgiving he has for Elizabeth, as he knows why she is acting heartlessly towards him, further emphasizing his culpability. Miller shows us how intimacy and touch are vital for a healthy relationship because the lack of it shows their cold distance and inadequacy of love. This concept is clasped throughout this part of the play as. “Her back is turned to him. He turns and watches her, sense of their separation arises”. The stage direction shows a transparent gap between the Proctor and Elizabeth, conveying passiveness between the couple. Elizabeth’s back is ‘turned’ to him. The repetition of ‘turn’ may symbolize how the relationship has turned into a dysfunctional relationship, showing the adverse effects of a Puritan society. The stage direction ‘her back is turned to him’ genuinely expresses Elizabeth’s coldness to Proctor. This portrays a sense of disregard and an absence of intimacy. Nonetheless, Miller portrays Proctor as a caring man for his wife, as Proctor ‘watches her’ hinting to the audience that he covets the spark to the tinder to revitalize his relationship with Elizabeth. The strain and hardship inside the household are attributed to Mary. Proctor outlandishly threatens Mary, stating that “he will whip the Devil out of her]”. Proctor is outraged that Mary appeared in court and made false accusations which are corrupting the justice system. Mary as well brought back a poppet which causes further panic. Proctor is trying to stop the hysteria which establishes Proctor as a role model or an intelligent man. Later on, Miller exhibits Proctor’s behavior as extremely conflicted due to hysteria and his affair with Abigail which causes him to be aggressive and sharp-tongued and this leads to Proctor acting harshly towards Elizabeth which can further damage the relationship. Mary’s actions justified Proctor’s words as Elizabeth previously told Mary not to go to court as it will cause more agitation, which seeps under the door to the private household. Miller highlights how public events can convulse relationships and show how communities that focus primarily on social order leaves no room for privacy.

In the beginning of Act three, Miller presents Proctor’s longing will to protect the pure characters in Salem exhibiting his father figure, and tries to cease corruption in the court. Miller indicates that hope fluctuates in court as the narrow-minded characters of Salem try to bring down Proctor’s name. Throughout the court scene, Parris is constantly trying to induce and provoke Proctor; this can be seen in the stage directions: “Pressing Parris away from her with a gentle but firm motion of protectiveness, she would speak with the Deputy Governor”. Miller presents Proctor as a protective figure and a logical man as he pushes Parris away from Mary and Elizabeth, this highlights that Proctor is protecting the girls from evil. Miller depicts the destructive power of petty personal dislike on the harmony of a community. Further out into the play, Proctor is furious with the justice system and the small-minded characters in the court he states: “There might also be a dragon with five legs in my house, but no one has ever seen it”. Miller indicates Proctor as a prudent, Proctor’s logical thinking reassesses the situation and compares the witchcraft to an imaginary ‘dragon’ in his house. This highlights how the justice system is a foolery, which is identical to the red scare in 1950’s America due to the unsound actions. The verb ‘might’ demonstrates how uncertain the allegations are in Salem and furthermore, Miller highlights that fear and suspicion can lead people to lose sight of what is right and just. Proctor’s fatal flaw is his honesty and integrity. This becomes evident in “A man may think God sleeps, but God sees everything, I know it now. I beg you, sir, I beg you – see her for what she is…She thinks to dance with me on my wife’s grave! And well she might, for I thought of her softly. God help me, I lusted and there is a promise in such sweat. But it is a whore’s vengeance…”. In court, a fractured Proctor talks to Danforth hoping to prove, Mary’s testimony, that Abigail is causing hysteria and condemning the innocent in court which gives Abigail authority. As Abigail tries to pray to God to help her, Miller presents Proctor as a selfless individual because he confesses about the affair with Abigail. Proctor displeasingly explains that Abigail is after his wife’s life due to the affair. Miller reveals Proctor’s longing need is to protect Elizabeth which develops Proctor as a sacrificial and affectionate character. The repetition of ‘god’ shows that no one, according to the bible can undermine and use God to their advantage, as God will always be the honorable one. Ultimately, Miller condemns the theocratic society that exists in Salem, and reminds the audience of the dangers of instilling too much power into a few men; as they can only use corruption as an aid and condemn people using God’s name.

At the beginning of act four, Miller conveys how Proctor cares for his morals and reputation. Miller presents the idea that Proctor would rather die with a favorable reputation, this will ultimately give peace to Proctor rather than lying, living and be disgraced in the Salem community. This notion is seen through “I have given you my soul; leave me my name!”. Miller highlights Proctor’s contrary situation, Proctor’s emphasis of his words presents that the only asset he has is his name, Proctor would rather succumb than to eradicate his reputation and live. Miller uses the noun ‘soul’ to present how Proctor’s soul has been given away, but the soul is seen as immortal. This concept can present the illogical frenzy in the court. Proctor sticks to his morals and wants closure but the court breeds more irrationality. Miller presents how hysteria and illogical thoughts can tear a community apart, just like 1950’s America. Proctor’s integrity and name is his only asset. If he loses it, he would live, feeling disgraced for the rest of his life. Proctor is defensive and is defiant in protecting his name. Miller presents how Proctor emphasizes his name to show how important it is to preserve it. Miller exhibits Proctor’s integrity, highlighting the longing need to be an honest man after his affair with Abigail. Miller shows how past mistakes can develop a character’s values and views for the best. The contrast of Proctor’s integrity between other characters in Salem is prominent, this is exhibited when Proctor states: “He cannot mount the gibbet like a saint. It is fraud”. The noun ‘fraud’ exemplifies Proctor’s willingness to stick to his morals and views himself as an adulterous man that can never be forgiven, Miller shows how Proctor is a distinctive character due to being harsh on himself, yet honest, unlike other characters that lie and condemn the innocent to maintain their reputation in Salem. In the ending of act four, Miller displays Proctor’s epiphany which is an eye-opener and an accomplishment to himself. Proctor is gratified due to not giving into the doing of others in Salem and this can be seen when he states: “You have made your magic now, for now, I do think that I see some shred of goodness in John Proctor”. Miller uses the noun ‘magic’ to condemn the Salem community for the damage they have caused: denouncing the innocent and refusing to stop until the innocent are forced to admit. The noun ‘goodness’ presents how Proctor is content with his decision, which puts him at peace. Miller presents this upbeat moment as a gift, displaying hope and that there is always light at the end of the tunnel. Miller displays the tone of Proctor as hopeful, Proctor feels like he has regained his energy because he has been stronger and more rational than his fellow corrupted townspeople. Miller presents this quote as a breather for the audience and Proctor himself. Proctor is uptight with his morals which shows that he is opposed to the evil ways of Salem as well. Miller exhibits that Proctor would rather die with fulfilment than to live in the ways of the fellow Salem community.

Arthur Miller exposes the substance of relationships through the prism of a theocracy that holds superstitions, represses human instinct, and fails to acknowledge human frailty. Dynamic human experiences are the normal progression in the lives of individuals most evident in the nature of their relationships.

In Arthur Miller’s, The Crucible, a shift of power is portrayed through Abigail’s sly manipulation. The disintegration of an orderly religiously managed society into one that Is governed by chaos and hysteria is caused initially by a woman’s bruised pride. At the beginning of the play, Abigail Williams does not rank very high nor holds any power in the society of Salem. Once a servant girl within the Proctor household, Abigail is not considered to have much standing in her village’s eyes. Her pride and desire to become dominant motivates much of her actions within the play. She rises above her modest and demeaning persona to find a way to seek revenge against the authoritarian’s mistreatment of her. She utilizes the common fear of witchcraft as her driving tool. When a group of girls is found to be dancing in the woods, suspicions of witchcraft soon follow. A part of this group, Abigail seizes the opportunity to seed doubt in her community and withhold power. She manipulates at every turn, and it appears her sole motive is to seek revenge on John Proctor and his wife Elizabeth. Once John’s lover she has been rejected. “I look for John Proctor that took me from my sleep and put knowledge in my heart! ….. And now you bid me tear the light out of my eyes? I will not, I cannot! You loved me, John Proctor, and whatever sin it is, you love me yet!” Abigail utters these words in a conversation with John Proctor, clueing to the audience of her past affair with him. In regards to Proctor we quickly realize, their relationship belongs to the past, although he may still be attracted to her, he is desperately trying to put his indecent acts behind him. Abigail, on the other hand, has no sense of closure, as this quote makes very clear. As she begs him to come back, her anger overflows and we see the roots of what becomes her destructive ways through Salem.

John Proctor is a flawed character throughout the crucible, his unseemly acts make him a realistic character, one that we can relate to. Although John was faced with a strong internal conflict regarding his reputation, this internal conflict drives his transformation as a dynamic character. Proctor is a member of the puritan religion, this culture grounded in the values of the Christian faith, hard work, self-denial, and simple living. Nonetheless, he subverts the expectations of the church, this is evident by him not attending church regularly and when asked to recite his commandments, ironically he is unable to remember the commandment against committing adultery. His lack of knowledge in the faith raises suspicions. At the beginning of Act 2, there was a great feeling of detachment and tension in the Proctor household. We see John trying to start a conversation with Elizabeth and she only gives him short answers to please him. Further on John desperately desires forgiveness from his wife, but whether it’s deserved or not, she struggles to let go of the past. “You will not judge me anymore Elizabeth. Let you look to your own improvement before you go to judge your husband anymore” This shows that John lacks responsibility, he is callous to think she will just forget. Although Elizabeth Proctor is reserved, slow to complain, and dutiful, as many Puritan women were described, she finds it painful that her husband committed adultery with their and young servant.

People cannot control their destiny but must live through the hardships and change their perspectives/personality to survive the hysteria. Mankind must persist through the failures and as long as courage drives ambition, their voice will be heard across the world. This power of inspiration is expressed during Mccarthyism, an era where Arthur Miller faces contempt with congress but persists on writing many plays to express his voice and make an impact on the world. In one of his many striking plays, ‘The Crucible’, Arthur Miller indirectly express his anger and frustration with Mccarthyism through the traits of multiple characters, thus signifying the title as a struggle to win individual liberties in a stubborn, theocratic government.

Mary Warren, a cunning women, portrayed as an animal under the absolute control of the theocratic government, makes her a robotic species with no actual voice in the play. Mary Warren fears the theocratic government laws making her vulnerable and an easy target for the rest of the characters to convict her of witchcraft. She is afraid that “Witchery’s a hangin error” and “Abby [must] tell” to not suffer the consequences of death penalty (67). Here, Mary’s tone shifts to a frenzy state as she knows her actions will result in detrimental effects. Thus, she wants to follow the government’s rules to stay on the safe side. Apart from her tone, Mary is restricted to express the art of dances for it is considered as a crime. Keeping in mind of these restrictions, the hysteria itself creates a whole new extension of various crimes. Being aware that “Common vengeance writes the law”, Mary warren fears the “Little crazy children jangling the keys of the kingdom” demonstrating the Puritanistic approach of god’s chosen one and the concept of false accusations (87). Mary’s anxiety to escape the crazy children haunts her as Abigail tries to convict her of witchcraft. Mary is tied between vengeance and morality resulting in a narrowed.

John Proctor struggles to express himself as he faces discrimination against the court but his strong attitude represents Arthur Miller’s discontent with McCarthyism. He wants to protect his rights thus, expresses his fierce nature claiming that “God’s icy wind, will blow” symbolically demonstrating that prejudice will prevail and truth will reveal itself (35). Although he resists the government’s opposition and puts forth his ideas, indirectly he claims that god will create equality while absolute dictatorship will be destroyed. This powerful expression exemplifies Arthur Miller’s anger upon the communist government. Miller’s ferocity with McCarthyism mirrors John Proctor’s anger upon the Supreme court. Although John seems courageous, he questions himself of “How [his] children [will] walk like men in the world [when] he [had] sold [his] friends” signifying Arthur miller’s message to his readers that John attempts to become a great role model for his kids (87). John understands the detrimental effects of the consequences but persists to save the lives of the innocence. John’s resistance against the government is seen as more of a courageous attempt to empower a stronger entity. Although he can confess, Mr. Proctor decides to set forth his own doctrine as an expression of righteousness disregarding the fatal consequences. Through John, Arthur miller advocates his will to fight back and determination in advancing the rights of others. Thus, John Proctor implements compassion derived by courageousness to deny the false accusations and redeem his spirit to fight back despite his struggles.

Giles Corey, a vulnerable man extreme to accusations, struggles to maintain his rights among the town of Salem but persists to resist against the government’s threats. Mr. Corey seeks to promote his sons’ lives with enriched lands of his own thus persisting through “More weight” and deny to falsely accuse the innocence (665). His character is expressed as overcoming the government’s control and seeking to benefit others. In order to empower Giles, the government’s routine continues as restriction enables to exercise free will over the vulnerable. It is a struggle for Mr. Corey as either way he will face detrimentality of consequences more importantly losing his land. The government ignores his opinions as he claims that “She were [only] readin’ books” and opposes with arrogance as it is “The highest court of the supreme government of this province” demonstrating that the court has more knowledge than a piece of literature (86). Giles Corey struggles to retain his voice for he must not oppose God and the puritanistic values. Mr. Corey isn’t god’s chosen one thus he has no rights to express his thoughts through reading literature. The government endows restrictions on learning and gaining for that will result in consistent rebellion against the Puritanistic laws themselves. Giles Corey faces condemnation from the court as he voices out his opinions resulting death. Thus, Mr. Corey died as an honorable man who resisted the force of the hysteria from empowering him prevailing his legacy.

Arthur Miller expresses his thoughts and grievances of McCarthyism through the analysis of proposing a similar configuration of conflicted characters in the ‘The Crucible’. He emphasizes his ideas on the inevitably of facing struggles in life and the way to persist through hardships. Regardless of one’s status and power, one must not get discouraged and absolutely no one has the power to defy others. Thus, Arthur Miller persuades the readers to bring unity or a common entity to fight for a cause that may change the world dramatically.

Frost and Miller depict a struggle for existence through the instability and uncertainty of humanity. Within Frost’s collection, both ‘The Road Not Taken, and ‘The Sound of Trees, depict a desire in humanity to achieve, but are clouded by the accompaniment of great uncertainty. Throughout ‘The Road not Taken’, Frost uses static verbs such as, ‘looked’ and ‘stood’, to emphasize the wariness of the speaker who is perhaps scared to make a choice, which they know will cause the progression of their future. These verbal choices also may be a representation of how we have little physical control over what happens in our future- but the control we do possess, we are apprehensive about. This is parallel to the use of verbal choice in ‘The Sound of Trees’, where the trees ‘sway’ yet do not move, indicating, like trees, that humanity is fixated on the ground- there is a hope and desire to make a change and be free, yet doing so is difficult as we are bound by our ‘roots’- setting up a struggle for reality and thus one’s existence. This idea was supported by critic Matthew Curry, who proposed the concept of the trees in ‘The Sound of Trees’, representing ‘an image for the poet’s frantic need to escape, combined with the knowledge that he can’t or won’t’. This notion in Frost’s collection links to the characters in Miller’s Death of a Salesman, notoriously Willy Loman, who maintains a desire throughout the play to achieve ultimate success but cannot do so. This is demonstrated too in Happy, Willy’s son, who follows into his father’s fantasy, attempting to seem like he has more control over his life than he does.

Throughout the play, Happy repeats that he is going to marry- ‘I’m getting married, Pop, don’t forget it” The repetition of this throughout the play depicts Happy’s belief that he can control his future, one Willy Loman can be argued to be responsible for ingraining in his son’s mentality- foreshadowing the struggle to accept the reality that both develop. Just like Willy and his son’s state of inability to turn their ‘certainty’ into reality, Frost depicts the uncertainty of the speaker in his poems through the use of structural devices. Frost uses enjambment to keep ‘The Road not Taken’ flowing, in accompaniment to the strict rhyme scheme which keeps the words tight. The tightness of the words in contrast to the fluidity of the poem as a whole, can be inferred as a representation of the rigid nature of decision-making, yet the seemingly endless results choices may lead to perhaps why the speaker finds choosing which road to follow on to so difficult. Furthering this idea, Frost creates a cyclical element to his poem where the image of ‘two roads diverged in a yellow wood’, is presented at the start of the poem in the first line, and again in the final stanza, emphasizing how one clearly cannot help but come back to the original choice they made- knowing this choice, ‘has made all the difference’. This cyclical reinforcement of uncertainty indicates a struggle the speaker possesses in being able to stray away from the thoughts of ‘what if’, linking to what Frost himself argued, ‘no matter which road you take, you’ll always sigh, and wish you had taken another’, highlighting humanities inability to remain certain that the way one’s life has diverted towards was meant to be, a concept the characters in Miller’s Death of a Salesman are unable to grasp.

This cyclical device is resonant in Frost’s ‘The Sound of Trees’, where instead of a direct similarity in language at the start and end of the poem, there is a conjoining of ideas. At the start of this poem, the speaker ‘wonders’ about the trees, yet the speaker ends the poem stating they ‘shall be gone’. Here Frost depicts the idea of longing, but the inability to stick through the challenges one may face along the way to see what result prevails. This idea re-iterates the depiction of a struggling agent, who is uncertain about the future yet does not have a stable enough mentality to stay content with not knowing, just like the seeming discontentment in ‘The Road not Taken’. These ideas are demonstrated in Miller’s play, where Willy himself spends all his time wondering about the past and hoping for the future but is not stable enough to see through the end. Willy’s dependence on suicide links to his ongoing fixation on what could have been, and as critic Rafaela Dimitriadi proposed, ‘what we understand about Willy’s behavior is that he decided suicide was the only thing left, according to Freud’s mourning and melancholia paper, a depressed person, as Willy seemed to be, is the one that tends to believe suicide will solve their problems’. Willy Loman is thus a pivotal example of an unstable man who couldn’t stray from the fixation on making a change to his life, unable to escape the dream of making a name for himself and his sons.

This desire was not uncommon in 1940s America- as this period gave rise to great optimism and economic prosperity after the depletion of the Great Depression- America’s economy was beginning to roar again, fuelling a fixation on the dream of success and wealth, a distant reality only in reach for few. An uncertainty of oneself is further presented through Willy’s values in Death of a Salesman and his fixation on the idea of success. ‘The door of your life is wide open!’ Willy exclaims to his son Biff that there are still opportunities for him to achieve success despite his sons, and his inability to do so. Here Willy’s descent into a world of illusion is amplified, as it is clear his character becomes more unstable and uncertain about the reality of the future, furthering the inner struggle of Willy’s existence. Miller’s use of exclamation after Willy’s speech, shows his enthusiasm and desire for his son’s to be successful, an idea which seems out of reach for the Loman’s, allowing us to further question Willy’s stability. Willy’s instability contrasts starkly with the certainty his son Biff possesses. Biff does not fall into the dream that his father promotes but instead argues ‘I’m not a leader of men, Willy, and neither are you’, emphasizing Biff’s surety of the place he and his father hold within society, knowing that he is not going to be ‘bringing home any prizes’ despite his father’s expectations. Miller presents Biff as aware of the futile real world, as opposed to his struggling father who seems to have submerged into a rose-tinted world of ideals, linking to the form in ‘The Road not Taken’, where like the ridged structure, Willy seems unable to escape the world he is so fixated upon, leading to a struggle of his existence, a man unable to accept the unpredictability of the future.

Frost and Miller depict a struggle for existence through the instability and uncertainty of humanity. Within Frost’s collection, both ‘The Road Not Taken, and ‘The Sound of Trees, depict a desire in humanity to achieve, but are clouded by the accompaniment of great uncertainty. Throughout ‘The Road not Taken’, Frost uses static verbs such as, ‘looked’ and ‘stood’, to emphasize the wariness of the speaker who is perhaps scared to make a choice, which they know will cause the progression of their future. These verbal choices also may be a representation of how we have little physical control over what happens in our future- but the control we do possess, we are apprehensive about. This is parallel to the use of verbal choice in ‘The Sound of Trees’, where the trees ‘sway’ yet do not move, indicating, like trees, that humanity is fixated on the ground- there is a hope and desire to make a change and be free, yet doing so is difficult as we are bound by our ‘roots’- setting up a struggle for reality and thus one’s existence. This idea was supported by critic Matthew Curry, who proposed the concept of the trees in ‘The Sound of Trees’, representing ‘an image for the poet’s frantic need to escape, combined with the knowledge that he can’t or won’t’. This notion in Frost’s collection links to the characters in Miller’s Death of a Salesman, notoriously Willy Loman, who maintains a desire throughout the play to achieve ultimate success but cannot do so. This is demonstrated too in Happy, Willy’s son, who follows into his father’s fantasy, attempting to seem like he has more control over his life than he does.

Throughout the play, Happy repeats that he is going to marry- ‘I’m getting married, Pop, don’t forget it” The repetition of this throughout the play depicts Happy’s belief that he can control his future, one Willy Loman can be argued to be responsible for ingraining in his son’s mentality- foreshadowing the struggle to accept the reality that both develop. Just like Willy and his son’s state of inability to turn their ‘certainty’ into reality, Frost depicts the uncertainty of the speaker in his poems through the use of structural devices. Frost uses enjambment to keep ‘The Road not Taken’ flowing, in accompaniment to the strict rhyme scheme which keeps the words tight. The tightness of the words in contrast to the fluidity of the poem as a whole, can be inferred as a representation of the rigid nature of decision-making, yet the seemingly endless results choices may lead to perhaps why the speaker finds choosing which road to follow on to so difficult. Furthering this idea, Frost creates a cyclical element to his poem where the image of ‘two roads diverged in a yellow wood’, is presented at the start of the poem in the first line, and again in the final stanza, emphasizing how one clearly cannot help but come back to the original choice they made- knowing this choice, ‘has made all the difference’. This cyclical reinforcement of uncertainty indicates a struggle the speaker possesses in being able to stray away from the thoughts of ‘what if’, linking to what Frost himself argued, ‘no matter which road you take, you’ll always sigh, and wish you had taken another’, highlighting humanities inability to remain certain that the way one’s life has diverted towards was meant to be, a concept the characters in Miller’s Death of a Salesman are unable to grasp.

This cyclical device is resonant in Frost’s ‘The Sound of Trees’, where instead of a direct similarity in language at the start and end of the poem, there is a conjoining of ideas. At the start of this poem, the speaker ‘wonders’ about the trees, yet the speaker ends the poem stating they ‘shall be gone’. Here Frost depicts the idea of longing, but the inability to stick through the challenges one may face along the way to see what result prevails. This idea re-iterates the depiction of a struggling agent, who is uncertain about the future yet does not have a stable enough mentality to stay content with not knowing, just like the seeming discontentment in ‘The Road not Taken’. These ideas are demonstrated in Miller’s play, where Willy himself spends all his time wondering about the past and hoping for the future but is not stable enough to see through the end. Willy’s dependence on suicide links to his ongoing fixation on what could have been, and as critic Rafaela Dimitriadi proposed, ‘what we understand about Willy’s behavior is that he decided suicide was the only thing left, according to Freud’s mourning and melancholia paper, a depressed person, as Willy seemed to be, is the one that tends to believe suicide will solve their problems’. Willy Loman is thus a pivotal example of an unstable man who couldn’t stray from the fixation on making a change to his life, unable to escape the dream of making a name for himself and his sons.

This desire was not uncommon in 1940s America- as this period gave rise to great optimism and economic prosperity after the depletion of the Great Depression- America’s economy was beginning to roar again, fuelling a fixation on the dream of success and wealth, a distant reality only in reach for few. An uncertainty of oneself is further presented through Willy’s values in Death of a Salesman and his fixation on the idea of success. ‘The door of your life is wide open!’ Willy exclaims to his son Biff that there are still opportunities for him to achieve success despite his sons, and his inability to do so. Here Willy’s descent into a world of illusion is amplified, as it is clear his character becomes more unstable and uncertain about the reality of the future, furthering the inner struggle of Willy’s existence. Miller’s use of exclamation after Willy’s speech, shows his enthusiasm and desire for his son’s to be successful, an idea which seems out of reach for the Loman’s, allowing us to further question Willy’s stability. Willy’s instability contrasts starkly with the certainty his son Biff possesses. Biff does not fall into the dream that his father promotes but instead argues ‘I’m not a leader of men, Willy, and neither are you’, emphasizing Biff’s surety of the place he and his father hold within society, knowing that he is not going to be ‘bringing home any prizes’ despite his father’s expectations. Miller presents Biff as aware of the futile real world, as opposed to his struggling father who seems to have submerged into a rose-tinted world of ideals, linking to the form in ‘The Road not Taken’, where like the ridged structure, Willy seems unable to escape the world he is so fixated upon, leading to a struggle of his existence, a man unable to accept the unpredictability of the future.