'Tragedy and the Common Man'
by xdreamfly (Sun Jan 7 2007 20:33:16 ) essay by Arthur Miller. Miller's brief account (only couple of pages long) of modern view of a tragedy, which encompasses "common folk", an opposed to Greek tragedies which concern only nobility/powerful. I think it applies to BBM, so here is a link:
http://theliterarylink.com/miller1.htmlRe: 'Tragedy and the Common Man'
by retropian (Mon Jan 8 2007 16:46:03 ) Very intersting and illuminating. It certainly applies to BBM. Someone on the boards said BBM could be subtitled "The Tragedy of Ennis DelMar".
Since Arthur Miller wrote this in 1949 I think he was refering to the coming and forseeable civil rights struggle of African Americans when he refered to;
"But there are among us today, as there always have been, those who act against the scheme of things that degrades them, and in the process of action everything we have accepted out of fear or insensitivity or ignorance is shaken before us and examined,".Everything he wrote is applicable to any minority seeking their rightful dignity, and really today gay people are the last minority group still denied that. But as far as the character Ennis goes;"the tale always reveals what has been called his tragic flaw," a failing that is not peculiar to grand or elevated characters. Nor is it necessarily a weakness. The flaw, or crack in the character, is really nothing--and need be nothing, but his inherent unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status".Is untrue. Ennis's flaw is that he is unwilling to take action. He not unwilling to remain passive, he his passive throughout the story. It is Jack who is active, and is cut down. I'm not suggesting that Aurthur Miller is wrong, but that Ennis as a character enlarges the scope of what is a tragic character. Ennis's tragic flaw is that he never questions his "underlying fear of being displaced," but he does demontrate "the disaster inherent in being torn away from our chosen image of what or who we are in this world. Among us today this fear is as strong, and perhaps stronger, than it ever was. In fact, it is the common man who knows this fear best".
Re: 'Tragedy and the Common Man'
by xdreamfly (Mon Jan 8 2007 20:38:40 ) Hi, retropian;
regarding the following Miller's quote: "the tale always reveals what has been called his tragic flaw," a failing that is not peculiar to grand or elevated characters. Nor is it necessarily a weakness. The flaw, or crack in the character, is really nothing--and need be nothing, but his inherent unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status"
you wrote: "Ennis's flaw is that he is unwilling to take action. He not unwilling to remain passive, he his passive throughout the story. It is Jack who is active, and is cut down. I'm not suggesting that Aurthur Miller is wrong, but that Ennis as a character enlarges the scope of what is a tragic character."
I agree that Ennis is passive as far as his relationship with Jack goes; he is unwilling to let the relationship progress to the next level (even after he divorces Alma and almost done paying alimony) because of his tragic flaw--fear; yes, fine. But you can also read Miller's last sentense in that paragraph as Ennis perceiving homosexuality as a threat to his manliness, and so then his flaw becomes "unwillingness to remain passive [to accept his homosexuality/feelings for Jack] in the face of what [Ennis] conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image". And Ennis does try to assert his manliness in number of ways--punching bikers, getting involved with Cassie, distancing himself from Jack ("now it's like seeing the pope"), and, ultimately, not being with Jack. Ennis just couldn't reconcile manliness with homosexuality. And until he could do that he would remain passive regarding his relationship with Jack.
I especially like the following statement from Miller's essay:
"I almost hesitate to claim that in truth tragedy implies more optimism in its author than does comedy, and that its final result ought to be the reinforcement of the onlooker's brightest opinions of the human animal."
Re: 'Tragedy and the Common Man'
by retropian (Mon Jan 8 2007 22:18:31 )
Hi xdreamfly.
I think Ennis remains passive in the sense that he never questions his assumtion that being gay=unmanly. He completely buys into the role that society has dicated to him, that to be a man means being heterosexual, married to a woman and producing children. He never protests against this limiting role and how it contorts his life and ultimately crushes him. He never actively protests or even conceives what is "a challenge to his dignity, his image" namely societal homophobia and homophobic stereotypes. I think then the tragedy of Ennis runs counter to Arthur Miller's point. He is writing about those who fight against the wrong that attacks their rights and dignity as human beings and fail because the task is insurmountable. Ennis does not fight for his right to love Jack free of fear and retaliation. But contrary to Arthur Millers point he is still a tragic character. So I think that since Arthur Millers essay was 1st written 1949 tragedy while still rare in literature has enlarged to include both those characters who fight the good fight yet still fail,and also those who remain passive and accepting of their lot in life, and also fail. They are perhaps even more tragic in that they don't even begin to realize their plight.
