Literary theory and criticism have developed over the course of more than 3000 years, starting with Aristotle and even Plato and Socrates, and it took many forms based on the time period or conditions within which the theory arose. Literary theory is basically seeking an answer to why we read and produce literature and what makes a work of literature good while literary criticism is the appliance of the theory in practice to evaluate or understand a work of literature. There have been many ways to read a text throughout the history but as for Arthur Miller’s “Death of a Salesman”, I will use certain methods to do a close reading into the selected 20 lines from the text. These are Platonian reading, Aristotelian reading, Horacian reading, Russian Formalism, and lastly Psychoanalytic or Freudian reading.

Arthur Miller was an American playwright who was born in 1915 and met his demise in 2005 so he was in a way a contemporary writer who mainly dominated the 20th century. He was extremely well known during his peak in 40s and 50s and won many awards including the Pulitzer Prize for drama. Also, he was married to Marilyn Monroe, and he was claimed to have been a member of the Communist Party with a fake name. Given that he observed the destruction of the world wars and these tumult years in the history of the United States, it is safe to state that he can be best criticized through a historical-biographical criticism. However, this is not that much possible just for these selected 20 lines.

Moreover, his play “Death of a Salesman” is considered as a play of illusion and distorted reality which criticizes the capitalist system and social norms. Briefly, the play features Willy, a salesman who is married to a woman named Linda and is the father of one boy and his smaller brother called Biff and Happy respectively. He criticizes his son Biff for not making any money like his peers. Also, the play melodramatizes the accounts concerning job affairs and infidelity in relationships and marriages. Therefore, in a way, the play can be considered as a general criticism of the modern world and societies.

In a general close reading, character Linda seems to be a mediator between Willy and the sons as she tries to balance the tempers and make everyone happy but in reality, there is not such a way most of the times. This illusion she is lured in is because of the capitalist society and the unrealistic expectancies of the society from the individuals. When Willy says “How can he find himself on a farm? Is that a life? A farmhand?”, He is understating and disdaining a farm life, basically a farmer because he was programmed into thinking that the city life and business life is superior to the countryside life and farming. This is probably because of the effects industrialization and capitalism made on the individuals followed by the population shifts from villages to cities. Since then, people started to underestimate the farm life and it is apparent in the lines of Willy.

Similarly, he continues saying he was all right with his jumping from job the job when he was young but he’s now older and he still does not make any money. This suggest that Biff was raised in the first place with an expectancy to look after his family or at least to himself. This is among the traditional American values defined earlier which is called “Rugged Individualism”. However, he ignores the fact that not every individual is the same and not everyone has the same expectancies from life. It is not healthful to spend one’s life with a job that he/she does not favor but elder generations are more traditional in terms of jobs, and they say a job is a job. Then Linda says, “He’s finding Himself, Willy.” This implies her motherly parental side who is there for her child no matter what condition he is in. In a way, she embraces her children as they are, not as they are after they are filtered through the society’s interpretation.

With a Platonian reading, what can be briefly said about these lines is that they are morally acceptable and have philosophic value because they simply inquire the success. Willy wants his son the be successful and making money, however, his mother wants him to give him some time so that he can find himself and find a job that suits him well rather than just following the social suppressions and ending up something he is not glad and fruitful, both for himself and both for society. This is way these lines would be accepted in a Plato’s Republic.

As for Aristotle, these lines, hence the whole play, would not be acceptable as it does not carry the three unities, namely unity of action, time and place and it is not so successful to achieve a final catharsis along with not featuring a well-established tragic hero. However, these were the standards for Classical Greek tragedies, and they cannot be used to evaluate these lines.

As for Horace, this text would not be perfect, but he would accept it in line with his ideas that dictate the need for short but wise deductive features within literature. He does not accept fully didactic plays or poems because they are not textbooks for learning. So, these lines would be favored by him in the sense that Linda fixates a solution to the problem of his son’s not finding himself. It is a wise statement that needs to be employed by everyone in the society to be successful as a whole.

From a Russian Formalist perspective, the author should defamiliarize the reader and literariness is the most significant factor above all because it is an intrinsic school of criticism which only takes the text into account. Therefore, as we dissect the text, some peculiarities start to appear. In sixth line, Linda says “But dear, how can he make any money?” This is a rhetorical question Linda uses to avoid the actual question Willy asks. Withing this rhetorical question, however, lies her understatement and maybe disdain for her son. Eighth line also supports this because she says if her son finds himself, both the Willy and he will be happy, but she does not say if he finds himself, he will be successful and making money because she also does not believe in him.

Psychoanalytically, in the first line, it’s Willy’s ego speaking. It tries to make sense of his failure as a family and as an individual in order not to succumb to his id. However, from the third line on, his id starts to take control pouring out his subconsciously comparisons between his son and others. His superego quickly takes the control of his mental state and he inquiries if Biff said something after he left or he apologized because it is the reasonable thing to ask with the superego in control. But, in the ninth line he again loses his temper, and his repressed emotions and ideas start to pour our as his id takes control again when he says “How can he find himself on a farm? Is that a life? A farmhand? In the beginning, when he was young, I thought, well, a young man, it’s good for him to tramp around, take a lot of different jobs. But it’s more than ten years now and he has yet to make thirty-five dollars a week!”

Works Cited

  • Miller, Arthur. Death of a Salesman. Bloomsbury, 2017.
  • Liu, Fuhua. “On Literary Criticism and Literary Critics.” Lecture Notes on Language and Literature, vol. 3, no. 1, 2020.
  • Miller, Michael J. “Psychoanalysis and Its Teaching.” Reading Lacan’s Écrits, 2019.