moth miller is non saying that a person should never " top knocked out(p) for something" if there is a chance for somebody to be detriment. After wholly, one could argue that Miller should never yield to have his plays produced, because if his play is being produced at a theater of operations then some other person whitethorn be hurt who would have had his play produced if Miller's was not.
What Miller is saying through Chris at this point in the play is that the moral one-on-one does indeed consider other people in devising decisions in life, and whether other people willing be hurt by those decisions. If Joe had considered the lives of strangers in making his decision about the risky airplane parts, then he would not have change the parts and he would have saved the life of his avouch son. Obviously, a person has to make decisions in life which will inevitably hurt others, but Miller's point is that we are all interconnected and owe one another consideration with appreciate to decisions which affect more than just ourselves.
The decision of Joe to sell the unsound airplane parts is an obviously immoral one, with clearly awe-inspiring consequences, beyond even what Joe might have imagined. Certainly he had to consider if only for a moment that people could flush it as a result of his decision, even if he could not have possibly imagined that his own son would die as an
Hewes, Henry, and Lee Strassberg, eds. Famous American Plays of the 1940s and the 1950s. Garden City, NY: Fireside Theatre, 1988.
You have written a graveyard play, and not some f symboliseual report. The play is taking place in a cemetery where their son is buried, and he is also their buried conscience reaching up to them out of the earth. even if [the grave] inconveniences [the actors] it will keep reminding them what the hell all this acting is really about. The bump stays! (Miller Timebends 275).
---. Timebends. New York: Grove, 1987.
Here is where the get it on of morality becomes complicated and difficult.
Yes, obviously, it is a good and moral act for a mother to continue to keep her son's memory vital and to hope he lives himself, but what if her actions and attitudes keep her from moving on with her life and, worse, keep another son from living his life?
. . . I tell you, Ann, if I had him here now I could kill him--" (Miller All 68).
Where Miller's play is still striking in its moral focus, as it must have been even moreso in 1947 when the family was more a sacred bulwark against chaos, is in his bill of indictment of a man who would use the family as an alibi for his sins. This is Joe's considerable immoral act, along of course with the actual selling of hopeless parts and the tragedies which ensued. Any sane person would agree that a man is immoral who sends young men to their deaths for economic profit. However, Miller puts this obvious sin in the context of a furthest more complex moral situation. While Miller may soften his indictment of Joe with some understanding of the difficulty of the man's occasion in the family (especially in 1947), there is still no interrogation that for Miller the family as a concept can substantially be abused as a reason for the or so immoral of actions. In other words, Joe;s final rail line is not that he did what he did to make money, but quite a to provide for his family. This is the basic question which Miller's play addresses: what is it that exactly
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment