Response to Tragedy and the Common Man

Tragedy and the Common Man

I agree with Arthur Miller on his essay; tragedies, can, and should apply to everyday people. Miller describes that the tragic hero is trying to find his “rightful” place in society. In most cases, this objective would be a prince trying to be a king, or someone involving the high powers of a hierarchy. In this case, a common man is more apt for the role of “tragic hero.” He or she is more apt because the common man can become more tragic then a high king. They are more apt because the audience members can relate to them. They also have more to prove, being a low status man in a world of kings, makes their need to be in a higher position more dramatic.

Miller also states that a tragic hero’s “tragic flaw” is only a character’s, “unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status,” which is a simplistic reality of tragedies. These “flaws” are more of a person’s stupidity and how his honor holds him prisoner. Even in modern literature, such simplistic writing enables heavy emotions. For example, in the book Ender’s Game, Ender Wiggin has only one flaw, which is his absolute thirst to win at everything. Such an attribute destroys Wiggin from the inside out. Until, by the end of the book, he is crazy, and is only saved from his grieving. No one is killed, but the tragedy in Ender’s loss of innocence and purity, is the tragedy.

Tragedies should not depend on high kings, but rather common people. The tragic hero’s flaw should also not depend on full destruction of his surroundings; but rather his relations to everyone, and how that can affect everything.