As I read Death of a Salesman this weekend, I couldn't help but ask this question... is incessant longing and being unsatisified inherent in American culture and American literatue?
I'm getting a lot of Catcher in the Rye vibes from this play, and I think this stems from both the time period in which they were written and the atmosphere of unattainable self-fulfillment permeating each. This is incredibly depressing but makes for excellent literature.
I was reminded of Mr. Lazarow's comments on the differentiating tides of idealism and realism that fluctuate back and forth, depending on what time period we're in. We're either grasping for an America that will never be, or we're admitting that it's foolish to have such impractical dreams. Either way, the idea of "America" is unattainable. Could this be because of the social boundries we've set up for ourselves?
Think about it. In our culture, self-fulfillment is rarely achieved. The standard is to always want more, either in the material sense or the spiritual sense. The Willy Loman, the "everyman", works his whole life without ever truly being satisfied. His dreams do not fit the confines of his parameters. They only grow and grow with each tiny failure, each step towards the grave. Even though the American ideal is to work hard to get where you want to be, few people ever get to where they want to be, either because they cannot define true satisfaction, or simply do not have to means to achieve their lofty goals.
Thoughts?
(Tylaor Bruke) *Your mind automatically rearranges words as long as you have the first and last letters of them. An interesting sidenote on how the brain processes the written word.*
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I think maybe the problem with achieving the idea of "America" is that it is an idea that has such a different meaning for different people. That is why we switch between wanting to achieve the idea of "America", and deciding to be more practical. (Which is it now? I feel like it is probably the second because we're in a depression...)
As far a self-fulfillment, I think it really depends on what your goals are and how real they are. It might be human nature to desire things that are difficult to reach. That might be what keeps us motivated to do better.
Thoughts?
(Arvind Kalidindi) *Taylor, when I saw your name misspelled, I thought that movie Gordon and Mike made of you was real (Just Kidding!)... Interesting side note though.*
Like Taylor I found this play excessively depressing to read, but there was also an inkling of truth to it even though it is fiction. It embodies the situation many families and individuals are going through everyday around America and the world: figuring out how to fit their round peg of a dream into the square hole of reality. When that is figured out, I think that is when someone becomes satisfied or happy.
I see where Arvind is coming from, the idea of self-fulfillment or "America" being determined entirely on a case by case basis makes a lot of sense.
Steve Szumski
Well, I do agree that it's pretty rare that someone is completely satisfied with his/her life, but what about those few people who do achieve that idea of 'America.' They had to make a lot of sacrifices. I think that applies to everyone. If you want something big, you have to sacrifice something that's worth just as much. Therefore, I don't think that not having the means is not really a reason why people can't achieve their goals.
That's why I think that it's really all about the person and their will to succeed and willingness to sacrifice.
I didn't realize that your name was spelled wrong until Arvind pointed it out-but may be it's just me and my slowness.
Desiring for something higher is natural in every capitalistic society in which competition is inevitable. Someone is rarely satisfied and constantly struggles for more. I agree with Arvind that the unattainable self-fulfillment is what keeps people motivated. Without wanting to acheive what may seem impossible, no innovative ideas will be created or efforts will be put into any work.
(Jennifer Park)
I think that a very interesting thing about this book is that Willy is not trying to fulfill his dream-- he's trying to have his son fulfill it for him. Talk about trying to fit a round peg in a square hole! The description of Biff in the beginning of the book creates the image of a man with dreams of his own-- why would he want to fulfill his father's dreams if he's got his own? I think that is something that Willy has difficulty grasping-- he wants to be in control, but he doesn't realize that Biff is his own man with his own dreams. I think Willy saw Biff as his second chance to fulfill his dream.
And isn't it ironic how in the end at Willy's funeral Biff is set on not becoming what his father would have him become, seeing where that would lead him, while Happy determines that he will see his father's dream to completion. Willy died for Biff's sake, not Happy's! I wonder, too, if Willy had ever really defined his own dream beyond the unoriginal terms "success and money". If he had made his definition more specific and more narrowed, would that have made a difference?
Emily T.
While the play was really depressing, I don't believe that the longing and dissatisfaction that seems to be so prevalent in American literature is necessarily a bad thing. While the story of Biff and him trying to fulfill his father's dream in vain is sad and touching, it is also definitely a reflection of the American Dream (which I believe is one of the crucial components that constitutes what makes someone "American). Not everyone can succeed in life, but everyone tries.
For some people, following anyone's dreams can lead to success. For others, they must follow their own dreams. Some will eventually fail at both. Failure is a fact of life but the American Dream is partly derived from the will to keep trying to achieve one's goals (even if they aren't the exact ones as imagined in the initial dream).
Self-fulfillment can only be achieved when a person's physical and emotional needs have been fulfilled (or at least that's the idea outlined in Maslow's pyramid theory). Americans strive for the fulfillment of basic necessities and while our social structure isn't perfect, it is better than most. Everything is relative and we will continue to root for the underdog and the unsatisfied in both reality and literature. I suppose you could say that it is just a part of being an American.
We really never are satisfied, are we? Throughout our lives, we've observed the rich and the famous. Those who are successful are put on a pedestal before us, and we regard them with awe. The dreams seems great, and unfortunately, sometimes intangible. We wish we could reach out and brush them with our fingertips, yet it is clearly impossible for us all to be the "one in a million." Years ago, civilians dreamed of assuming roles similar to those of J.D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie. Today, people envy businessmen like Bill Gates. (I am using soley businessmen in this example because as we all know, Willy Loman's dream was to experience the lucrative end of the business world.)
I feel as if we've been trained to strive for more. Always yearning, always wanting, we never get enough. This is parallel to our previous discussion concerning the "American Dream." We put so much at stake and take for granted the ones we love in hopes of attaining the best of the best. After all, wasn't one of the main motivations of immigration in the past to grow wealthy in this "land of the free and home of the brave"?
Like Taylor said, we may not have the "means" to reach our goals, but isn't that what America represents? Doesn't this nation symbolize chance and hope to outsiders (some, not all)?
On the differentiating tides of idealism vs. realism:
It seems to me that Willy Loman entered the area of business when it had held a lucrative position. After all, his 84-year-old friend was able to gain wealth by merely making phone calls from within his room. Is it possible that as Willy aged, the popularity of business decreased? The "get-rich-quick" idealism seems to have dissipated by this point in the play. I am stating this based on Willy's interactions with Ben (in his memories) vs. Willy's interactions with Harold at the firm.
I hope this made sense in the least bit.
(Sam Maliha)
P.S. One of my teachers once showed her class a whole letter written with words using mismatched letters. We were still able to understand it, though. Pretty interesting.
Just a quick note on how the brain perceives the written word. I actually wrote about this in my semantics scrapbook and after Googling a bit, I found that it's only partially true. The trick only works for short and relatively non-complex words (i.e. the sentence "The sprehas had ponits and patles" has dozens of permutations that make grammatical sense)
Perhaps we are underestimating the power and complexity of the mind as well as of language?
Sorry, it just caught my attention and I couldn't resist replying. :P
http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/~mattd/Cmabrigde/
In reaction to the idea of the American Dream, is it really a good thing? It is good to want to acheive one's potential, but, how are we defining the term "success?" The way I have seen "success" used so far in our conversation is with implications toward the acquisition of wealth equaling success. For example, talking about Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Gates. And, yes, that's what the American Dream seems to be about-- having enough money to have a nice house, a couple nice cars, a "good" job (that gets enough money to finance everything else), etc.
My question is, does success automatically mean fulfillment? I have heard countless stories of "successful" people being left with a feeling of emptiness... is the fulfillment of the American Dream really what life's all about?
I think one of Willy Loman's issues was the fact that he mixed up his dream with the American Dream. His whole life he worked to acquire money so that he could "be someone." Because he could not earn lots of money, Willy believed he had disappointed his family, and he wad dissatisfied with himself. The funny thing is, as Biff said at Willy's funeral, Willy wasn't passionate about business-- he was passionate about working with his hands (i.e., fixing the roof). If Willy had focused on doing what he enjoyed, he might not have earned a whole lot of money, but he also probably would not have been as "exhausted" as he was working as a businessman (doing something you don't like to do is a whole lot harder than doing something you do like to do).
In addition, look at Happy and Biff. In the beginning of the book the description of Biff includes that he has clear dreams. Biff knows that he is not a businessman and he knows that his dream is to live out West and have a farm. He is sastisfied with that dream-- and he is honest with himself about his dream. On the other hand, Happy has an apartment, earns a good amount of money, has a car, and gets whatever girl he wants whenever he wants her. Yet, Happy admits that he is not satisfied. But, wait a second, Biff's the one without a job... he's the one that should be dissatisfied, according to the concept of the American Dream...
I think the "American Dream" is unacheivable because people can never reach perfect satisfaction with just material goods. Biff doesn't have the material goods, but he's got a clear vision, and he knows what he's truly passionate about-- he could care less about the money, as long as he's doing something he enjoys.
Emily T.
It's been said that ambition is a good servant, but a bad master. We are all driven to some extent to pursue the American Dream, but we must be careful not to become restricted by its limits.
Schwarzenegger believed in the philosophy of "staying hungry," and believed that American Dream followed this idea as well. As Americans, we have always wanted to improve upon the previous generation and leave a legacy: as Willy put it, we want to plant something in the ground. We set goals that we may never reach, but we are determined to try. As Arnold said, when you have your dream achieved, make up a new dream. The American Dream encourages that mentality: set a goal, work hard, reach it, and set a new one.
The danger is when we become too preoccupied with reaching the "American" large-scale dream and start to neglect the smaller dreams and enjoyments of life. Biff admitted that he enjoyed his job working with horses in Texas, but he soon wondered what he was doing, "playing around with horses" when he was supposed to be "making his future" and taking big steps, in order to fulfill the American Dream.
To me, the fundamental difference between Biff and Willy is how they perceive the American Dream. For Biff, it's been almost a burden to carry this Dream in his mind (ex: you can't play with horses or start out low, you've got to start from the top and lead others or there's no point working). For Willy, his entire life was given to reaching the Dream, and he cannot understand that his failures are due in part to this single mindedness.
It seems to be becoming impossible to not want more. Once you obtain on thing, a newer shinier version is released. As a society, we're constantly updating everything around us and trying to make everything better than it's ever been. We don't exclude ourselves from these new standards. Each semester, each new iPod, each fashion season, we find that we must improve. It's the willingness and the ability to improve that paves the way for the American dream.
Willy once was on his way to the American dream, but willingness without ability cannot get you there. Newer, younger salesmen came out with new and better ways, and Willy could not progress the way we want to.
(Megan)
Post a Comment