The purpose of this term paper is to examine how the characters in Arthur
Miller’s plays are confronted with guilt and responsibility and how they deal
with it. Furthermore, I want to demonstrate how personal, individual guilt
and responsibility not only become a matter for the individual but also
have an important impact on the community and the society. According to
Miller, there is a really strong mutual relationship between the individual
and society. He states: “Society is inside man and man is inside society,
the water is in the fish, the fish is in the water.” Miller’s main protagonists
always try to defend themselves against an accusation, to deny their
responsibility and guilt, and to believe in their innocence. Bigsby mentions
what all of the characters concerning innocence and guilt have in
common: “… [They] spend much of their time rebutting charges whose
justice they acknowledge even as they are rejected. They are people who
try to escape the consequences of their actions, who try to declare their
innocence even when that involves implying the guilt of others.” This truly
applies for the plays and characters I will observe in the following. I
decided to focus on two plays published in the 1940s and 1950s: All My
Sons (1947) and The Crucible (1953). Their main protagonists experience
confrontation with themselves which finally leads to death. Most emphasis
will be laid on All My Sons as there we have a number of characters
dealing with guilt and responsibility, namely Chris, Larry, Kate, and Joe
Keller. In addition, I will discuss the character of Proctor in The Crucible.
The dominant question in these characters becomes this one: “How
can a human being work out the interconnections among the everwidening
circles of responsibility: self, family, society, the universe?
According to Miller, “to violate the codes of any circle is to sin.”
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Joe, Kate, Chris, and Larry Keller in All My Sons
3. Proctor in The Crucible
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Themes
This term paper examines how the characters in Arthur Miller’s plays confront and navigate complex issues of guilt and personal responsibility. It aims to demonstrate that individual moral choices regarding guilt are never isolated, but rather have profound consequences for the community and society at large, as seen through the protagonists' struggles in their respective environments.
- The intersection of personal guilt and social responsibility.
- The impact of individual actions on familial and societal structures.
- Comparative analysis of protagonists in All My Sons and The Crucible.
- The relationship between self-preservation and moral accountability.
- The destructive potential of innocence and self-ignorance.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Joe, Kate, Chris, and Larry Keller in All My Sons
As a manufacturer of airplane parts Keller knowingly shipped cracked cylinder heads to the United States Army in World War II. As a consequence, twenty-one American pilots die when their planes crash in Australia. He justifies his action saying that he did it for the benefit of his prosperous business and the family. Nevertheless, his sons do not accept his unsocial responsibility: Larry kills himself, and Chris totally rejects him. He does not take responsibility for what he did until the end when Chris forces him to. However, as he cannot meet his son’s expectation of being a good father anymore he sees no other way out than killing himself.
Joe Keller grew up as an uneducated man who made it in a world of materialism and competitiveness. According to Keller’s imagination, his well-going business and providing his family with enough money are the most important things in life. Being a good father for Keller means to provide his sons with financial and material stability but most importantly “His desire to pass his business on to his sons is rooted in love. Keller’s regard for his sons is undeniable, and his belief in the sanctity of fatherhood is clear as he cries, ‘A father is a father’ and this cry affirms his belief that blood should always be put before outside concerns”. Using this illusion of the sanctity of fatherhood allows Keller to do everything – morally right or wrong, social or unsocial – as long as it helps to fulfill his role of a good father. “This desire to bond with his son is, in a sense, what frees him from moral responsibility, and allows him to ship those faulty parts with a clear conscience.”
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the research focus on guilt and responsibility in Arthur Miller's work, establishing the core question of how individuals navigate circles of responsibility from the self to the universe.
2. Joe, Kate, Chris, and Larry Keller in All My Sons: This section analyzes the ethical decay of the Keller family, examining how Joe's materialist justifications conflict with Chris's idealistic demands for social accountability and the tragic consequences of their denial.
3. Proctor in The Crucible: This chapter investigates John Proctor’s internal and social struggle, highlighting his path toward accepting individual guilt and sacrificing his life to preserve his dignity and truth within a corrupt society.
4. Conclusion: The concluding chapter synthesizes the findings, noting that while both protagonists face tragic ends, their paths differ significantly in their degree of self-awareness and willingness to assume responsibility for the wider community.
Keywords
Arthur Miller, All My Sons, The Crucible, Guilt, Responsibility, Individual, Society, Joe Keller, John Proctor, Morality, Idealism, Tragedy, Fatherhood, Innocence, Accountability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper examines how characters in Arthur Miller’s plays are confronted with guilt and responsibility, and how they navigate these moral dilemmas within their respective social contexts.
What are the primary thematic fields addressed?
The central themes include the intersection of individual and social ethics, the burden of survivor's guilt, the impact of familial expectations, and the conflict between private interests and public duty.
What is the main objective or research question?
The research explores how a human being reconciles the interconnected circles of responsibility—self, family, society, and the universe—and investigates the consequences of violating these moral codes.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The work employs a literary analysis method, interpreting the primary dramatic texts through the lens of secondary critical literature and established scholarly discourse on Miller’s work.
What is covered in the main body?
The main body focuses on a character study of the Keller family in "All My Sons" and an analysis of John Proctor in "The Crucible," evaluating their specific reactions to guilt and their final choices regarding moral responsibility.
Which keywords characterize this study?
The study is best characterized by terms such as guilt, social responsibility, tragedy, morality, and individual agency within the framework of mid-20th-century American drama.
How does the author distinguish between Joe Keller’s and John Proctor’s endings?
The author argues that while both die, Joe Keller’s suicide is an act of escape from responsibility, whereas Proctor’s death serves as an act of self-purification and a heroic defense of his integrity.
What role does the father-son dynamic play in "All My Sons"?
The father-son relationship forms the core conflict of the play, where the tension between Keller’s desire to protect his family business and his son Chris's idealistic moral standards leads to the inevitable collapse of the family unit.
- Quote paper
- Andreas Keilbach (Author), 2007, Guilt and Responsibility in Arthur Miller's Plays, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/118453
