hear me out, two examples of the books i've read due to the curricular include catcher in the rye and death of a salesman
both are about (to simply put it) losers
its like they teach us to accept our sad fate, in school when i was younger all they taught was us being as great as we can be but now its like they are saying its okay to be a failure.
why teach us to be losers?
eh?
shareOkay, first of all, Death of a Salesman doesn't teach you that it is okay to be a failure. The books and the movies purpose is to teach you that the American dream is not what it is cut out to be. It shows Willy as a man who has pursued this illusory notion that being rich and being the best will ultimately bring happiness, only that in the end it really doesn't. The whole point is to show how a person like Biff, who has accepted that the notion of the American dream is not something worth trying to attain your whole life and that it is better to realize that there are more important things to life than money and social status.
Therefore, the answer to your question is that Death of a Salesman doesn't teach you to be a loser, it teaches you to seriously question where your values and morals lie in what you want to attain in life. And that money and a high social status don't necessarily bring happiness to one's life. Obviously, there are other major themes from Death of a Salesman, but the one i have just stated is one of the more important ones.
i would think that these works show students what failure is and not to repeat their actions that led them to being "losers."
sharePeople bandy about this concept of "the American Dream," assuming that we all know what it is and what it means. Willy Loman bought into an industrialized, advertised, packaged dream. The question is, who taught or told him this dream? The notion you present is one of a dream betrayed. But you fail to acknowledge that his neighbor, and life-long friend, Charley, does quite well for himself; in addition (and to add insult to imagined injury) his son becomes a noted litigator arguing a case in front of the Supreme Court.
There are those Willy knows, knows well, and beside whom he lives, who are able to achieve reasonable dreams of success without the strain and struggle that Willy struggles with. Willy's dream is illusory, but the reality of the freedom of wealth and self-determination is real. You have read far too many essays about "'Death of a Salesman' and the American Dream" to have an original idea to share.
Consider the notion that perhaps Willy was born in the wrong time. Many references, explicit and implicit, are given which serve to suggest that Willy should have been a farmer, a mechanic, or some sort of tradesman. The failure for Willy is that his true desires, talents, and ambitions ran so contrary to what he chose that it resulted in a catastrophic breakdown of his psyche.
OR he was struck with a degenerative disease which would never have been recognized and could never have been treated during the time period the play was set.
I'm not disagreeing totally, but I think it's worth noting that Charlie does well for himself and apparently owns his own business, but the kind of success Willy dreams of is more closely associated with that of his boss and his brother, two men who gained their success by less than noble means (inheritance in the case of Howard and questionable actions in the jungle on the part of Ben).
Charlie, important to remember, still lives in the same home he's had for near 40 years (compared to Happy's reference to his boss continually building houses and selling only to build again - in dialog cut from this version).
Yes, Bernard is arguing a case before the Supreme Court, but that, too is no sign of absolute wealth, only competence (although, admittedly he does seem to have friends who are doing quite well, hence the tennis court).
How the hell does the movie/play dismiss that bing rich and the best bring you happiness? I think you've missed a key point in the writing... Willie Loman is under the illusion that he's "the best" or at least well liked. He's never been rich and his career is mediocre at best. These points are made several times over the the play.
As for Biff... he realizes that he's a nothing but just about any definition. He admits to it. He calls himself out for being a bum on a few occasions. Willie is delusional about it but I'm sure Biff is far from happy with his revelation. He gave himself the chance to pursue his own dreams only to ruin himself every time.
I think you're reading into it what you want to. If you don't think the American dream is worthwhile, so be it, but don't try to shoehorn Death of a Salesman into fitting that point of view.
No, no, no. Willy wasn't a loser. Willy wasn't a failure. Willy wasn't exactly a rock star, but you can't forget the Requiem. At the time it was written, the most common indicator of having attained the American Dream was owning a house. "We're free and clear, Willy." Willy had his faults, but he was able to put dinner on the table every night.
Contrast that with Biff: the irreparable dreamer. All Biff had was some idealized notion of the American Dream; do you think he's going to have a family? Is he ever going to have a house? Willy fueled that, always telling him to aim high, stroking his ego. Where did that get him?
Willy settled, sure, but it's far more admirable to settle for a life than to keep searching for one.
And that's the difference between Willy Loman and Holden Caulfield. While they were similar in that they both said one thing and did something else entirely, what Holden does never gets him anywhere. Literally. He just wanders around Manhattan for a couple of days, too ashamed to face his parents. Holden's a lot more like Biff.
Sure, you have to pity Willy for the way he goes at the end, but even that act could be read a couple of ways. With his life insurance, he knew he was worth more dead than alive. He makes the ultimate sacrifice for Linda.
So, if you think owning a house and providing for your family is losing, then may everyone lose. Your teachers aren't trying to teach you to lose, they're trying to let you know that life isn't all rainbows and bunnies.
Oh, Mr. Harris! Mr. Bob Harris! Don't touch me! Just rip my stocking!
NO! It's not saying that Willy is a failure for settling down, he is a failure because he doesn't see the value in that himself and keeps dreaming of being a greater salesperson. Biff and Willy are both "irreparable dreamers" as you put it.
shareAll of these comments and not one mentions Willy's unfaithfulness having anything to do with the direction his life takes. This family is relatively happy until Biff catches his father in the act of adultery. The image he has built up of Willy is shattered - he loses all his dreams that his father has inspired. His father becomes a shell of himself for his betrayal of his son. It's a betrayal of values and family that starts a downward spiral - not the search for American Dream.
sharesince when is Death of a salesman educational? It´s a masterpiece in modern drama. If students are asked to read A Streetcar named desire, are they then TAUGHT to rape and oppress women???
Cab´t believe how ignorant some can be. This is a literally masterpiece and should be read and seen by ever person in the world, it does nothing but enrichen life!
Aarya
Enrichen life? I was waiting the whole time for Willy to drop dead, Biff to tell Linda about Willy's affair, and in general, for the whole damn thing to be over.
sharehmm.
i don't think that its the case at all that both books are preparing losers.
it generally depends on what you would term 'loser'.
if the original poster follows 'the american dream' maybe the characters are 'losers', however it is more the case that they subscribe to reality as opposed to a craving for success and money.
in catcher in the rye, holden realises how fake the whole dream is, having seen it time and again in the private schools he attended. biff saw it in his father and saw how it destroyed him.
i think ultimately it depends on what character you relate to most. as a 14 year old who has read both books i think i can have a pretty apt judgement as to whether its preparing us 'kids' as losers, and i can honestly say it seems more to me that they are introducing literature that encourages us to find what we love doing and do it, and it doesnt necessarily have to pay the most or get us in the papers, but if its what we want to do, such as biff and his ranch, then we should do it.
but if that makes us losers then maybe it is true =]
I was waiting the whole time for Willy to drop dead, Biff to tell Linda about Willy's affair, and in general, for the whole damn thing to be over.
[deleted]
You should really re-read the play.
www.myspace.com/josephgonzales23
If the reader is quick enough to realize it, then this is the most anti-losing script he or she will have ever read. Nobody, nobody should want to end up like Willy Loman or any of his family. The Lomans were all depressed and deluded, thinking they would someday "win" out on all their hard work when the truth is, sometimes people struggle all the way to the grave without even seeing benefits reaped.
I read this play as such an allegory; Charley's family was successful through passive yet intelligent maneuvers throughout life; Willy constantly wanted to set the world on fire ("the woods are burning"), meeting men, seducing the right women, and suavely making his way to a fortune through sales, thinking that would be the apex of success. The script even delivers a multilayered, well-written "Goofus and Gallant" story arc almost between Biff and Bernard.
In my opinion, you're all a bunch of losers to be discussing this for so long.
But what do I know, I'm just a loser.
Who isn't? It's the thing to have problems these days, anyway.
"Well, *beep* me gently with a chainsaw."- Heathers
Warning labels...
http://www.oddee.com/item_88437.aspx
The reality is everybody can't be President, but that doesn't necessarily make them losers either.
I think the OP has an excellent point.
why teach us to be losers?