Oedipus Tyrannus+Death Of A Salesman

5 Pages 1164 Words

The play, Oedipus Tyrannus, is so ancient, its hero so different from us, its action so fantastic and full of coincidence, its talk of gods and oracles so removed from our world-view, that Sophocles inevitably speaks much less meaningfully to the imagination of the modern reader / viewer than the plight of Miller’s easily recognisable salesman – the dumb, pathetic victim of advanced American capitalism.

By close examination of appropriate parts of each play, give your response to the above critical opinion.

In your answer, consider;
- the methods used to present the characters of Willy Loman and Oedipus
- the staging of significant episodes in each play
- the world-view reflected in each play
- other possible opinions of the plays.


Sophocles and Miller both created ‘complex, masterful and dramatic plays’ but each play differs from the other in many ways. Sophocles was born around 496 BC while Miller arrived 2,411 years later in 1915. This mammoth difference in time period inevitably changes writing skills due to social and cultural changes. Oedipus Tyrannus may have been ‘slated’ by many modern day critics but little or none have said that it lacked excitement or action. We as modern readers can still feel the anticipation and thrill of this ‘ancient’ play while sitting in our conventional theatres. But what about Millers’ Death of a Salesman? Does it really grip the viewer to the edge of their seats with “What’s going to happen next?” running in their minds? Though the two plays have similarities, Death of a Salesman doesn’t really conjure up the same response for some reason. Is this due to our sceptical imaginations or is there another reason?

A tragic hero has been described by some as,
“A character who moves from good to bad fortune, through suffering, to awareness.”
But as Miller said, “Lets not get hung up on definitions” In both these tragedies, human fortunes are completely...