The American Dream in Death of a Salesman Essay Example

In his tragic play, Death Of A Salesman, Arthur Miller explores the life of Willy Loman, a man who is obsessed with the American dream but unable to achieve it. His obsession with the American dream influences his sons, Happy and Biff, because Willy attempts to recreate the success that his father and brother achieved. However, when his children reach adulthood, they are not as successful as Willy envisioned, so he reminisces their childhood and his past as a reminder of his efforts. In contrast, the people around WIlly had already achieved their version of the American dream in WIlly’s perspective. have already achieved their version of the American dream. These people around Willy act as foil characters to highlight his failure and the result of his compliance with societal expectations.  Thus, in Death of a Salesman, Miller uses the contrast of several successes and failures to show the consequences of complying with societal expectations.  

Firstly, Miller juxtaposes Benard and Charley’s success with Willy’s failures to illustrate that complying with societal norms doesn’t lead to success. Since childhood, Willy has always embedded the idea of easy and fast success in his sons while Charley has embedded the concept of working hard in Bernard. Willy describes his sons as “built like Adonises…[they should] be liked and [they] will never want (Miller, 33, Act 1)”, while Benard is described as “..earnest and loyal boy (32)”. The author uses a simile to compare Willy’s sons to “Adonises”, conveying what Willy envisions for his sons, which is that they are destined to be successful because they have a good physical appearance. Thus, the author uses this simile to emphasize that Willy is only focused on the societal definition of success, that is, outward appearance is a necessity for success. However, the author contrasts this with Bernard's description because he uses “Earnest and loyal” to convey a trustworthy tone about Bernard  to emphasize that outward appearance is not the only thing necessary for success. Furthermore, This idea is further reiterated in Bernard’s adulthood after Willy meets Bernard and Charley tells Willy that “[Bernard doesn’t] have to [tell anyone he’s going to the Supreme Court]--he’s gonna do it ”(95, Act 2). The author uses colloquial language to imply that the idea is simple and doesn't require any explanation, which is that taking actions is better than just talking about the actions. jactions speak louder than words. In contrast, Willy frequently talks about what he is going to do rather than doing what he envisions because he is afraid of the result. Furthermore, the author uses colloquial language to convey that simple concepts like taking actions are better than talking about doing them. Miller also conveys that this concept is  difficult for people, like Willy, who try to fit into societal expectations to understand. This implies that conforming to societal norms makes one lose their sense of reason and reality, which is Willy’s case. Therefore, Miller uses colloquial language and simile to contrast Willy's failure with Charley and Bernard's success to illustrate the difference between conforming to societal norms and not doing so.  Likewise, Willy’s desire to fit in the societal expectations can also be seen in his dialogue as he frequently uses cliches like when he said “[Charley is ] a man of few words, and they respect him.”(37; Act 1) to Linda when his business was lagging. The author uses the contrast of Charley being respected by society to Willy’s desire to be a respected man in the eyes of society. This is prominent because the author uses “respect” which depicts an admirable tone about Charley. Therefore, this insinuates that Willy respects Charley’s success in gaining recognition from society and desires to replicate this recognition from society. The author also uses cliches in Willy’s dialogue to depict that Willy doesn’t know what he wants because he is conflicted by conforming to societal norms. 

Furthermore, Miller uses the contrast of Billy’s success to Willy’s failure to illustrate how realizing the restraints of complying with societal expectations is. Later in the play, Biff confronts Willy about Willy’s desires to fit in the societal expectations but Willy says that he is “Not a dime a dozen! [he is] Willy Loman”(132; Act 3). The author uses the idiom “a dime a dozen” to convey Willy’s desire to be successful by replicating the success his father and brother had. This is because “a dime a dozen” means something so common, something not unique. The author also uses the idiom as irony because Willy wants to become something beyond societal norms but he tries to fix the societal norms. Consequently, the author uses that irony to convey that Willy is confused about what he wants because he is conflicted between fitting into societal norms and becoming something beyond societal norms. The author also uses the idiom to convey that Biff realized that complying with societal norms doesn't make anyone unique but a "dime in a dozen". This is contrasted with the irony, which the author uses to convey that Willy expects to be unique while conforming to societal expectations. Consequently, the author reiterates this idea further through the use of portmanteau with “Willy Loman”. “Willy Loman” sounds like “Will he, Low man”. The use of this portmanteau insinuates that Willy, himself is confused and unsure of what to do. Thus, the author conveys that the consequences of fitting in societal expectations are an internal conflict because Willy is conflicted between fitting in the societal norms or breaking out of the societal norms.  Hence, Miller uses the irony of the idiom and the portmanteau of Willy’s name to show the confusion with fitting in societal expectations.  

Furthermore, Miller conveys the consequences of complying with the unrealistic societal norms through Ben’s success and Willy’s failure. In the play, it is revealed that Ben and Willy’s dad left them when Willy was three, which resulted in Ben going to Alaska to find their father. However, he ends up in a jungle in Africa and becomes rich. Repeatedly, Willy asks Ben how he “did it”(48), and Ben tells Willy that “When [he] walked into the jungle, [he] was seventeen. When [he] walked out [he] was twenty-one. By God, I was rich.” (Miller; 52; Act 1). The repetition and parallel structure emphasizes that Ben himself did the action, which the author uses to convey that Ben was not influenced by societal norms because he became successful without anyone but himself. Miller also uses the jungle as an analogy to the world because its connotative meaning is associated with a dark and dangerous atmosphere, which insinuates that only the brave, witty, and hard workers survive, respectively, Ben. Consequently, the author uses this analogy to contrast the city, by connotation usually associated with a busy and lively atmosphere, yet in this play, it is associated with cowardice because it represents Willy’s comfort zone because the play takes place in the cities and he only travels to two cities. Hence, the author uses the cities as a symbol to convey that it acts as a shield for Willy because it is surrounded by “apartments”. Thus, the author conveys that compliance with societal expectations can become a shield to those who comply with its expectations. This idea is further reiterated when Ben tells Willy to “get out of these cities, they’re full of talk and time payments…you can fight for a fortune..”(85; Act 2). The author uses the personification of “[the cities] full of talk” to emphasize that the cities are full of aspiring people like Willy, but few of them actually do anything about it. The author also uses aggressive diction, “fight” to depict the urgency and importance of “[getting] out of [the cities]”, which implies that the cities are part of what is influencing Willy’s desire to comply with societal expectations. Thus, Miller contrasts Ben’s success with Willy’s failure by using the juxtaposition of the jungle to the cities in order to show that   Similarly, The author uses the jungle as a symbol that represents Willy’s affixation to repeat history and to live in the past. The author implies Willy’s affixation with the jungle is because it shows his regrets as he didn’t accomplish his desires, becoming successful like his father and brother.  In conclusion, Miller illustrates that those who comply with societal expectations often have unfulfilled ambitions through the juxtaposition of the jungle with the cities. Hence, Miller uses the juxtaposition between the city and the jungle to show the contrast between Ben’s success, which was not influenced by societal norms to Willy’s failure, which was highly influenced by societal expectations. 

In conclusion, Miller uses the contrast between Charley and Benard’s success with Willy’s failure and Ben’s success to Willy’s failure to depict the unrealistic societal expectations and their consequences on those that comply with its expectations.  Hence, Miller implies that conforming to societal norms makes one lose their sense of reason and reality. Miller also conveys that compliance with societal expectations can become a shield to those who comply with its expectations. Likewise, Miller illustrates that those who comply with societal expectations often have unfulfilled ambitions.