Reminder

1. Write a critical commentary on the following passage, relating it to the significance of the relationship between father and son here and elsewhere in the play.

2. Reminder • Do not write such things as; “In the following passage Miller presents…” It does not make logical sense for you to write this!

3. What are the requirements of a good literature answer? • Usually a three to four sentence opening paragraph that quickly establishes the ‘scope’ of the essay. • A clear and consistent focus upon language (the BASIS of your work in Literature!) • A discussion of DRAMATIC PRESENTATION – how is the language delivered to the audience? • A discussion of the Impact of this presentation upon the audience. • A clear sense of the major THEMATIC CONCERNS that are evident in the extract and how these are linked to the same concerns elsewhere in the play.

4. What does an extract test? • The ideas of the play – in microcosm • Key characters/key concerns in a ‘snapshot’ in time • Expectation of student to be able to relate to the core thematic concepts here and elsewhere

5. This question – the first paragraph • ‘locate’ the extract in relation to the play as a whole; • e.g. – Placed at the end of Act Two, this extract/passage presents the emotionally charged showdown (climax of the second Act) between Chris and Joe Keller. • Establish a thematic or concept-based focus; • e.g. – It also marks the insoluble clash between their beliefs, with Keller appealing to familial bonds and Chris demanding responsibility to one’s ‘country’ and ‘world’. • Establish the significance of the extract to the play’s structure and progression (movement); • e.g. – This climactic scene will lead to the denouement of Act Three, where the two characters come into further conflict which eventually leads to tragic consequences.

6. This extract/passage • From: Chris: You killed them… To: Chris: I’m listening. God almighty, I’m listening! Lines 1 - 12 • The language is immediately polarised between Joe and Chris • Chris uses words like “killed” and “murdered” and the tone is direct, absolute and accusatory • Joe uses conceptual phrases such as “How could I kill anybody?

7. What does this language suggest? • A fundamental inability to judge things from a shared perspective – Chris’s language is based on ideals and absolutes whilst Joe’s language is founded upon the basis of the Keller ‘mythology’ – the benevolent local entrepreneur who allows children to play cops and robbers in his back yard. • Joe’s appeal to Chris is based on the ‘humanity’ that he has demonstrated in the town and to his family. (Note: Chris’s distinct recognition of this on p89 – “I know you’re no worse than most men but I thought you were better…”)

8. Language • Just as Chris speaks in judgmental absolutes, his father speaks terms of human variation and fallibility • Chris’s insistent repetition of “explain” and “I want to know” suggest an appeal to logic • However, Chris also shows the emotional opposite of rationality in “I’ll tear you to pieces” (“I will chop her into messes…”???)

9. Language • Throughout the extract, we can see Miller consistently ‘delivering’ this same fundamental concept • Logic Vs emotion • Whilst Chris appears to seek logic, his reaction is violent and volatile (e.g. “overwhelming fury” line 8)

10. Language – Lines 13 - 28 • This section of the extract is dominated by Joe Keller • Note the opening statement, “You’re a boy” compared to Act One (p15) “You are old enough…” • One of the most significant features of the speeches is the use of the 2nd person pronoun “you” (and related possessive pronoun “your”) and the 3rd person (plural) pronoun “they” (and variants “them” and “their”) • For your answer to make sense you must establish a clear interpretation of this technique

11. Joe’s speeches – what is going on? • A close look at Joe’s speech tells us that Miller is allowing his character to become ‘disassociated’ with what he is describing • The use of “you” consistently allows Miller/Keller to include both Chris and the audience and at the same time enabling Joe to ‘avoid’ the word “I” which would imply direct accountability

12. Cross reference! • This is an excellent opportunity to look at the use of pronouns elsewhere (a distinct advantage in proving to the examiner your grasp of the whole play) • e.g. – Act Two, Page 70 – when Joe discusses Steve’s human fallibility, he consistently uses “he” (“he damn near blew us up”/ “he wouldn’t admit that was his fault” etc) • e.g. – Act One, page 34 – “the Major callin’ for cylinder heads…” • In the above example, Joe seems happy to use “I” when in contrast to Steve

13. Language from lines 36 - 60 • This section is notable for the frequent repetition of the word “means” • This indicates that Miller is both ‘teasing out’ the reality of Joe’s actions but is also discussing the nature of meaning – who defines it? • Chris’s disbelief at the line “I was afraid maybe” indicates his own level of ‘denial’ – his inability to see anything bad in his father (contrast this with Ann’s perception of Joe after p 49 – “there’s not a person on this block…”)

14. Language in Chris’s outcry Lines 48 - 59 • The language is polarised into two forces • “business” (related to Joe’s world view) vs“country/world” • The emotional tone reverts to that of the “overwhelming fury” of line 8 • “I ought to tear the tongue out…” line 56 • Finally, Chris appeals to a higher power • Note Chris’s consistent appeals to God/Christ/Jesus in his attempt to achieve understanding

15. Dramatic presentation • Whilst the extract is apparently ‘just a dialogue’, what is happening in terms of movement? • What is the impact upon the audience? • Note the number of stage directions suggesting powerful physical actions and reactions

16. So what does language tell us? • In this extract, the most obvious feature is that of polarised forces at work • Logic vs emotion • Absolute truth vs ‘effective’ reality • Divine (perfect) vs mortal (fallible)

17. Cross references • Numerous very useful cross references should be made • Act One – page 17 – “the whole shootin’ match is for you” • Act One – pages 30 – 32 – the emphasis on Joe’s ‘innocence’ because of the “court paper” • Act One – page 34 – “He’s a little man, your father…”

18. Cross references • Act Two – Page 53 – Joe’s appeal to Annie not to ‘crucify’ her father • Act Two – Page 69 – “A little man makes a mistake…” • Act Three – Page 89 – “Chris, a man can’t be Jesus in this world!”

19. Thematic concerns • The student must utilise core concerns from the play to create a coherent sense of purpose on the playwright’s (Miller’s) part • In particular here are the concerns of Family (and loyalty to the family) as well as the American Dream – the driving force behind the ‘pragmatism’ of the play