Tragedy and the Common Man

Throughout the essay, Miller refers explicitly to both ancient Greek and Shakespearean tragedies, naming their titular heroes. Miller is arguing that tragedy as an art form is still relevant and necessary, and the endurance of these particular stories across history is evidence of its pervasiveness in society and culture. Many of these stories are commonly known, despite being centuries old, and thus Miller appeals to the audience’s existing knowledge of tragedy to support his argument. Additionally, Miller uses references to illustrate his point that these tragedies have similar underlying themes and the characters have similar motivations. He also refers to specific psychiatric conditions named after tragic heroes in order to illustrate that modern people are believed to experience the same emotional states as “noble” figures.

“Tragedy and the Common Man” takes the form of a persuasive essay. Miller starts the essay by outlining what he views as a problem—the lack of tragedies being written during his time—and provides his rationale for why tragedy ought to experience a resurgence in modern times. He takes a clear position on the topic and attempts to persuade his audience to expand their definitions of tragedy and consider the common man a suitable subject for the genre. Though his essay is a response to his critics, it is directed at a general audience in an attempt to convince them to embrace tragedy as an art form. It is important to note, though, that Miller manages to persuade without necessarily positioning himself as an authority on the subject but rather through logical argumentation.