Tragic heroes in modern English literature

CONTENTINTRODUCTIONCHAPTER I. SOCIAL A CULTURAL CONTEXT IN THEFIRST HALF OF THE TWENTY CENTURE AS A BACKGROUND FOR A NEW TRAGIC HERO1.1Social and litery theories explaning place of the human being1.2The last generation as a new representatives of the tragic heroCONCLUSIONCHAPTERII. THE TRAGIC HEROES OF ARTHUR MILLER BOOKS2.1The image of tragic hero in the works of Arthur Miller2.2 E.Heminqway’s “Fiesta” as a new approach to the tragic hero2.3The tragic hero as representation problem in the works E. Heminqway and ArthurMillerCONCLUSIONGENERALCONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INTRODUCTION
Our work is devoted to the analysis of the novels by Arthur Millerand E. Heminqway. The plots of there novel generally revolve around the subjectof tragedy of the main heroes and lay emphasis especially on its tremendousimportance.
The aim of our work is to reveal the tragedy of people in thenovels by A. Miller and E. Heminqway.
The hypothesis of our work is that the writers in their booksrepresent the tragic hero.
Theaim has defined the next tasks:— to research the Socialand litery theories explaning place of the human being;— to investigate the lastgeneration as a new representatives of the tragic hero;— to investigate the image of tragic heroin the works of Arthur Miller and E. Heminqway’s “Fiesta” as a new approach tothe tragic hero;— to research the tragic hero asrepresentation problem in the works E. Heminqway and Arthur Miller.Object of research in the given work is A.Miller and E. Heminqway.
Subject is the tragedy of the main heroes in A. Miller and E. Heminqway.
The practical value is that it can be useful for anybody who isinterested in life and work of the novels by A. Miller and E. Heminqway.
Whilemaking our research we used the works of such linguists as Vinokur G.O.,Suvorov S.P., Arnold I.V. and many others. During our work we used the works onthe translation theory of such linguists as Levitskaya T.R., Fiterman A.M.,Komissarov V.N., Alimov V.V., Shveytser A.D., Garbovskiy N.K., Dmitrieva L.F.,Galperin I.R., Arnold I.V., Yakusheva I.V., van Deik, Kolshanskiy and others.We used also the articles from the the periodical editions.
Concerningthe aim and the tasks we have used such method as a descriptive one, the methodof the experience, the contextual method and the comparative method. Thesemethods weren’t used as the isolated methods, they were used in their complexto satisfy the aim and the task in the best way.
CHAPTER I. SOCIAL ACULTURAL CONTEXT IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE TWENTY CENTURE AS A BACKGROUND FORENEW TRAGIC HERO
1.1. Social and litery theories explaning place of the human being
The term ‘Tragedy’ is used in a common parlance, and yet it cannotbe reduced to a formula, for it has so many shades that it actually defies alogical analysis. An American critic has admirable summed up Tragedy in a fewwords: “Courage and inevitable defeat.” Now-a-days we can never think of aTragedy without an unhappy ending. But the Greeks did. Philoctetes bySophocles, for example, has no unhappy ending. There is a similarity betweenthe ancient Greek Tragedy and a modern Tragedy. The hero and certain othercharacters are caught in a difficult situation.
Tragedy is a form of art based on human suffering that offers its audiencepleasure. While most cultures have developed forms that provoke thisparadoxical response, tragedy refers to a specific tradition of drama that hasplayed a unique and important role historically in the self-definition of Westerncivilization. That tradition has been multiple and discontinuous, yet the termhas often been used to invoke a powerful effect of cultural identity andhistorical continuity «the Greeks and the Elizabethans, in one culturalform; Hellenes and Christians, in a common activity,» as Raymond Williamsputs it.[3] From its obscure origins in the theatres of Athens 2500 years ago,from which there survives only a fraction of the work of Aeschylus, Sophoclesand Euripides, through its singular articulations in the works of Shakespeare, Lopede Vega, Racine, or Schiller, to the more recent naturalistic tragedy of Strindberg,Beckett's modernist meditations on death, loss and suffering, or Müller's postmodernistreworkings of the tragic canon, tragedy has remained an important site ofcultural experimentation, negotiation, struggle, and change.[4] A long line of philosophers--whichincludes Plato, Aristotle, Saint Augustine, Voltaire, Hume, Diderot, Hegel, Schopenhauer,Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud, Benjamin and Deleuze--have analysed, speculatedupon and criticised the tragic form.[5] In the wake of Aristotle's Poetics (335BCE), tragedy has been used to make genre distinctions, whether at the scale ofpoetry in general, where the tragic divides against epic and lyric, or at thescale of the drama, where tragedy is opposed to comedy. In the modern era,tragedy has also been defined against drama, melodrama, the tragicomic and epictheatre. The character and plot in most of Tragedies arelinked up. In Greek Tragedies fate played a very important part, but after theRenaissance character became more and more prominent. In some of ShakespearianTragedies, despite the importance of character, the motivation of action comesfrom the supernatural forces or even external circumstances. In modernTragedies, the hero is often the victim of social forces.
The origins of tragedy are obscure, but the art form certainlydeveloped out of the poetic and religious traditions of ancient Greece. Itsroots may be traced more specifically to the chants and dances called dithyrambs,which honoured the Greek god Dionysus (later known to the Romans as Bacchus).These drunken, ecstatic performances were said to have been created by the satyrs,half-goat beings who surrounded Dionysus in his revelry.
Phrynichus, son of Polyphradmon and pupil of Thespis, was one ofthe earliest of the Greek tragedians. «The honour of introducing Tragedyin its later acceptation was reserved for a scholar of Thespis in 511 BCE,Polyphradmon's son, Phrynichus; he dropped the light and ludicrous cast of theoriginal drama and dismissing Bacchus and the Satyrs formed his plays from themore grave and elevated events recorded in mythology and history of hiscountry», and some of the ancients regarded him as the real founder oftragedy.[7] He gained his first poetical victory in 511 BCE. However, P.W.Buckham asserts (quoting August Wilhelm von Schlegel) that Aeschylus was theinventor of tragedy. «Aeschylus is to be considered as the creator ofTragedy: in full panoply she sprung from his head, like Pallas from the head ofJupiter. He clad her with dignity, and gave her an appropriate stage; he wasthe inventor of scenic pomp, and not only instructed the chorus in singing anddancing, but appeared himself as an actor. He was the first that expanded thedialogue, and set limits to the lyrical part of tragedy, which, however, stilloccupies too much space in his pieces. Aristotle is very clear in his Poeticsthat tragedy proceeded from the authors of the Dithyramb.[9] There is somedissent to the dithyrambic origins of tragedy mostly based in the differencesbetween the shapes of their choruses and styles of dancing. A common descentfrom pre-Hellenic fertility and burial rites has been suggested. Nietzschediscussed the origins of Greek tragedy in his early book, The Birth of Tragedy(1872).
Aristotle defined Tragedy as “a representation ofan action, which is serious; complete in itself, and of a certain length; it isexpressed in speech made beautiful in different ways in different parts of theplay; it is acted, not narrated; and by exciting pity and fear it gives a healthyrelief to such emotions.” [12, 121].
Tragedy must be spoudaious i.e. noble, serious, and elevated. The Greek root for Tragedy istragoidia, which means something serious, but not necessarily a drama with anunhappy ending. Plato has called Homer’s Odyssey a Tragedy, though it is not drama. Seriousness of subject is whatreally matters.
Tragedy, F. L. Lucas maintains, had threedifferent meanings in the three periods of literary history. In ancient times,a Tragedy meant a serious drama; in medieval times, a Tragedy meant a storywith an unhappy ending; and a modern Tragedy is a drama with an unhappy ending.
“Tragedy is an imitation of an action.” And‘action’ again gives rise to a lot of troubles. A novel or an Epic is narrated,while a drama, be it a Tragedy or a Comedy, is acted. Can there be actionwithout narration? The answer is obvious. The Greek Dramaturgy did not allowedany act of violence on the stage. Even a romantic playwright like Shakespearehad some of the murders reported by messengers. Lucas rightly points out, “Noteverything permits itself to be acted. ‘Let not Medea slay her sons before theaudience’: things like that, at least, on the Greek stage were relegated to aMessenger’s speech.”
With regard to “an action which is complete in itself,”the controversy has been raging for a long time. What is actually meant bycompleteness? An action having a beginning, a middle, and an end is said to becomplete. T. R. Henn defines ‘completeness’ as totality which Matthew Arnoldlater called ‘architectonice’. Aristotle himself, in different chapter of the Poetics, has saught to define ‘completeness’. If the play beginsabruptly, the reader or the audience may not understand what it is about. Letnot the reader ask “What happens then?” The work of art should be rounded off.The Greek art, whether plastic or non-plastic, always insisted on symmetry [12,127]. Along with symmetry there is frugality. The details are not extraneous.On the contrary, it is an organic unity. If there are details, they are notornamental, but functional, Aristotle means by ‘completeness’ the organicunity.
The organic unity is linked up with the size ofthe work of art. If the art has no appropriate limit or size, it loses itssymmetry. “Whatever is beautiful, whether it be a living creature or an objectmade up of various parts, must necessarily not only have its parts properlyordered, but also be of an appropriate size for beauty is banned up with sizeand order.” If a thing is a thousand miles long, that will also not bebeautiful, for the whole thing cannot be taken in all at once, and the unity ofthe art will be lost sight of Aristotle while speaking of the Plot, againemphasis that the plot of a play, being but representation of an action, mustpresent it as an organic whole. Aristotle says that the Tragedies “shouldcenter upon a single action, whole and complete, and having a beginning, amiddle and an end, so that like a single complete organism the poem may producea special kind of pleasure.”
Aristotle emphasizes that the Tragedy should be“expressed in speech made beautiful.” But in the modern age, Tragedies havebecome realistic, and therefore, the language has become drab and colourless.Another part of Aristotle’s definition of Tragedy is that it should be “acted,not narrated.” This also is a bone of contention.
In modernist literature, the definition of tragedy has become lessprecise. The most fundamental change has been the rejection of Aristotle'sdictum that true tragedy can only depict those with power and high status [13,78]. Arthur Miller's essay 'Tragedy and the Common Man' exemplifies the modernbelief that tragedy may also depict ordinary people in domestic surroundings.British playwright Howard Barker has argued strenuously for the rebirth oftragedy in the contemporary theatre, most notably in his volume Arguments for aTheatre. „You emerge from tragedy equipped against lies. After themusical, you're anybody's fool,“ he observes.[13]
Although the most important American playwrights — Eugene O'Neill,Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller — wrote tragedies, the rarity of tragedyin the American theater may be owing in part to a certain form of idealism,often associated with Americans, that man is captain of his fate, a notionexemplified in the plays of Clyde Fitch and George S. Kaufmann. Arthur Miller,however, was a successful writer of American tragic plays, among them TheCrucible, All My Sons and Death of a Salesman.
1.2. The last generation as a new representatives of the tragic hero
Tragic hero is the main character in a tragedy who makes an errorin his or her actions that leads to his or her downfall. Tragic heroes appearin the dramatic works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Seneca, Marlowe, Shakespeare,Webster, Marston, Corneille, Racine, Goethe, Schiller, Kleist, Strindberg, andmany other writers.
Some common traits characteristic of a tragic protagonist: [10,117]
· The hero discovers his fate by his own actions, not by thingshappening to him.
· The hero sees and understands his doom, and that his fate wasrevealed by his own actions.
· The hero's downfall is understood by Aristotle to arouse pity andfear.
· The hero is physically or spiritually wounded by his experiences,often resulting in his death.
· A tragic hero is often of noble birth, or rises to noble standing(King Arthur, Okonkwo, the main character in Achebe's novel, Things Fall Apart.)
· The hero learns something from his/her mistake.
· The hero is faced with a serious decision.
· The suffering of the hero is meaningful.
· There may sometimes be supernatural involvement (in Shakespeare's JuliusCaesar, Caesar is warned of his death via Calpurnia's vision and Brutus iswarned of his impending death by the ghost of Caesar).
· The Shakespearean tragic hero dies at some point in the story, forexample Macbeth. Shakespeare's characters illustrate that tragic heroes areneither fully good nor fully evil. Through the development of the plot a hero'smistakes, rather than his quintessential goodness or evil, lead to his tragicdownfall.
· The hero of classical tragedies is almost universally male. Latertragedies (like Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra) introduced the femaletragic hero. Portrayals of female tragic heroes are notable because they arerare.
Famous tragic heroes
Macbeth is the main character in Shakespeare’s Macbeth (1607?).The character was based upon accounts found in Holinshed's Chronicles (1587), ahistory of Britain. Macbeth is a Scottish noble and a valiant military man. Atthe urging of his wife, he commits regicide and becomes King of Scotland. Hethereafter lives in anxiety and fear, unable to rest or to trust his nobles. Heleads a reign of terror until defeated by the rightful heir to the throne inthe final act.
Othello is a character in Shakespeare's Othello (c.1601-1604). Thecharacter's origin is traced to the tale, „Un Capitano Moro“ in GliHecatommithi by Giovanni Battista Giraldi Cinthio. There, he is simply referredto as the Moor.
Othello is a brave and competent soldier of advanced years and Moorishbackground in the service of the Venetian Republic. He elopes with Desdemona,the beautiful daughter of a respected Venetian senator. After being deployed toCyprus, Othello is manipulated by his ensign, Iago, into believing Desdemona isan adultress. Othello murders her before killing himself.
Othello was first mentioned in a Revels account of 1604 when theplay was performed on November 1 at Whitehall Palace with Richard Burbagealmost certainly Othello's first interpreter. Modern notable performers of therole include Paul Robeson, Orson Welles, Richard Burton, James Earl Jones, and LaurenceOlivier.
King Lear is a tragedy by William Shakespeare, believed to havebeen written between 1603 and 1606, and is considered one of his greatestworks. The play is based on the legend of Leir of Britain, a mythological pre-Romanking. It has been widely adapted for stage and screen, with the part of Learbeing played by many of the world's most accomplished actors.
There are two distinct versions of the play: The True Chronicle ofthe History of the Life and Death of King Lear and His Three Daughters, whichappeared in quarto in 1608, and The Tragedy of King Lear, which appeared in theFirst Folio in 1623, a more theatrical version. The two texts are commonlyprinted in a conflated version, although many modern editors have argued thateach version has its individual integrity.[1]
After the Restoration the play was often modified by theatrepractitioners who disliked its dark and depressing tone, but since the 19thcentury it has been regarded as one of Shakespeare's supreme achievements. Thetragedy is particularly noted for its probing observations on the nature ofhuman suffering and kinship.
Oedipus (pronounced /ˈɛdəpəs/ in American English or /ˈiːdəpəs/ in BritishEnglish; Greek: ΟἰδίπουςOidípous meaning „swollen-footed“) was a mythical Greek kingof Thebes. He fulfilled a prophecy that said he would kill his father and marryhis mother, and thus brought disaster on his city and family. This legend hasbeen retold in many versions, and was used by Sigmund Freud to name the Oedipuscomplex.
Marcus Junius Brutus (85–42 BC) or Quintus Servilius CaepioBrutus, often referred to simply as Brutus, was a politician of the late RomanRepublic. He is best known in modern times for taking a leading role in the assassinationconspiracy against Julius Caesar in an attempt to take control of the Republic.[1]
Prince Hamlet is the protagonist in Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet.He is the Prince of Denmark, nephew to the usurping Claudius and son of theprevious King of Denmark, Old Hamlet. Throughout the play he struggles withwhether, and how, to avenge the murder of his father, and struggles with hisown sanity along the way. By the end of the tragedy, Hamlet has caused thedeaths of Claudius, Polonius, Laertes and his two childhood friends Rosencrantzand Guildenstern. He is also indirectly involved in the deaths of his love Ophelia(drowning) and of his mother Gertrude (poisoned by mistake). Hamlet himself isthe final character to die in the play.
Antigone (pronounced /ænˈtɪɡəni/; Greek Ἀντιγόνη) is the name oftwo different women in Greek mythology. The name may be taken to mean»unbending", coming from «anti-» (against, opposed to) and"-gon / -gony" (corner, bend, angle; ex: polygon), but has also beensuggested to mean «opposed to motherhood» or «in place of amother» based from the root gonē, «that which generates»(related: gonos, "-gony"; seed, semen).
Romeo Montague is one of the fictional protagonists in WilliamShakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. He is the heir of the Montague family of Verona,and falls in love and dies with Juliet Capulet, the daughter of the Capulethouse.
Juliet Capulet is one of the title characters in WilliamShakespeare's tragedy Romeo and Juliet. The story has a long history thatprecedes Shakespeare himself. The heroine's name was Giulietta in some earlierversions. It had become Juliet by the time Arthur Brooke wrote his narrativepoem. Juliet is the beautiful daughter of a generous and very wealthy family inVerona, headed by Lord and Lady Capulet. She was their oldest child. Sheapparently had younger siblings at some point, but by the time of the play, shewas their only surviving child. Juliet is the sole heir to the Capulets. As achild, she was cared for by her Nurse, who is now her confidante, or Juliet'scaretaker. As the story occurs, Juliet is approaching her fourteenth birthday(her sixteenth in Arthur Brooke's poem). She was born on «Lammas Eve atnight,» so Juliet's birthday is July 31 (1.3.19). Her birthday is «afortnight hence», putting the action of the play in mid-July (1.3.17).
Shakespeare's Juliet was very young; her father states that she«hath not seen the change of fourteen years» (1.2.9). In manycultures and time periods, women did and do marry and bear children at such ayoung age. However, in Shakespeare's England, most women were at least 21before they did so. Romeo and Juliet is a play about Italian families. Theaverage English playgoer in Shakespeare's audience had never met an Italianperson, and it was commonly thought that they were quite exotic, the Italianmale passionate and emotional, and the Italian female precocious and quiteready to become a mother by thirteen. Lady Capulet had given birth to Juliet bythe time she had reached Juliet's age: «By my count, I was your mothermuch upon these years that you are now a maid» (1.3.74-75).
The play celebrates youth while pointing out its impulsiveness,passion, and idealism; qualities which contribute to the tragedy. Theadolescent infatuation of the lovers becomes elevated to the status of sacredlove. The sacred lovers were reunited on the same deathbed. Their families hadboth realized what they had done by separating the two unborn star crossedlovers. The Capulets and Montagues were reunited and their fightingdiscontinued. [21, 132].
In Greek mythology, Heracles or Herakles (pronounced /ˈhɛrəkliːz/ HER-ə-kleez) meaning «glory of Hera», or«Glorious through Hera» Alcides or Alcaeus (original name) ("Ἥρα + κλέος, Ἡρακλῆς)" was a divine hero, the son of Zeus and Alcmene,foster son of Amphitryon and great-grandson (and half-brother) of Perseus. Hewas the greatest of the Greek heroes, a paragon of masculinity, the ancestor ofroyal clans who claimed to be Heracleidae and a champion of the Olympian orderagainst chthonic monsters. In Rome and the modern West, he is known as Hercules,with whom the later Roman Emperors, in particular Commodus and Maximian, oftenidentified themselves. The Romans adopted the Greek version of his life andworks essentially unchanged, but added anecdotal detail of their own, some ofit linking the hero with the geography of the Central Mediterranean. Details ofhis cult were adapted to Rome as well.
Extraordinary strength, courage, ingenuity, and sexual prowesswith both males and females were among his characteristic attributes. Althoughhe was not as clever as the likes of Odysseus or Nestor, Heracles used his witson several occasions when his strength did not suffice, such as when laboringfor the king Augeas of Elis, wrestling the giant Antaeus, or tricking Atlasinto taking the sky back onto his shoulders. Together with Hermes he was thepatron and protector of gymnasia and palaestrae. His iconographic attributesare the lion skin and the club. These qualities did not prevent him from beingregarded as a playful figure who used games to relax from his labors and playeda great deal with children. By conquering dangerous archaic forces he is saidto have «made the world safe for mankind» and to be its benefactor.Heracles was an extremely passionate and emotional individual, capable of doingboth great deeds for his friends (such as wrestling with Thanatos on behalf ofPrince Admetus, who had regaled Heracles with his hospitality, or restoring hisfriend Tyndareus to the throne of Sparta after he was overthrown) and being aterrible enemy who would wreak horrible vengeance on those who crossed him, asAugeas, Neleus and Laomedon all found out to their cost.
In Greek mythology, Achilles (Ancient Greek: Ἀχιλλεύς) was a Greek heroof the Trojan War, the central character and the greatest warrior of Homer's Iliad.
Achilles also has the attributes of being the most handsome of theheroes assembled against Troy,[1] as well as the best.
Later legends (beginning with a poem by Statius in the firstcentury AD) state that Achillies was invulnerable in all of his body except forhis heel. Legend states that Achilles was semi-immortal, however his heel wasvulnerable. Since he died due to a poisoned arrow shot into his heel, the«Achilles' heel» has come to mean a person's principal weakness.
CONCLUSION
We came to a conclusion that the term ‘Tragedy’ is used in acommon parlance, and yet it cannot be reduced to a formula, for it has so manyshades that it actually defies a logical analysis. An American critic hasadmirable summed up Tragedy in a few words: “Courage and inevitable defeat.”Now-a-days we can never think of a Tragedy without an unhappy ending. But theGreeks did. Philoctetes by Sophocles, for example, has no unhappy ending. Thereis a similarity between the ancient Greek Tragedy and a modern Tragedy. Thehero and certain other characters are caught in a difficult situation.
Tragedy is a form of art based on human suffering that offers its audiencepleasure. The origins of tragedy are obscure, but the art form certainlydeveloped out of the poetic and religious traditions of ancient Greece. Itsroots may be traced more specifically to the chants and dances called dithyrambs,which honoured the Greek god Dionysus (later known to the Romans as Bacchus).These drunken, ecstatic performances were said to have been created by the satyrs,half-goat beings who surrounded Dionysus in his revelry.
Tragic hero is the main character in a tragedy who makes an errorin his or her actions that leads to his or her downfall. Tragic heroes appearin the dramatic works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Seneca, Marlowe, Shakespeare,Webster, Marston, Corneille, Racine, Goethe, Schiller, Kleist, Strindberg, andmany other writers.

CHAPTER II. THE TRAGIC HEROES OF ARTHUR MILLER BOOKS
 
2.1 The image of tragic hero in the works of Arthur Miller
Act one begins with Reverend Parris praying over her daughter,Betty Parris, who lies unconscious on her bed. Through conversations betweenReverend Parris and his niece Abigail Williams, and between several girls, theaudience learns that these girls, including Abigail and Betty, were engaged inoccultic activities in the forest lead by Tituba, Parris’ slave from Barbados. Parriscaught them and jumped from a bush startling the girls. Betty fainted and hadnot recovered. During this session, Abigail drank chicken blood to killElizabeth Proctor. She tells the girls that she will kill anyone who mutters aword about what happened. The townspeople do not know exactly what the girlswere doing but there are rumors of witchcraft.
John Proctor enters the room where Betty lies faint. Abigail isstill in there and she tries to seduce him. Proctor is a farmer who has had anaffair with Abigail a while ago, but now he wants to forget it [11, 127].
Reverend John Hale is summoned to look upon Betty and the researchthe incident. He is an expert in occultic phenomena and he is eager to show hisknowledge. He questions Abigail who accuses Tituba as being a witch. Tituba,afraid of being hanged, confesses faith in God and accuses Goody Good and GoodyOsborne of witchcraft. Abigail and Betty, who has woken up, claim to have beenbewitched and confess faith in God. They name several other people whom they claimthey saw with the Devil.
Act two begins eight days after the discussion at Parris’ house. Betweenact one and act two, Deputy Governor Dansforth came to Salem to oversee thecourt proceedings. Fourteen people have been arrested for witchcraft, and thereis talk of hanging. Elizabeth Proctor asks John to go to the court and testifyagainst Abigail and the other girls. John doesn’t want to get involved. Thereis tension between Elizabeth and John since Elizabeth has not forgiven John forthe affair. Marry Warren enters. She was in court testifying against thetownspeople. She gives Elizabeth a doll which she has made in court. In themiddle of their discussion, Hale enters to question John and Elizabeth,suspicious of witchcraft. Later, Giles Corey and Francis Nurse enter to seekadvice after both their wives had been arrested. Next, the marshal arrives witha warrant for Elizabeth’s arrest. Elizabeth was accused by Abigail for stabbingAbigail with a needle through a doll. John Proctor protests but Elizabeth istaken away in chains. Proctor demands Mary that she goes to court and testifyagainst the girls. He vows that he will fight the proceedings, even if it meansconfessing his own adultery.
 Act three takes place in court. Francis Nurse, Giles Corey,and John Proctor present their case against the girls to Deputy GovernorDansforth and Judge Hathorne. Proctor presents a petition signed by 91 peopletestifying to the good character of their wives, and Dansforth issues warrantsfor the questioning of all of them. Corey charges Putnam on inciting hisdaughter to accuse Corey of witchcraft in order get his land. Corey has awitness but will not name him for fear of getting the man arrested. Corey isarrested because of contempt of the court.
 Proctor presents his case and a deposition by Mary Warrensaying that she never saw the devil or any spirits. Abigail says that Mary islying and she and the girls pretend to be bewitched by Mary. Proctor,frustrated at the gullibility of the court, grabs Abigail by the hair andexclaims to everyone that she is a whore confessing that he had an affair withAbigail. Elizabeth is brought in to be questioned about whether this is true. Elizabethtells the court that John Proctor never had an affair with Abigail in order tosave his name, however, this destroys Proctor’s testimony. Mary crumbles underthe peer pressure and returns to Abigail’s side, accusing Proctor of being awitch [11, 139].
The girls pretend to be bewitched by Proctor. Proctor accusesDanforth of being afraid to reveal the truth. Dansforth acts more to keep thereputation of the court rather than for justice. Reverend Hale now sees theevil in the court and denounces the proceedings. Proctor is arrested.
Act four begins in prison where Sarah Good and Tituba wait to behanged. They have gone insane and believe that Satan will take them both toBarbados.
 There is rumors of an uprising in a nearby town due tosimilar witch trials. The townspeople are afraid of a similar riot in Salem.
Hale and Parris are now terrified. They go to visit the innocentpeople in the jail and beg them to make false confessions in order to savetheir lives. Hale believes that the blood of the people who are being hanged ison his hands. He asks Elizabeth, who is now pregnant, to tell John to confessto save his life but Elizabeth will not. While Elizabeth is talking to John,she tells him that she has forgiven him of his affair and tells his that he cando as he will. John Proctor confesses that he is a witch, but will not say theothers are. After a few moments, Proctor is fed up with the court, tears up hisconfession, and goes out to be hanged with Rebecca Nurse. Hales pleads thatElizabeth ask Proctor to confess, but she says, “He has his goodness now. Godforbid I take it from him!”
In The Crucible all the event flow naturally from one event to thenext. Everything happens naturally from the natures of the characters. The factthat the story isn’t contrived, and even more that it is based on a true storyis interesting. The result is so unbelievable. The incident begins with thegirls dancing in the forest and snowballs into a huge witch hunt. The plot wasexciting. There was sufficient conflict to keep my interest aroused. There area lot of tension and suspense in the story [14, 56]. It covers basic humaninstincts and qualities. It shows the human necessity for survival, and thelengths at which a person will go to save his life. There is the idea of honorand truth. Proctor tries to keep his reputation but gives it up to reveal thetruth. Through his struggle he achieves righteousness. All these things keepthe plot moving. Proctor’s relationship with Elizabeth can be seen to grow andmature. He continually grows more pure in Elizabeth’s sight until she is ableto forgive him in act four. Proctor’ character also improves. He doesn’t wantto get involved in the court proceedings in act two but stands up for the truthin act four.
Each character has his own distinct quality. Most characters aredistinctly good or evil though few characters are really developed. The readeris only able to see one side of each character. Even John Proctor, the maincharacter isn’t as developed as it could be. This is probably due to therestrictions of time and narration of this particular genre.
Parris — A minister in Salem who is more worried about his ownreputation than the town or the truth.
Betty — Parris’ daughter. She is faint in the beginning of theplay and later accuses various people for witchcraft.
Abigail — Parris’ niece and Proctor’s mistress. She is the leaderof the girls who accuses people of witchcraft during the trial.
Tituba — Parris’ slave from Barbados. She is the first accusedwith being accused by Abigail.
Mrs. Putnam — Wife of Thomas Putnam. She first plants the idea ofBetty being bewitched.
Ruth — Daughter of the Putnams. She is one of Abigail's friendswho accuses people at the trial.
Mercy Lewis — Putnams’ servant. She is also involved in theaccusations of the witches.
John Proctor — Main character. He is a good man, but has committedadultery with Abigail.
Elizabeth Proctor — John Proctor’s wife. She is an upright womanwho is accused of being a witch. She couldn’t forgive Proctor for adulteryuntil just before he died.
Mary Warren — Proctor’s servant. She is one of Abigail’s friendsand plants evidence on Elizabeth.
Reverend Hale — Self proclaimed expert on witchcraft. He is aminister who at first believes the girls accusations but eventually sees theevil in the court.
Deputy Governor Dansforth — Deputy Governor of Massachusetts whobelieves the testimony of the girls despite evidence to the contrary. He worksmore to keep the reputation of the court than to seek justice.
Judge Hathorne — Judge presiding over the witch trials.
Rebecca Nurse — Respected, upright wife of Francis nurse. She isaccused of witchcraft.
Francis Nurse — Rebecca’s Husband. He had land disputes with thePutnams.
Giles Corey — Old cranky villager who accidentally causes his wifeto be accused.
Sarah Good — She is an accused witch who becomes insane whileawaiting her hanging.
Susanna — One of Abigail’s friends who takes part in accusing thevillagers.
Cheever — He arrests the witches.
Herrick — Also arrests the witches. Is the jail keeping.
Hopkins — Messenger.
The play takes place in Salem, Massachusetts during the 17century. Since this story is based on a true story, the setting is real. Thefact that the story takes place during the 17 century is important. Thecommunity needed to be superstitious and gullible in order for this incident toactually happen. Also, the event needed to be in a Puritan society to have suchan aversion to witches. People in the twentieth and even the nineteenthcenturies would be too skeptical about the supernatural to believe the girls[14. 78]. Also, they would be likely to dismiss the act of dancing in theforest as just a little game.
Miller’s style is very simple. He uses simple sentences and wordswhich are easy to understand. He brings out the evil quality of Abigail and theother girls and also the gullibility of the judges. His style is easy tounderstand and should be in order to be successful as a play. While using thesimple style, Miller doesn’t take anything away from the suspense in the plot. Thedialogues of his character are like actual speech. His words are usedeffectively and doesn’t include anything not necessary for making a good play. Manyclever figurative devices are used. For example, Abigail says that John“sweated like a stallion.” The writing is really that memorable since it wasnot really written as prose or poetry. However, certain images as the onepreviously mentioned are hard to forget.
The theme of the story was rising over adversity, and standing forthe truth even to death. This is the theme for many stories and is always anexciting one. John, in the beginning, wanted to keep distant from the trials. Hedid not want to have a part, whether good or bad. When Elizabeth was arrested,he was forced to become part of it [3, 145]. He went to court first to set hiswife free but after watching the proceedings, he saw that the evil was not onlybeing done to his own wife but many others like his wife. As a result, heworked even harder to free the other innocent people, getting himself arrested.Despite this drawback, he did not give up. He had the chance to free himself ifhe testified against the others but he realized that this would be wrong, andeven though he wanted to free himself, he would not if it meant bringingtrouble upon others. He cleansed himself at the trial, standing for what heknew was right and died a righteous person. Though he stayed away from church,he became more pure than the common Puritans, dying as a martyr like theoriginal apostles. He learned what truth meant through his suffering.
Through Proctor’s struggle, Miller displays the struggles withineach of our own hearts. Many times we have witnessed some wrong happening tosome other person and wished not to get involved. However, sometimes, likeProctor, there might be something that forces us in. Would we be quit afteronly saving our wife like Proctor could have done, or would we go for theentire community as Proctor did?
Theaction of the play is set in August 1947, in the mid-west of the U.S.A. Theevents depicted occur between Sunday morning and a little after two o'clock thefollowing morning.
Joe Keller, the chief character, is a man who loves his familyabove all else, and has sacrificed everything, including his honour, in hisstruggle to make the family prosperous. He is now sixty-one. He has lost oneson in the war, and is keen to see his remaining son, Chris, marry. Chriswishes to marry Ann, the former fiancée of his brother, Larry. Theirmother, Kate, believes Larry still to be alive. It is this belief which hasenabled her, for three and a half years, to support Joe by concealing herknowledge of a dreadful crime he has committed.
Arthur Miller, the playwright, found the idea for Joe's crime in atrue story, which occurred during the second world war: a manufacturer knowinglyshipped out defective parts for tanks. These had suffered mechanical failureswhich had led to the deaths of many soldiers. The fault was discovered, and themanufacturer convicted. In All My Sons, Miller examines the morality of the manwho places his narrow responsibility to his immediate family above his widerresponsibility to the men who rely on the integrity of his work.
Three and a half years before the events of the play, Larry Kellerwas reported missing in action, while flying a mission off the coast of China.
His father, Joe Keller, was head of a business which made aeroengine parts. When, one night, the production line began to turn out crackedcylinder heads, the night foreman alerted Joe's deputy manager, Steve Deever ashe arrived at work. Steve telephoned Joe at home, to ask what to do. Worried bythe lost production and not seeing the consequences of his decision, Joe toldSteve to weld over the cracks. He said that he would take responsibility forthis, but could not come in to work, as he had influenza. Several weeks latertwenty-one aeroplanes crashed on the same day, killing the pilots.
Investigation revealed the fault in the cylinder heads, and Steveand Joe were arrested and convicted. On appeal, Joe denied Steve's (true) versionof events, convinced the court he knew nothing of what had happened, and wasreleased from prison. Before his last flight, Larry wrote to his fiancée,Ann, Steve's daughter. He had read of his father's and Steve's arrest. Now hewas planning suicide [6, 122].
Three and a half years later, Ann has told no-one of this letter.Kate Keller knows her husband to be guilty of the deaths of the pilots and hasconvinced herself that Larry is alive. She will not believe him dead, as thisinvolves the further belief that Joe has caused his own son's death, anintolerable thought. She expects Larry to return, and keeps his room exactly asit was when he left home. She supports Joe's deception. In return she demandshis support for her hope that Larry will come back. Ann and her brother,George, have disowned their father, believing him guilty. But George has goneat last to visit his father in jail, and Steve has persuaded him of the truecourse of events.
The play opens on the following (Sunday) morning; by sheercoincidence, Ann has come to visit the Kellers. For two years, Larry's brother,Chris, has written to her. Now he intends to propose to her, hence theinvitation. She is in love with him and has guessed his intention. On theSaturday night there is a storm; a tree, planted as a memorial to Larry, issnapped by the wind. Kate wakes from a dream of Larry and, in the small hours,enters the garden to find the tree broken [4, 111].
/>Western drama originates in the Greek tragediesof Sophocles, Aeschylus and Euripides, all of whom wrote in Athens in the 5thcentury B.C. In these plays the tragic hero or protagonist ( = first or mostimportant actor) commits an offence, often unknowingly. He (occasionallly she)must then learn his fault, suffer and perhaps die. In this way, the gods arevindicated (shown to be just) and the moral order of the universe restored.(This is a gross simplification of an enormous subject.)
These plays, and those of Shakespeare two thousand years later,are about kings, dukes or great generals. Why? Because in their day, theseindividuals were thought to embody or represent the whole people. Nowadays, wedo not see even kings in this way. When writers want to show a person whorepresents a nation or class, they typically invent a fictitious “ordinary”person, the Man in the Street or Joe Public. In Joe Keller, Arthur Millercreates just such a representative type. Joe is a very ordinary man, decent,hard-working and charitable, a man no-one could dislike. But, like the protagonistof the ancient drama, he has a flaw or weakness. This, in turn, causes him toact wrongly. He is forced to accept responsibility — his suicide is necessaryto restore the moral order of the universe, and allow his beloved son, Chris,to live, free from guilt.
The play has two narrative strands which finally meet. These are:
· Chris's and Ann's attempt to persuade Kate that Larry is dead, sothey can marry. Joe wishes to support them, but sees that he cannot;
· the attempt by George, then by Chris, to find out the truth ofwhat happened in Joe's factory in the autumn of 1943.
A slip of Kate's tongue tells George of Joe's guilt, but he leaveswithout persuading Chris. Chris and Ann insist on marrying and Joe supportsthem. This drives Kate (who sees this as a betrayal) to tell Chris the truth.Ann's showing Larry's letter to her convinces Kate that Larry is dead. Theletter also answers Joe's repeated question about what he must do, to atone forhis crime. He cannot restore life to the dead, but he can give life (free froma sense of moral surrender) back to his living son, Chris.
/>Joe Keller is not a very bad man. He loves hisfamily but does not see the universal human «family» which has ahigher claim on his duty. He may think he has got away with his crime, but istroubled by the thought of it. He relies on his wife, Kate, not to betray hisguilt.
/>Chris Keller has been changed by his experienceof war, where he has seen men laying down their lives for their friends. He isangry that the world has not been changed, that the selflessness of his fellowsoldiers counts for nothing. He feels guilty to make money out of a businesswhich does not value the men on whose labour it relies.
/>Kate Keller is a woman of enormous maternal love,which extends to her neighbours' children, notably George. Despite herinstinctive warmth, she is capable of supporting Joe in his deceit. To believeLarry is dead would (for her) be to believe his death was a punishment of Joe'scrime (an intolerable thought), so she must persuade herself that Larry stilllives. Joe sees this idea to be ridiculous, but must tolerate it to secureKate's support for his own deception.
/>Ann Deever shares Chris's high ideals butbelieves he should not feel ashamed by his wealth. She disowns her father whomshe believes to be guilty. She has no wish to hurt Kate but will show herLarry's letter if she (Kate) remains opposed to Ann's marrying Chris.
/>Dr. Jim Bayliss is a man who, in his youth, sharedChris's ideals, but has been forced to compromise to pay the bills. He is fairto his wife, but she knows how frustrated Jim feels. Jim's is the voice ofdisillusioned experience. If any character speaks for the playwright (ArthurMiller), it is Jim.
/>Sue Bayliss is an utterly cynical woman.Believing Joe has “pulled a fast one”, she does not mind his awful crime, yetshe dislikes Chris because his idealism, which she calls “phoney”, makes Jimfeel restless. She is an embittered, rather grasping woman, whose ambitions arematerial wealth and social acceptance. She does not at all understand the moralvalues which her husband shares with Chris.
/>George Deever is a soul-mate of Chris. Whenyounger, he greatly admired him. In the war, like Chris, he has been decoratedfor bravery. He follows Chris in accepting that Steve is guilty. Now hereproaches Chris for (as he sees it) deceiving him. He is bitter because he hasgrown cynical about the ideals for which he sacrificed his own opportunitiesfor happiness.
/>Lydia Lubey is a rather one-dimensionalcharacter: she is chiefly in the play to show what George and Chris (so far)have gone without. She is simple, warm and affectionate, rather a stereotype offemininity (she is confused by electrical appliances). Her meeting with Georgeis painful to observe: she has the happy home life which he has forfeited [4,76]. We understand why George declines her well-meant but tactless invitationto see her babies.
/>Frank Lubey (unlike George, Larry, Chris and Jim)is a materialist. He lacks culture, education and real intelligence, but hasmade money in business, and has courted Lydia while the slightly younger menwere fighting in the war. His dabbling in quack astrology (horoscopes) lends supportto Kate's wild belief that Larry is still alive.
Throughout literature works of tragedy have beensignificant, for example, Hamlet or King Lear. Their plots were generallytragic, but the themes introduced such as the tragic hero brought up deep ideasthat could be discussed and thought about extensively. One problem with modernliterature is that very few tragedies have been written. One of the few authorsthat did write tragedies was Arthur Miller. He even wrote an essay commentingon the lack of modern tragedies, believing this to be because people thoughtthey were “fit only for the very highly placed, the kings or the kingly”. Hebelieved that the “common man is as apt a subject for tragedy in its highestsense as kings were.” From this belief he wrote several tragedies that won himawards and respect from his peers. One such tragedy was All My Sons, which wasabout the lies and immorality of a man and the resulting actions andconsequences. The themes presented-dishonesty and immorality-intensify thetragic mood of the play. These themes are developed due to the actions of oneman, Joe Keller, who could be a considered a tragic man. These negative themesthat are brought up by the actions of Joe Keller, the tragic man, prove whythis play is a modern tragedy.
The themes in All My Sons are mainly derived fromthe concept of morals, the laws that man follows through our conscience. One ofthe themes that branches out from this is morality, the principles about humanlife. This theme is evident when related to the Keller family, where a conflictbetween morality and the loss of it takes place. Joe Keller, the father of theKeller family, was responsible for sending out faulty cylinder heads duringWorld War 2, which resulted in the deaths of 21 fighter pilots. He believedthose deaths were justified, because he kept his business, which in turn kepthis family fed and healthy “You lay forty years into a business and they knockyou out in five minutes, what could I do…Chris, I did it for you…For you, a businessfor you!” (All My Sons, pg. 69,70). His wife, Kate Keller, supported himbecause if he was responsible for those deaths then he could have beenresponsible for his sons death, Larry Keller, a fighter pilot “Your brother’salive, darling, because if he’s dead, your father killed him.” (All My Sons,pg. 68). Just like Joe, she did not see the full scope of his crime, onlycaring about the family. Joe’s justification and Kate’s ignorance of murder forthe benefit of the family causes the loss of morality to be evident in theKeller household.
The two children of the family, Chris and LarryKeller, have views on morality that contrast those of their parents [2, 99].Once Chris found out about his fathers crimes, he demanded an explanation forhis actions “Then you did it. To the others…you killed twenty-one men…Youkilled them, your murdered them!” (All My Sons, pg. 68,69).
He was disgusted that his father did this, andwhen his father tried to justify it, he was shocked and furious:
For me!-I was dying every day and you werekilling my boys and you did it for me?…You’re not even an animal, no animalkills his own, what are you?…I ought to tear the tongue out of your mouth.”
Chris’ views on morality began the conflict withhis father, but once Larry’s views were revealed, this conflict escalates “Iread about Dad…How could he have done that?…if I had him here now I could killhim…I can’t bear to live any more.“ (All My Sons, pg. 83). Due to hisembarrassment of his father's crime Larry committed suicide. The sons of theKeller family had different views on morality from their parents, holding themto a very high standard. These conflicting views between the parents andchildren resulted in the suicide of Joe Keller. His morals encompassed only hisfamily, therefore when he realized his actions resulted in the death of hisson, he committed suicide not being able to bear the moral crime he committed.This conflict resulted in suicide, making this a tragic theme.
Another theme that branches from morals is honesty.This theme is significant because it involves mostly every character from theplay. One character that is significant is Joe Keller. He lied to all hisfriends, even to parts of his own family, stating that he was not involved withthe production of the faulty cylinder heads. The truth about his crime wasrevealed when his wife did not go on with the lie about being sick during thewar “Well, sure…I meant except for that flu. Well, it slipped my mind, don’tlook at me that way.”(All My Sons, pg. 65). Only when Chris interrogated Joedid he reveal the truth about his crime. He even lied to Herbert after tellinghim he would take the blame for the faulty cylinder heads. When the time cameto admit he was the one that ordered the shipment of the faulty cylinder heads,he denied involvement and resulted in Herbert going to jail. The loss inhonesty spread to other characters. Dr. Jim Bayliss was not fond of Chris, buthe never told him this. It was revealed to the audience because Sue, Jim’swife, told Ann, Chris’s fiancйe “My husband is unhappy with Chris around…Every time he has asession with Chris he feels as though he’s compromising by not giving upeverything for research.”(All My Sons, pg. 44). The neighbours’ dishonesty wasprimarily directed at Joe, believing he was responsible for the faulty cylinderheads, from Sue “Everybody knows Joe pulled a fast one to get out of jail”(AllMy Sons, pg. 45) to Jim “What’d Joe do, tell him?…Don’t be afraid, Kate, I know.I’ve always known.”(All My Sons, pg. 74). This dishonesty encompassed most ofthe characters in the play, making this theme tragic.
Joe is described as a bad character with no senseof morality or honesty, but he once was a good and honest worker and was a veryfriendly person. His flaw is tragic because it turned a good and honest maninto a killer. This is called a “tragic flaw”, present in the tragic hero intragedies. Miller believes that tragedy does not only befall a hero, but thecommon man as well “I believe that the common man is as apt a subject fortragedy in its highest sense as kinds were”i. This belief lead him to createthe tragic man, and with the creation of the tragic man came Joe Keller. He isseen as a polite man through his personality, a man who likes to socialize andkeep everyone on a positive spirit “Without Frank the stars wouldn’t know whento come out…Take it easy, Frank, you’re a married man.”(All My Sons, pg. 28).This is true for the common man and hero as well, who by Aristotle’s definitionhas good and bad characteristics. Joe had bad characteristics as well, whichended up being his tragic flaw. Miller believed the tragic flaw was “the flaw,or crack in the character and was really nothing—and need be nothing—but hisinherent unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to bea challenge to his dignity”i. Joe’s unwillingness to let his company gobankrupt forced him to decide whether his family’s wealth or the lives offighter pilots was more important to him. Unfortunately, he chose wrong, lovinghis family so much he would do anything for them “Chris, I did it for you…Foryou, a business for you!”(All My Sons, pg. 70). This was his tragic flawbecause due to his decision, his son committed suicide, which in turn causedJoe to commit suicide realizing his guilt in the matter “Sure, he was my son.But I think to him they were all my sons. And I guess they were, I guess theywere”(All My Sons, pg. 83). The tragic hero is meant to create sympathy becauseof the lost potential. Due to Joe Keller’s tragic decision with the faultycylinder heads, he went from a polite and friendly man into a disrespected manamong his neighbours and his own family.
Great tragedies have always focused on the tragichero, like Hamlet in “Hamlet”, Macbeth in “Macbeth” and Oedipus in “OedipusRex”. These plays show that focusing the story on the tragic hero is not a badidea, giving good reason why Arthur Miller did this in All My Sons. Miller’spurpose was to bring the beauty of tragedy to modern literature, proving itwasn’t only meant for the upper classes of aristocracy. He succeeded, making amodern tragedy partially based on the form of past Shakespearean masterpieces,leaving the death of the tragic hero towards the end of the play for example.The conflicts between the Keller family and between all the characters broughtup tragic themes. These themes, in conjunction with the plot, made a tragichero out of Joe Keller, or in Miller’s case, a tragic man. This tragic man fitsthe play perfectly with the themes associated with him. All My Sons can beconsidered a modern tragedy because of the creation of the tragic man and howhis actions created several tragic themes. These actions resulted in his death,which occurs to most tragic men and heroes in great tragedies
2.2 E. Heminqway’s “Fiesta” as a new approach to the tragic hero
Ernest Miller Heminqway (July 21, 1899 — July 2, 1961) was an Americanwriter and journalist. He was part of the 1920s expatriate community in Paris,and one of the veterans of World War I later known as «the Lost Generation.»He received the Pulitzer Prize in 1953 for The Old Man and the Sea, and the NobelPrize in Literature in 1954.
Heminqway's distinctive writing style is characterized by economyand understatement, and had a significant influence on the development oftwentieth-century fiction writing. His protagonists are typically stoical menwho exhibit an ideal described as «grace under pressure.» Many of hisworks are now considered classics of American literature.
The Sun Also Rises (Later Fiesta) is the first major novel by ErnestHeminqway.[1]Published in 1926, the plot centers on a group of expatriate Americans inEurope during the 1920s. The book's title, selected by Heminqway (at therecommendation of his publisher) is taken from Ecclesiastes 1:5: «The sunalso ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where hearose.» Heminqway's original title for the work was Fiesta, which was usedin the British, German and Spanish editions of the novel.
The novel explores the lives and values of the so-called «LostGeneration,» chronicling the experiences of Jake Barnes and severalacquaintances on their pilgrimage to Pamplona for the annual fiesta and bullfights. After serving in World War I, Jake is unable to consummate a sexualrelationship with Brett Ashley because of either psychological or physicaldamage that leaves him impotent. However, he is still attracted to and in lovewith her. The story follows Jake and his various companions across France and Spain.Initially, Jake seeks peace away from Brett by taking a fishing trip to Burguete,deep within the Spanish hills, with companion Bill Gorton, another veteran ofthe war. The fiesta in Pamplona is the setting for the eventual meeting of allthe characters, who play out their various desires and anxieties, alongside agreat deal of drinking.
/>Jake Barnes: The narrator of the story,Barnes is an American World War I veteran who suffers from physical injuriesand psychological damage that renders him, which leads him to become unable topursue a sexual relationship with Brett. Having lost direction of his life as aresult of his experiences during the war, Barnes attempts to satisfy himselfthrough hard work, drinking, and bull fights.
Lady Ashley, or Brett: Brett is the object of lust for most of themale characters of the book. Portrayed as elusive and promiscuous, Brett, likeBarnes, also lacks direction in life and finds emptiness in activities that shewould have normally enjoyed during pre-war times. She is engaged to Michael.
Robert Cohn: His status as an outsider as a result of being Jewishhas caused Cohn to develop an inferiority complex. Despite attempts to be civiland courteous, Cohn is the object of scorn from other characters. The novel'splot turns on his attempt to recover a brief affair he had with Brett, leadinghim to tag along with the group of expatriates, much to their collectivevexation.
Michael Campbell, or Mike: A Scottish veteran of the war, Michaelis close friends with Jake and Bill, and engaged to Brett. Though he attemptsto hide his contempt for Cohn, his fiery temper usually manifests itself duringperiods of heavy drinking. Also, he is bankrupt as a result of his excessiveborrowing.
Bill Gorton: An old friend of Barnes, Bill is also a veteran ofthe war and is less cruel than Michael in his attitudes towards Cohn. Despitealso being a heavy drinker, Bill is often more light-hearted than the rest ofhis peers.
Pedro Romero: The star bullfighter of the fiesta, Romero isintroduced to Jake and his friends, falls in love with Brett, and then theysplit up when they recognize her inability to commit to a sustained relationship.His autonomy, steadfastness, and commitment make him a model for Jake, whopossesses none of these qualities even though he aspires to them. Furthermore,the younger Pedro Romero having been born in 1905 represents the younger CivicGeneration, often referred to as the Greatest Generation. This served tofurther demonstrate the Lost Generation's feelings of insecurity anddisillusionment compared to their next-younger Generation./>
The novel has heavy undercurrents of suppressed emotions andburied values. Its weary and aimless expatriates serve as metaphors for society'slost optimism and innocence after the war. The topic of war is rarely discussedexplicitly by any of the characters, but its effects are alluded to through thesexual impotence of Jake and his war wound, and the behavior of the othercharacters, whom Carlos Baker described as «floundering in an emulsion ofennui and alcohol.» The war is also present as the tragedy that affectsthe way characters are able to deal with themselves, and post-war society. Thethemes of the novel are cast against the background of the Biblical quotationthe book opens with: «One generation passeth away, and another generationcometh; but the earth abideth forever»[2]/>.
The Sun Also Rises is considered one of Heminqway's best novelsalongside A Farewell to Arms and For Whom the Bell Tolls.[citation needed] Itis considered ground-breaking in its economic use of language for creatingatmosphere and recording dialogue. Upon its publication, many U.S. criticsdenounced its focus on aimless, promiscuous, and generally licentiouscharacters. On the other hand, it was extremely popular with a young andinternational readership. Since then, the novel has gained general recognitionas a modernist masterpiece.
While most critics tend to take the characters seriously, somehave argued that the novel is satirical in its portrayal of love and romance.It shows Jake and Cohn, the two male protagonists, vying for the affections ofBrett, who is clearly unworthy of the naive praise they heap on her (Cohnopenly, Jake implicitly). This could be true in the sense that all of Heminqway'swriting «pokes fun at» humans, their vulnerabilities and foibles.However, Heminqway is usually considered too dismayed with the human conditionto have been anything but serious, and the situations of his characters sopathetic as to have moved well beyond simple sarcasm.
In The Sun Also Rises, gender issues are dealt with very seriouslyby critics, though there is little consensus among them. Some critics chargethat the depiction of Brett as a 'liberated woman' is intrinsic to herdivisiveness in relationships throughout the novel, and therefore that Heminqwaysaw strong women as causing trouble, particularly for the men who otherwisedominate the novel [21, 156]. The reading of Brett as a 'strong' or 'liberatedwoman' is itself debatable, however, as she seems unable to live outside aheterosexual relationship. Twice divorced, she has a sexual relationship withalmost every man she meets, which suggests a neurotic and necessarilyunsuccessful craving for security rather than independence from men. In thisreading, Brett is as much a victim of the war and its destruction of socialmores as are the male characters. Other critics have argued that Brettsignifies the castration of Jake, meanwhile defenders suggest that Brettactually becomes the main character by being the only person Jake is trulyinterested in. Although the reasons vary significantly from critic to critic,the majority of critical opinion still labels Brett's character as anexpression of misogyny [16, 182].
Another point of criticism is Heminqway's depiction of characterRobert Cohn, a Jewish man who is often the subject of mockery by his peers.Though some critics have interpreted this as anti-Semitism on the part of Heminqway,defenders of the book argue that Cohn is depicted in a sympathetic manner,mocked not due to his religion but due to his failure to serve during World WarI. Interestingly, Heminqway is reported to have said that Cohn was the«hero» of the book, and Harold Loeb, the Jewish writer who served asa model for Cohn, defended Heminqway from charges of anti-Semitism.
Rises Jake Barnes is the character who maintains the typical CodeHero qualities; while Robert Cohn provides the antithesis of a Code Hero.
Jake Barnes, the narrator and main character of The Sun AlsoRises, is left impotent by an ambiguous accident during World War I. Jake'swound is the first of many code hero traits that he features. This physicalwound, however, transcends into an emotional one by preventing Jake from everconsummating his love with Lady Brett Ashley. Emotional suffering can take itstoll on the Code Hero as it did with Jake Barnes. Despite the deep love betweenJake and Lady Brett, Jake is forced to keep the relationship strictly platonicand stand watch as different men float in and out of Lady Ashley's life andbed. No one other than Jake and Brett ever learn the complexity of theirrelationship because Jake's hopeless love for Brett and the agony it entailsare restricted to scenes known to themselves alone. Therefore, Jake suffers insilence because he has learned to trust and rely only upon himself, which isconducive to the Heminqway Code as well. Jake is an American who travels toEurope to satiate his appetite for exotic landscapes and to escape his pain. Jaketries to live his life to the fullest with drinking, partying, and sportingwith friends. With these pastimes, Jake hopes to hide from his fault and get onwith the life he has been made to suffer. Watching and participating in sportshelp accentuate the Code Hero's masculinity and provide the sense of pride Jakehas lost. This gain of pride is essential in the Heminqway Code. Jake attendsfishing trips with friends, he visits Pamplona, Spain to witness the running ofthe bulls, and he acts as a mediator between arguing friends. Thesecharacteristics reveal his strong character built of courage and grace. Jake,as with any Code Hero, is a man of action who spends more time achieving goalsthan talking about them.
Jake's friend, Robert Cohn violates everything a Heminqway CodeHero represents. He is rich, gifted, and skillful and is ready to discuss hisemotions in detail. Robert refuses to admit defeat when Brett rejects himrepeatedly. Unlike Jake, when Cohn is hurt, he insists on complaining toeveryone instead of suffering in silence. Cohn does nothing to assert hismasculinity, either. He allows people, especially women to ridicule him andknock down his self esteem. Cohn obviously can not stand up for himself anddoes not take action when he should. Consequently, Robert has no self control.When a matador sleeps with Brett, whom Cohn is in love with, he takes out hisjealousy by beating him repeatedly. Although a man of action, Jake, thequintessential Heminqway Hero, knows when to control himself, Robert Cohn doesnot.
On the whole, Jake Barnes strictly adheres to the qualities of thetypical Heminqway Code Hero. He relies solely on himself, utilizes his assets,enjoys bullfights and other honorable activities. He is an individual of actionand speaks not of what he believes; rather he just does what he believes to beright subtlety without any fanfare. Jake has lived with disappointment andfrustration all his life, yet he overcomes it and uses the lesson to hisadvantage. On the other hand, Robert Cohn, who has had the easy life is theperpetual loser. He allows people to walk all over him and continually feelssorry for himself. Robert Cohn is the false knight, who, in theory should bethe victorious protagonist but will always turn out to be a shallow person wholives on the fringes of life. In the end, the person who does not possess theCode Hero qualities can never discover himself, and therefore never truly behappy.
2.3 The tragic hero as representation problem in the works E. Heminqwayand Arthur Miller
Tragedyis exceptional suffering in life leading the protagonist to death. The hero suffersfrom a fault, a defect, an imbalance or a flaw leading to his downfall. Thetragic hero may perish and may be destroyed but it is not possible to crush hissoul easily. The novels of Ernest Heminqway fulfill most of these domains oftragedy.
Tragedyusually focuses on figures of stature whose fall implicates others such asfamily, an entire group, or even a whole society and typically the tragicfigure becomes isolated from his group or society. Death, destruction, horror,sufferings are some of the major characteristics of a tragic hero.
The characters of “A Farewell to Arms” are only innocent victims of a war forwhich they are not responsible. They have nothing to do with its plans, slogansor objectives. However, the setting of the novel is the war itself with all itshorrors and outcomes [13, 145]. The escape of the major characters FredricHenry and Catherine Barkley softens to some extent the burdens of this bloodywar. The escape represents a disgust at the failure of western civilization toachieve its objectives.
Thevision of war is one of suffering, and destruction. War represents all thedark, diabolic powers and its quest is monomaniacal. Concerning the philosophyof love and war, one can see that Catherine and Fredric represent love and peace.Their escapism from war with all its vices and darkness softens the agony andburdens of war.
Heminqwayhas a message for mankind that we must seek a world devoid of wars. Life shouldcontinue within its continuum wheel for the welfare of the humanity
Tragedypresents situations that emphasize vulnerability, situations in which bothphysical and spiritual security and comforts are undermined, and in which thecharacters are pressed to the utmost limits – overwhelming odds, demonic forceswithin or without or even both. Against this tragic protagonist are the powerswhether human or divine governed by fate or chance, fortune or accident,necessity or circumstances, or any combination of these elements.
Tragedytestifies to suffering as an enduring, often-inexplicable force in human life.In the suffering of the protagonist there is some human cause. Tragic visionimplies that suffering can call forth human potentialities, it can clarifyhuman capabilities, and that there is a spiritual progress achieved throughthis suffering. In fact, tragedy provides a complex vision of human heroism, ariddle mixed with glory and jest, nobility and irony. Tragedy presents not onlyhuman weakness and liability to suffering, but also its nobility and greatness.It is, therefore, understandable why tragedy does not occur to puppets or topeople with little value.
Accordingto Heminqway, the external forces of the war also doom Fredric Henry in “AFarewell to Arms”, which have left him alone after the death of Catherine. Thephilosophy is that the world breaks everyone impartially, and death falls onthe earth without mercy [13, 158]. However, death in war is violent andcatastrophic and it comes suddenly and unreasonably, it is not like one whodies on his deathbed. Heminqway has been conscious of the doom and of theunavoidable death, yet his works disclose a love for life. The world breakseveryone but those that will not break it kills.
Inthis age few tragedies are written. It has often been held that the lack is dueto a paucity of heroes among us, or else that modern man has had the blooddrawn out of his organs of belief by the skepticism of science, and the heroicattack on life cannot feed on an attitude of reserve and circumspection. Forone reason or another, we are often held to be below tragedy-or tragedy aboveus. The inevitable conclusion is, of course, that the tragic mode is archaic,fit only for the very highly placed, the kings or the kingly, and where thisadmission is not made in so many words it is most often implied.
Ibelieve that the common man is as apt a subject for tragedy in its highestsense as kings were. On the face of it this ought to be obvious in the light ofmodern psychiatry, which bases its analysis upon classic formulations, such asthe Oedipus and Orestes complexes, for instance, which were enacted by royalbeings, but which apply to everyone in similar emotional situations.
Moresimply, when the question of tragedy in art in not at issue, we never hesitateto attribute to the well-placed and the exalted the very same mental processesas the lowly. And finally, if the exaltation of tragic action were truly aproperty of the high-bred character alone, it is inconceivable that the mass Ofmankind should cherish tragedy above all other forms, let alone be capable ofunderstanding it.
Asa general rule, to which there may be exceptions unknown to me, I think thetragic feeling is evoked in us when we are in the presence of a character whois ready to lay down his life, if need be, to secure one thing--his sense ofpersonal dignity. From Orestes to Hamlet, Medea to Macbeth, the underlyingstruggles that of the individual attempting to gain his «rightful»position in his society [17, 187].
Sometimeshe is one who has been displaced from it, sometimes one who seeks to attain itfor the first time, but the fateful wound from which the inevitable eventsspiral is the wound of indignity, and its dominant force is indignation.Tragedy, then, is the consequence of a man's total compulsion to evaluate himselfjustly.
Inthe sense of having been initiated by the hero himself, the tale always revealswhat has been called his tragic flaw," a failing that is not peculiar togrand or elevated characters. Nor is it necessarily a weakness. The flaw, orcrack in the character, is really nothing and need be nothing, but his inherentunwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be achallenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status. Only the passive,only those who accept their lot without active retaliation, are«flawless.» Most of us are in that category. But there are among ustoday, as there always have been, those who act against the scheme of thingsthat degrades them, and in the process of action everything we have acceptedout of fear or insensitivity or ignorance is shaken before us and examined, andfrom this total onslaught by an individual against the seemingly stable cosmossurrounding us from this total examination of the «unchangeable»environmentcomes the terror and the fear that is classically associated withtragedy.
Moreimportant, from this total questioning of what has previously beenunquestioned, we learn [19, 165]. And such a process is not beyond the commonman. In revolutions around the world, these past thirty years, he hasdemonstrated again and again this inner dynamic of all tragedy.
Insistenceupon the rank of the tragic hero, or the so-called nobility of his character,is really but a clinging to the outward forms of tragedy. If rank or nobilityof character was indispensable, then it would follow that the problems of thosewith rank were the particular problems of tragedy. But surely the right of onemonarch to capture the domain from another no longer raises our passions, norare our concepts of justice what they were to the mind of an Elizabethan king.
Thequality in such plays that does shake us, however, derives from the underlyingfear of being displaced, the disaster inherent in being torn away from ourchosen image of what or who we are in this world. Among us today this fear isas strong, and perhaps stronger, than it ever was. In fact, it is the commonman who knows this fear best.
Now,if it is true that tragedy is the consequence of a man's total compulsion toevaluate himself justly, his destruction in the attempt posits a wrong or anevil in his environment. And this is precisely the morality of tragedy and itslesson. The discovery of the moral law, which is what the enlightenment oftragedy consists of, is not the discovery of some abstract or metaphysicalquantity.
Thetragic night is a condition of life, a condition in which the human personalityis able to flower and realize itself. The wrong is the condition whichsuppresses man, perverts the flowing out of his love and creative instinct.Tragedy enlightens and it must, in that it points the heroic finger at theenemy of man's freedom. The thrust for freedom is the quality in tragedy whichexalts. The revolutionary questioning of the stable environment is whatterrifies. In no way is the common man debarred from such thoughts or suchactions.
Seenin this light, our lack of tragedy may be partially accounted for by the turnwhich modern literature has taken toward the purely psychiatric view of life,or the purely sociological. If all our miseries, our indignities, are born andbred within our minds, then all action, let alone the heroic action, isobviously impossible.
Andif society alone is responsible for the cramping of our lives, then theprotagonist must needs be so pure and faultless as to force us to deny hisvalidity as a character [5, 83]. From neither of these views can tragedyderive, simply because neither represents a balanced concept of life. Above allelse, tragedy requires the finest appreciation by the writer of cause andeffect.
Notragedy can therefore come about when its author fears to question absolutelyeverything, when he regards any institution, habit or custom as being eithereverlasting, immutable or inevitable. In the tragic view the need of man towholly realize himself is the only fixed star, and whatever it is that hedgeshis nature and lowers it is ripe for attack and examination. Which is not tosay that tragedy must preach revolution.
TheGreeks could probe the very heavenly origin of their ways and return to confirmthe rightness of laws. And Job could face God in anger, demanding his right andend in submission. But for a moment everything is in suspension, nothing isaccepted, and in this stretching and tearing apart of the cosmos, in the veryaction of so doing, the character gains «size,» the tragic staturewhich is spuriously attached to the royal or the high born in our minds. Thecommonest of men may take on that stature to the extent of his willingness tothrow all he has into the contest, the battle to secure his rightful place inhis world.
Thereis a misconception of tragedy with which I have been struck in review afterreview, and in many conversations with writers and readers alike. It is theidea that tragedy is of necessity allied to pessimism. Even the dictionary saysnothing more about the word than that it means a story with a sad or unhappyending. This impression is so firmly fixed that I almost hesitate to claim thatin truth tragedy implies more optimism in its author than does comedy, and thatits final result ought to be the reinforcement of the onlooker's brightestopinions of the human animal.
For,if it is true to say that in essence the tragic hero is intent upon claiminghis whole due as a personality, and if this struggle must be total and withoutreservation, then it automatically demonstrates the indestructible will of manto achieve his humanity. The possibility of victory must be there in tragedy.Where pathos rules, where pathos is finally derived, a character has fought abattle he could not possibly have won. The pathetic is achieved when theprotagonist is, by virtue of his witlessness, his insensitivity or the very airhe gives off, incapable of grappling with a much superior force. Pathos trulyis the mode for the pessimist. But tragedy requires a nicer balance betweenwhat is possible and what is impossible. And it is curious, although edifying,that the plays we revere, century after century, are the tragedies. In them,and in them alone, lies the belief--optimistic, if you will, in theperfectibility of man. It is time, I think, that we who are without kings, tookup this bright thread of our history and followed it to the only place it canpossible lead in our time--the heart and spirit of the average man.
CONCLUSION
Miller’s style is very simple. He uses simple sentences and wordswhich are easy to understand. He brings out the evil quality of Abigail and theother girls and also the gullibility of the judges. His style is easy tounderstand and should be in order to be successful as a play. While using thesimple style, Miller doesn’t take anything away from the suspense in the plot. Thedialogues of his character are like actual speech. His words are usedeffectively and doesn’t include anything not necessary for making a good play. Manyclever figurative devices are used. For example, Abigail says that John“sweated like a stallion.” The writing is really that memorable since it wasnot really written as prose or poetry. However, certain images as the onepreviously mentioned are hard to forget.
The theme of the story was rising over adversity, and standing forthe truth even to death. This is the theme for many stories and is always anexciting one. John, in the beginning, wanted to keep distant from the trials. Hedid not want to have a part, whether good or bad. When Elizabeth was arrested,he was forced to become part of it [3, 145]. He went to court first to set hiswife free but after watching the proceedings, he saw that the evil was not onlybeing done to his own wife but many others like his wife. As a result, heworked even harder to free the other innocent people, getting himself arrested.
The themes in All My Sons are mainly derived fromthe concept of morals, the laws that man follows through our conscience. One ofthe themes that branches out from this is morality, the principles about humanlife. This theme is evident when related to the Keller family, where a conflictbetween morality and the loss of it takes place. Joe Keller, the father of theKeller family, was responsible for sending out faulty cylinder heads duringWorld War 2, which resulted in the deaths of 21 fighter pilots.
The Sun Also Rises (Later Fiesta) is the first major novel by ErnestHeminqway. The novel explores the lives and values of the so-called «LostGeneration,» chronicling the experiences of Jake Barnes and severalacquaintances on their pilgrimage to Pamplona for the annual fiesta and bullfights. After serving in World War I, Jake is unable to consummate a sexualrelationship with Brett Ashley because of either psychological or physicaldamage that leaves him impotent. However, he is still attracted to and in lovewith her. The story follows Jake and his various companions across France and Spain.Initially, Jake seeks peace away from Brett by taking a fishing trip to Burguete,deep within the Spanish hills, with companion Bill Gorton, another veteran ofthe war. The fiesta in Pamplona is the setting for the eventual meeting of allthe characters, who play out their various desires and anxieties, alongside agreat deal of drinking.

GENERAL CONCLUSION
On the basis of above-stated we came to a conclusion, that thestory reminds its readers of an ugly blemish on human history. It reminds usthat man is not perfect, and that we can make mistakes. However, even withthese mistakes, we can cleanse ourselves and purify ourselves by making what iswrong right. The sufferings become to the sufferer like a crucible.
Miller's plays often depict how families are destroyed by falsevalues. Especially his earliest efforts show his admiration for the classicalGreek dramatists. «When I began to write,» he said in an interview,«one assumed inevitably that one was in the mainstream that began withAeschylus and went through about twenty-five hundred years ofplaywriting.» (from The Cambridge Companion to Arthur Miller, ed. byChristopher Bigsby, 1997)
Great tragedies have always focused on the tragichero, like Hamlet in “Hamlet”, Macbeth in “Macbeth” and Oedipus in “OedipusRex”. These plays show that focusing the story on the tragic hero is not a badidea, giving good reason why Arthur Miller did this in All My Sons. Miller’spurpose was to bring the beauty of tragedy to modern literature, proving itwasn’t only meant for the upper classes of aristocracy. He succeeded, making amodern tragedy partially based on the form of past Shakespearean masterpieces,leaving the death of the tragic hero towards the end of the play for example.The conflicts between the Keller family and between all the characters broughtup tragic themes. These themes, in conjunction with the plot, made a tragichero out of Joe Keller, or in Miller’s case, a tragic man. This tragic man fitsthe play perfectly with the themes associated with him. All My Sons can beconsidered a modern tragedy because of the creation of the tragic man and howhis actions created several tragic themes. These actions resulted in his death,which occurs to most tragic men and heroes in great tragedies

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Auwera J. van der. Pragmatic presupposition: Shared beliefs in atheory of irrefutable meaning // Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 11: Presupposition.N.Y., 2003. P. 249-264.
2.  Bower G.H., Black J.B.,Turner T.J. Scripts in memory for texts // Cognitive Psychology, 2002. Vol. 11.P. 177-220.
3.  Barker L., Barker D.Communication. – New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, 2003. – 480 p.
4.  Bell D. The End ofIdeology. – USA: Free Press, 2000. – 260 p.
5.  Berlin В., Kay P. Basic ColorTerms: Their Universality and Evolution. — Berkeley: The Univ. ofCalifornia Press, 2002. – 178 р.
6.  Beugrande R.A. de,Dressler W.U. Introduction to Text Linguistics. — L., N.Y.:Longman, 2006. – 270 р.
7.  Culture Shock. A Readerin Modern Cultural Anthropology. Ed. by P.K. Bock. N.Y., 1970. 320 p.
8.  Clark H.H., Marshall C.R.Definite Reference and Mutual Knowledge // Elements of Discourse Understanding.Cambridge, etc.: Cambridge University Press, 2001. P. 10-63.
9.  Clark H.H. UsingLanguage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 436 p.
10.Delia J.D.,Grossberg L. Interpretation and Evidence // Western Journal of SpeechCommunication. 1977. Vol. 41. P. 32-42.
11.Fine G.A.Rumours and Gossiping // Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Volume 3. Discourseand Dialogue. Ed. T.A. van Dijk. London: Academic Press, 2005. P. 223-237.
12.Flick U.Social Representations and the Social Construction of Everyday Knowledge:Theoretical and methodological Queries // Social Science Information, 1994.Vol. 33. P. 179-197.
13.Francis G.,Hunston S. Analysing everyday conversation // Advances in Spoken DiscourseAnalysis. London, 1992. P. 123-161.
14.Hirsсh E. D., Jr. CulturalLiteracy. What Every American Needs To Know. N.Y.: Random House, Inc., 2004.254 p.
15.Kotthoff H.The Social Semiotics of Georgian Toast Performances: Oral Genre As CulturalActivity // Journal of Pragmatics. Vol. 24. № 4. P. 353-380.
16.Levy D.M.Communicative goals and strategies: Between discourse and syntax // Syntax andSemantics. Vol. 12: Discourse and Syntax. New York, 2002. P. 183-210.
17.Lewis D.K.Convention: A philosophical study. Cambridge, Massachusets: Harvard UniversityPress, 2002. 214 p.
18.Schiffer S.R.Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. 170 p.
19.Sinclair J.Priorities in discourse analysis // Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis.London; N.Y., 2002. P. 1-34.
20.Smith M.Social situation, social behavior, social group // Psychological Review, 2004.Vol. 52. P. 224-229.
21.Tannen D.Talking Voices. Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2004. 240 p.
22.Weinreich P.The Operationalisation of Identity Theory in Racial and Ethnic Relations //Theories of Race and Ethnic Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2006. – P.299-321.
23.Widdowson H.G.Teaching language as communication. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. –168 p.
24.Wierzbicka A.Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis. — Ann Arbor: Karoma, 2005.- 327 p.
25.Wierzbicka A.A Semantic Metalanguage for the Description and Comparison of IllocutionaryMeanings // Journal of Pragmatics. – Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers,2006. – Vol. 10. – P. 67-107.
26.Wodak R.Disorders of discourse. London and New York: Longman, 1996. 200 p.
27.Wodak R. ThePower of Political Jargon // Language, Power and Ideology: Studies in PoliticalDiscourse / Ed. R. Wodak. – Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co.,2005. – P. 137–164.
28.Wunderlich D.Methodological remarks on speech act theory // Speech act theory andPragmatics. – Dordrecht: D. Reidel publ.co., 2004. – P.291-312.
29.Zadeh L.A.Fuzzy Sets // Information and Control. Vol. 8. 2006. P. 338-353.
30.Ziff P.Semantic analysis. – N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2003. – 155 p.