Benefits of the Psychology of Personality

Benefits of the Psychology of Personality The psychology of personality enables us to understand ourselves better than it allows us to understand others. Critically evaluate this statement, giving empirical and/or theoretical evidence to support your arguments. According to Kohut (2013), personality is not a clearly defined and measured concept; therefore in order to understand ourselves and other people we have constructed implicit personality theories, through observing others’ behaviour and experiencing social interactions (Maltby, Day Macaskill, 2010). However, it is also clear that individual differences occur, making the study of personality more complex, and one which is highly influenced by and reliant on subjectivity. This produces problems with reliably understanding others, and also raises unexpected questions as to whether studying personality really does allow us to understand ourselves better than other people. Allport (1955), expresses personality as a process of ‘becoming’, unique to each individual and their context, and considers that individual differences are made sense of through comparison with accepted concepts. It would therefore make sense that many theories in personality research base themselves on common sense and rely heavily on intuition, often without explicit knowledge (Heider, 2013). Furthermore, psychological research (within personality psychology and other areas) is often directly influenced by personal experience. Allport also commented that by understanding ourselves and identifying issues which are important to our own experience, we are then able to collect structured knowledge about other people. Empirical research by Chiu, Hong and Dweck (1997) demonstrated that an individual’s understanding of themselves influences their view of the personalities of others, through pattern projection, and that forms implicit personality theories. This suggest s that we have an existing deeper knowledge of ourselves and that as we develop this we also cultivate theories about the behaviour of other people around us which allows us to understand them. If then, understanding ourselves enables a better understanding of others, it is important to consider how personality psychology allows us to understand ourselves better. Firstly, much of the terminology used (such as ‘self-actualisation’ and ‘self-concept’) places emphasis on our knowledge of ourselves and how individual awareness should be strived for, as shown by Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The Need Satisfaction Inventory has been produced in order to operationalise and confirm Maslow’s theory using college students (Lester, 1990); this has provided more grounded evidence for ideas about achieving happiness and potential. Furthermore, the Jungian personality types are based on the concepts of ‘thinking’, ‘feeling’, ‘sensing’ and ‘intuition’ (Jung, 1998), placing emphasis on the internal and subjective, and classifying people using these individual processes. There are elements of psycholo gy which take internal processes to be irrelevant, such as operant and classical conditioning, which rely on genetics and situational factors (Pavlov, 1927; Skinner, 1938). Yet, personality psychology is concerned with what makes people different, and therefore focuses on the internal thoughts and processes which make a person who they are. We are clearly interested in the motives and causes of behaviour and this is one of the main reasons for studying personality (Maltby, Day Macaskill, 2010). Subsequently much research is based entirely on subjective processes as this allows us to understand ourselves better. Ullen, de Manzano, Almeida, Magnusson and Pederson (2012), looked at the phenomenon of ‘flow’ within personality psychology. This involved measuring ‘flow proneness’ using self-report, as flow is a subjective experience which involves enjoyment, low self-awareness and effortless actions when engaging in an activity of interest. The theory is based entirely on subjective experience as flow cannot be measured empirically or be identified by people other than the individual experiencing flow. Due to research such as this, logically it would appear that while undertaking personality research it should be easier to understand ourselves. We have direct information about our history, private behaviours, thoughts and feelings which others do not have, and that we do not have about other people (Vazire Carlson, 2010). However, there are limitations to the amount that we can understand our own personality and internal processes. Wilson (2009) commented on the use of introspection in psychology, stating that it may not be as effective as first thought, as many aspects of ourselves are hidden from conscious awareness, limiting its ability to provide us with self-knowledge. This notion of the unconscious is grounded in psychodynamic psychology and Freudian concepts. Freud considered the unconscious and reasoned that there is much of our thoughts, feelings and internal information about ourselves which is unknown to us. Freud considered consciousness to be a dynamic system, whereby unconscious thoughts manifest themselves in various ways such as dreams and ‘Freudian slips’ (Power, 2000). When understanding a person we put emphasis on their motives, rather than just the observed behaviour, however we cannot pass any judgement on the unconscious (ours or others’) or make generalisatio ns about unconscious processes, as it is beyond our cognition (Jung, 1998). In more recent research, Carlson (2013) provides research suggesting that mindfulness can improve self-knowledge, especially into internal aspects of personality such as thoughts and emotions. Mindfulness, as opposed to introspection, is being more aware of our own internal thoughts and processes without needing immediate explanation and justification- we simply observe our own state. Carlson considers that we can measure both trait and state mindfulness and that this may overcome the barriers of information and ego-defence which can distort our understanding of ourselves. Despite this, it is clear that currently we cannot fully understand ourselves; it has also been explored that this process is intrinsically linked to, rather than preceding, our understanding of others. Heider (2013) explains that as soon as we enter into an interaction with someone else we cannot be analysed and viewed separately from that person and the environment we are in. We respond to what others think of us, or what we perceive to be their views. Vazire and Carlson (2010) go further than behaviour and consider that an individual cannot develop a full understanding of themselves without considering the perspective of people who know them well. Others can see things about our personality and provide insights that we cannot, this is due to blind spots, as we sometimes have too much or too little information or self-presentation motivations which can distort our considerations. We do not view ourselves objectively as others do, which inhibits our understanding of ourselves. Vazir e (2010) produced the Self-Other Knowledge Asymmetry (SOKA) model to illustrate that both the individual and the people close to them have insight into different aspects of their personality. When we consider these ideas when understanding others, on an explicit level it is clear that the only way to find out what people are thinking is to ask them (Baumeister, Vohs Funder, 2007), however this produces a large reliance on self report, and raises methodological issues and problems. The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, or EPQ (Eysenck, Eysenck Barrett, 1975) is used to measure personality using yes/no judgements by individuals on a series of statements. The self report asks questions such as: ‘Do you often wonder about things you should have done or said?’, ‘Do you often feel lonely?’ and ‘Are your feelings easily hurt?’ Considering Vazire and Carlson’s point, people close to the individual may have an insight and may be able to correct with regards to demand characteristics, however behaviour does not always reflect feelings and beliefs, leaving the self report with a large potential for bias. This is partly due to poor pre dictive validity which leads Baumeister, Vohs and Funder (2007) to argue that Social and Personality psychology disciplines are not really measuring behaviour because of their reliance on self report. They explain that there are often discrepancies between what people say they will do and how they actually behave, meaning that observations and direct experiments would be a more reliable way to study behaviour, and that self-report should be used to accompany these to provide deeper understanding. However, psychology is the study of why people do what they do, so this comment could be considered irrelevant if the emphasis of personality psychology is to explain internal processes and understand why people act as they do (Maltby, Day Macaskill, 2010). Adler (1998) would argue that everything happens with conscious intent and that observing behaviour actually gives no insight into what is occurring within an individual. Furthermore, self-reports do not occur in isolation from the envi ronment, therefore situational factors have an influence on the extent to which personality characteristics are displayed, which in turn may affect an individual’s perception of themselves and subsequently their self-report judgements (Ajzen, 2005). Additionally, self-reports are snap judgements which do not give much information into understanding others, yet can be useful for developing models and theories to explain general internal processes and behaviour (Baumeister, Vohs and Funder, 2007). For example, attachment theory relies on past experiences (Bretherton, 1992) and has proved a highly influential model used in many areas of psychology. As a model, it has been reliably based on observation of behaviour and has helped us to understand others, and even to make inferences about personality; however on an individual basis we often do not have the information available to allow us to make direct attribution retrospectively. We need to understand the full context and the goal of the individual and in this way we understand ourselves but not others. Models provide information about general behaviour, yet perhaps they only aid true understanding of ourselves and not others; when it comes down to environment and experience we kn ow ourselves. Subsequently, the use of self-reports in personality psychology poses questions as to the degree to which we are developing an understanding of others. On the contrary, Lounsbury, Levy, Leong and Gibson (2007) conducted a study into the Big Five personality traits and whether they influence sense of identity in an individual. Although a causal relationship could not be established, their research showed that each of the personality traits were related to, and subsequently may influence, identity. In this way, personality research allows us to develop an understanding of others and often inspire further research. The question is simply the degree to which research like this is able to produce understanding; the preceding points have shown that this may not be as strong as we would think. Reanalysis of such studies has shown reliability in self-report measures. McCrae and Costa (1987) showed strong cross-validation for measures of the five factor personality, showing that self-reports can provide us with insight into behaviour and be relied upon in some cases. So, in conclusion, it has become evident that the study of ourselves and others within personality psychology is perhaps more complex than first thought. This essay has raised many issues. Firstly, it is unclear as to how well personality psychology allows us to understand ourselves. On a conscious level it would appear than whilst trying to understand any aspect of personality we develop a clearer understanding of our own, however, research has shown limitations to this (Wilson, 2009; Power, 2000). Overall, it can be seen that we develop a better understanding of ourselves, yet this may not be to a greater extent than others; it may in fact be a joint process of understanding ourselves and understanding those around us (Heider, 2013; Vazire and Carlson, 2010). Alternatively, when we consider how much we are developing a better understanding of others, there are limitations in the use of self-reports, as it is hard to know the degree of understanding we are gaining and whether this i s providing us with a full picture (Ajzen, 2005). Therefore, there are many considerations which make it hard to know the extent of the understanding gained in personality psychology. Perhaps this is also dependent on interpretation of the word ‘understanding’ and the information needed. If a general knowledge of behaviour is adequate, then the models and theories provided by the discipline can help us to understand both ourselves and others to some degree. However, if we seek understanding on a deeper level, we may have to consider that personality psychology may not currently have all the answers needed for deeper insight in ourselves or others.

Pan’s Labyrinth Setting

Setting is one of the vital elements of fiction. A work can only be fully approached if it is first based on its setting, which guides the development of the work. For â€Å"Pan’s labyrinth†, an outstanding cinema work rich in symbols, details and meaning, it is even more essential for us to take the underlying context into serious consideration The external setting of this work consisted of 3 element: time, place and social environment. In 2006, the movie was filmed in a Scots Pine forest situated in the Guadarrama mountain range, Central Spain by the talented Mexican director Guillermo del Toro.The idea for Pan's Labyrinth came from Guillermo del Toro's notebooks, which he says are filled with â€Å"doodles, ideas, drawings and plot bits† which had been kept for twenty years. There are a lot of social factors affecting Del Toro. Firstly, his mind and work are characterised by a strong connection to fairy tales and horror, also he described his political positio n as â€Å"a little too liberal†. Del Toro got the idea of the mythological faun (Pan) from childhood experiences with â€Å"lucid dreaming†: after he waked up, a faun would gradually step out from behind the grandfather's clock.The faun became a mysterious, semi-suspicious relic who gave both the impression of trustworthiness and many signs that warn someone to never confide in him at all. Moreover, by exploring the figure of the god Pan and the symbol of the labyrinth, he tried to â€Å"mix those compelling factors and play with them†. Secondly, â€Å"Pan's Labyrinth† continues a tide of fine movies of Del Toro, illustrating a period after Francisco Franco has come into power. He pointed out that the villains in most of his films are united by the common attribute of authoritarianism.Most people make the villains ugly and nasty but Del Toro realizes that one of the dangers of fascism is that it's very attractive. To him, perfection actually lies in full y loving the defect. Killing somebody can be because of he broke a law, or broke an idea: patriotism, liberty, democracy†¦ In short, the idea behind the act is valued more than the act itself. The Internal Setting of â€Å"Pan’s labyrinth† is related to the 2 parallel storylines: Ofelia's fantasy world against the colorless right angles of the fascist world. For the reality – the facist world, it takes place aroundMay–June 1944, five years after the Spanish Civil War, when Spain was under the authoritarian dictatorship of Francisco Franco. The world war II is about to end. The story happens in a mill on the border of Spain. When the war is raging across the world, women are subordinate to men. The Falangists is winning over the rebels and the rebels have to hide in the forest. It is really a time of suspicion and paranoia: rebel supporters are brutally killed. For the fantasy world, it is seen that the story is closely connected to an old and abandon ed labyrinth and the Underworld Kingdom existing a long time ago.Ofelia, the main character, is a young girl who loves fairy tales. She travels with her pregnant mother Carmen to meet Captain Vidal, her new brutal, facism and cold-blood stepfather and father of Carmen's unborn child. The story is then gradually revealed within the (internal) setting, making viewers immersing completely in appalling scenes with its deep meaning implied. ? A work’s setting has important role as it is the world in which the characters appear, act and expose their emotions. It can be used to evoke a mood or atmosphere that will prepare the reader for what is to come in.In many cases, setting contributes to the overall meaning of a story or affects the characters. It would be a shortcoming if we analyzed a literature work without interpreting its setting and meaning behind, especially for â€Å"Pan’s labyrinth†. In the realistic story, the decisive colors drawing the view of story is old-newspaper yellow and dark grey, which implies the atmosphere of sadness and lurking danger. Not much of Spain outside the mill is referred in the story but the war between political groups here can represent the overall country’s condition.The influence of military is strong and almost encroaching on the natural order of Spain. However, the fascist seem not to belong to this place. They wear steely blue gray uniform, which is unnatural in the forest, while the rebels wear earthy browns connecting to soul of mountain. The fascists' headquarters is lying in a small mill, and surrounded by trees and forest, the rebels' habitat. It states the implication: despite the power of military, the fascists are still the small pocket of dry land in the midst of rising communism, one day they will face to the failure.To further the point on the mill's lack of femininity, it is an indication to us audience that this is not right place for Ofelia. The box shape of it exists only for fun ction, efficiency and work and there is no room to growth and discovery. That this place is not for a child reflects the fact fascism does not fit in Spain. In the parallel story, the fantasy world appears in front of audiences with devastated views. It loses the princess Moanna like Spain is seeking freedom. The Labyrinth is the only place that Ofelia can fully realize her imagination. Moreover, it also reflects reality out there.The structure of Labyrinth is the same as the circulation of destiny. Ofelia comes to the dream world, reunites with the parents, while the rebel defeats the fascist after so much sacrifice, blood and tears. â€Å"Pan’s labyrinth† (internal) setting partly reveals a sorrowful and tragic fairytale. As previously mentioned, the story happened when Spain was under the authoritarian dictatorship of Francisco Franco, in a mill surrounded by mountain and forest and rainy frequently. The film’s darkness overshadows the light, therefore most v iewers can imagine the sorrow from that dreary framework without seeing any minutes of the film.Unlike in other fairy tales where the writers omit events or elements that are deemed too harsh, in Pan’s labyrinth they do not overestimate the violent conflict between the rebel and German army which is leaded by a brutal person Capital Vidal; or the loneliness of the girl between two world, reality and fantasy. To some extent, both of them can reveal a tragic ending. Besides the internal setting, the external setting also discloses some values of the film but in artistic aspect. The author, Guillermo del Toro, has strong obsession of fairy tale and horror.That why he can create details, characters especially fairy ones which contain many symbolic values and compel the audiences to thinking a lot. As a consequence, each time we watch the film, we can always find something new. If we ask why a writer chooses to include certain details in a work, then we are likely to make connecti ons that relate the details to some larger purpose, such as the story's meaning. By analyzing clearly the setting of †Pan's Labyrinth†, viewers, as well as critics, can draw lessons from what Del Toro conveyed

An Analysis of the Dramatic Impact of the Restaurant Scene in Death of a Salesman Essay

Death of a Salesman was first performed in 1949 and was seen to be a powerful and moving piece of drama. I will now be going through the appeal and the impact of the play. First of all, the book of Death of a Salesman can be said to be a universal book, in the sense that it has broad range of themes and is a book for everybody. It has all sorts of aspects, and real life situations that one has to take in mind. Lets first look at the characters. Willy Loman is an insecure and self-deluding travelling salesman. Despite him desperately searching through his past, he is not the typical tragic hero that we have come to depict. He is rather a man who doesn’t achieve self-realization and self-knowledge. He fails to realize his personal failure, and an emotional and spiritual understanding of himself. Willy’s crucial problem is the failure to understand the anguished love that is offered to him. This is the real problem, and tragedy of the play. In the end, he is forced to making the most extreme sacrifice to allow Biff to follow the American Dream. In the end, we remember him by his quote that he made to Charley, â€Å"after all the highways, and the trains, and the appointments, and the years, you’re worth more dead than alive†. Biff Loman essentially wants to seek the truth about himself. While the father and brother alike, are in their self-delusional selves, and are unable to accept the miserable lives that they have, Biff accepts failure and confronts it. Essentially, Biff’s discovery of Willy’s affair drains him of all the faith he had in Willy. Willy sees Biff as an underachiever, and a person that could rise to the top, but Biff on the other hand sees himself trapped in his father’s unrealistic ambitions. Biff’s general identity crisis is a major aspect in the drama. In order to find it, he must expose his father’s delusions. Happy Loman is seen as Willy’s incarnation but with all his worst aspects. He is a difficult character to emphasize. He is a one-dimensional and emotionless character in the play. His empty vow at the end, which says he will â€Å"beat this racket†, is the full embodiment of the lie in which is the American Dream. He has blind ambitions, and is swallowed up by his lies that he is the assistant buyer, when in fact he is just an assistant to the assistant buyer, and is a no body. He is also depicted in this quote, â€Å" My own apartment, a car, and plenty of women, and still, goddamit, I’m lonely†. This idea represents that in fact, Happy has not got such a delightful life, as we have come to conclude, but in fact, he has an inner-emptiness. He feels as though he is a failure, and knows it, just like Willy, but never admits it. Linda Loman is one of the more reasonable characters in the play. She symbolises the need for patience and reason, as well as being the most realistic. She is practically the emotional core of the play. Well, the analysis of these characters should give an idea of what the play portrays. Here is the impact and the appeal, along with the major themes. The play is very much a mix of all sorts of different things, tragedy, social commentary and family drama. The American Dream is one of the most talked about issues in the entire play. Essentially, Willy depicts the American Dream very well. He believes wholeheartedly in what he considers its promise. He believes that a â€Å"well liked† and â€Å"personally attractive† man in business will indubitably possess all the material wealth and possessions that the world has to offer. However, his constant obsession with the vision of a superficial man with the qualities of being well liked and personally attractive is farfetched. Rather, a more understandable man would have depicted the American Dream as being identified as, hard working and positive approaching that leads to success. Eventually it is this very denial of how life works that destroys Willy. He approaches Bernard as a nerd because he studies hard and tries for success. Yet when he finds that Bernard reaches promise and success, and when he looks at his own life, he is left in a disparity, as he realises what a blind and fake kind of vision he lived for. It is actually this very idea that can be very appealing. It teaches a lesson about life, success and failure. How a man, fixed on a blind vision, realises that it is not superficial values that create a successful man, it is the desire to be the best, to want to learn, to strive for success, rather than wait for it. It is this very concept, in which we see a man crumble to a grinding halt. It is actually a truly remarkable aspect, as in it makes you think about life’s goals, and it is the educated people that prosper, not the fake. Another major issue in the play is betrayal. In the play, Willy constantly believes that Biff has betrayed him, in the sense that Biff hasn’t followed his ambitions and dreams that he had for him. Willy believes Biff has to follow his dreams and his path, and the moment Biff tries to reject this, he takes it personally, and says it’s spite. Overall, Willy fails as a salesman, to ultimately, sell the American Dream to his son. Then, Willy assumes that Biff has betrayed him because of his discovery of his affair with The Women. Whereas, Biff, who called Willy â€Å"a phoney little fake† believes Willy, with his unending ego-stroking lies, betrays him. What interests here, is the relationship between father and son. Here we have, a son dying for the truth and being realistic about what and who he is, confronting a father, surrounded by his own self-delusions about the American Dream, and to force it upon his son. This is a very interesting concept, which puts up the idea that Willy has really betrayed Biff, firstly because of his affair, which hurt Biff so much, as he loved his father and mother dearly, and also the fact that Biff is not given the chance to be realistic about himself and his family. I think it is the relations between father and son that are most interesting here. Another issue in the play, that the audience will notice, is abandonment. When Willy is a child, his father, leaving him and Ben alone, abandons him. Ben eventually leaves for Alaska, and Willy is left pondering over his warped vision of the American Dream. Thus, he tries desperately to prove it to his family, and Biff, who Willy loves dearly and has great ambitions for, drops Willy with his dreams when he finds out his betrayal to Linda. Finally, in the restaurant scene, which will be mentioned later, Willy finally believes his American Dream is coming to light, but all his illusions are shattered, and he is left babbling in the washroom. It seems that every abandonment causes great despair over Willy. It actually quite saddens the audience when they see this lonely figure of a man, living up to his fake dreams, to be shattered and let down by those dearest to him. What is interesting, is that how we come about seeing this. His abandonment by his sons can be seen to be his incapability of being realistic about life, and that is one of the main reasons why Biff is uneasy towards Willy. The fact that he is always in unrealistic dreams. So generally, it can be interpreted in different ways. One interesting point I would like to make is that Willy has this tendency to mythologize figures. In the play he has a very important quote, â€Å" And when I saw that, I realized that selling was the greatest career a man could want. Cause what could be more satisfying than to be able to go, at the age of eighty-four, into twenty or thirty different cities, and pick up the phone, and to be remembered and loved and helped by so many different people?† Willy speaks of Dave Singleman here, as a legend and the embodiment of the American Dream. Here is his mistake. His failure to understand his own life, leads to his demise. Willy fails to realise the loneliness, and hopelessness of Singleman’s job. It is that very failure to realise this, that sees both his sons abandon his fake Dream. It is also the fact that he mythologizes Biff and Happy. He is quoted as saying Biff is like Adonis and Happy like Hercules. This is because he believes Biff and Happy to be the absolute embodiment of the American Dream. He sees them as being perfect in every way required, but the reality is extremely different. Moreover, the fact that there includes many different types of symbols also makes you think. It can be said that the rubber hose is an important symbol in itself, as it constantly reminds us of Willy’s desperate attempts to commit suicide. Here, the rubber hose represents the attempts at killing himself with gas, which is, the supplier of his families basic needs. This very idea of inhaling gas is the concept that Willy thinks, is a crucial battle to afford such simple necessities. Diamonds are what I find, extremely puzzling. These diamonds represent two things to Willy. They are, the validation of ones labour, and the ability to pass actual material goods to children. They are both what Willy is craving for. On the other hand however, they are a representation of the discovery of Ben in Alaska, and Willy’s desperate failure as a Salesman. The mistake of Willy, essentially what he feels as well, is that he didn’t go with Ben to Alaska and peruse the American Dream for which he craved so much. Instead, he stayed for what the Dream promised, financial security. So, at the end Ben encourages Willy to enter the Jungle and obtain the diamond, thus, to kill himself for the insurance money to make his life meaningful in at least one sense. So, these ideas were the key concepts of the play. This is exactly what makes it a fantastically interesting and complicated piece of drama. The fact, that so many lessons are learned, so many ideas are played, so many themes and genres are come across. These are what make Death of a Salesman, a truly magnificent piece of writing. It is the fact that it takes the audience into a whole bundle of new ideas and aspects to consider that makes it remarkable. The fact also, that it is set in the 1980’s makes it even more interesting. It depicts the typical nature of the American Dream. Arthur Miller (the author) tries to get the idea across that the American Dream is nothing but an illusion; it is hard working that really matters. Maybe some time ago it was the case, but not now. This idea is clearly implied throughout the book. For example there is Biff’s struggle to get the concept of realism across to his father, there is Happy’s lies and failure, also Bernard’s excellent success, and also Charley’s success even when he was not well liked, and finally, Willy’s failure in life. It is all these ideas that make the play truly astonishing. Now, after describing the play as a whole, I will move on to the restaurant scene, one of the most important scenes in the entire play. It is the climax of the whole Drama. I will first describe the scene then explain and comment on it with quotes. It starts of with the scene in Frank’s Chop House. After Happy meets a particular girl, Miss Forsythe, Biff explains to Happy that he waited six hours to see Bill Oliver, and Oliver didn’t even remember him. He quotes after that, â€Å" I even believed myself that I’d been a salesman for him! And then he gave me one look and- I realized what a ridiculous lie my whole life has been. We’ve been talking in a dream for fifteen years, I was a shipping clerk.† Biff asks where he ever got the idea that he was a salesman for Oliver, he was only a shipping clerk. However, it was Willy’s lies and exaggerations that led him to believe he was a salesman when he actually wasn’t. Then Biff accounts how he stole Bill Oliver’s fountain pen and was disgusted with himself. Happy tells Biff to go tell Willy lies, and say he is thinking about the preposition and then Willy will eventually forget the whole matter. When Willy arrives, he reveals the shocking news, â€Å"I’m not interested in stories about the past or any crap of that kind because the woods are burning, boys, you understand? There’s a big blaze going on all around. I was fired today†. After that he states he needs some good news to go back to Linda with, because he is essentially in disparity, and his life is wrecked. Then everything goes off. Willy says to Biff that he can’t blame him because he is the one who failed math. Young Bernard appears in Willy’s flashback, telling the news to Linda, that Birnbaum flunked Biff. Biff gets completely confused at his father’s crazy statements, and tries to calm him down and explain the truth to him, but it reaches a stage where Willy refuses to listen to Biff’s story. In an absolute frenzy, Willy goes into a state of delirium and has a semi-daydream about the discovery of The Woman in the Boston hotel. Biff backs down, and then desperately starts to lie in an attempt to save his father, â€Å"Oliver talked to his partner about the Florida idea. You listening? He-he talked to his partner, and came to me†¦ I’m going to be all right, you hear? Dad, listen to me, he said it was a question of amount!† Then, when Biff can’t lie anymore, because he is afraid that Willy will get hurt, Willy is insulted by Biff, thinking it is spite and lashes out at his son, he quotes â€Å"You rotten little louse, are you spiting me?† whereas Biff would never do that, because he loves his father and only wants to help him. Then Willy goes off into the washroom and talks to himself. Biff returns to Happy in the Chop House, and accuses Happy of not caring about his father. Essentially Biff reveals the real character that Happy is. Biff tells him in a crucial quote, â€Å" I sense it, you don’t give a goddam about him.† Happy says he should go out with the ladies. Biff leaves in guilt and anguish. Happy claims to the ladies that Willy is not his father, â€Å"he’s just a guy† and then he frantically asks for the bill, Stanley doesn’t respond, so they all leave, and Willy is left babbling in the washroom alone. So, before I get on to the scene with The Woman, I want to explain this. First of all, as Willy has encountered Howard, Bernard and Charley, and has seen their success, his dreams are seriously dented. His illusions and constructed reality is falling apart. Biff wants to essentially leave behind all the lies and fake illusions and start a new beginning, one with his father relating to honesty. Willy, however, wants his sons to aid him in constructing a false truth. One that includes reliving the American Dream for him. Willy takes Biff so far, as to produce a false report of the interview with Bill Oliver and Happy is very willing to accept. When Biff starts to produce a negative report, Happy jumps in with positive remarks to keep the talk going, he quotes, â€Å"Sure pop, sure, he told him my Florida idea†. He comes up with false information about the interview, and here, it is absolutely clear that he has only his own interests in mind, however the damning evidence comes la ter. After a moment of weakness and defeat, Willy’s ultimate fear is lived in the restaurant. He is in an emotional breakdown, and needs Biff and Happy to give him confidence, as he knows he is not liked anymore, and he knows it better than anybody. Eventually we see the state of abandonment as before, when Biff and Happy reject him. Willy’s dream is coming apart, and Happy and Biff have dented it more than any other. For Biff, the experience of finding out the truth about himself and the fact that he is not a salesman for Bill Oliver, makes him even more determined to crack the lies that surround him, at any cost. Willy refuses to hear out Biff because he wants to stay in delusions. He doesn’t want the truth, because he realises how bitter it is, and he knows it. Essentially it can be said that he can’t handle the truth. On top of that Biff doesn’t want to hear Willy’s lies because he is tired of them, he doesn’t want them repeated and repeated. He wants his Dad to realise him. Biff believes, that he must conquer the heavy lies put on him, and realise the truth about his personal degradation. Both Willy and Biff know the differences between the death of a salesman in Singleman and Willy’s own pathetic vision of death. The basis here is that Biff understands that behind the American Dream lies a lonely, and terrible death, one that Singleman himself had. Happy and Linda want Willy to die as he is, in delusions and false truth, but Biff is determined to reach the real truth. Now, this is essentially what is going on in this scene. Biff tries desperately to uncover the lies about himself and Willy, but Willy won’t let him explain. It’s as almost if Willy doesn’t want to hear. Another point to add is that before Biff tries to explain things, we find out he is slightly on alcohol and nervous, and it is essentially because he wants to say he is worthless, a no body, and a bum, something that his father will not accept. Biff tries to explain but Willy won’t let him. This implies Willy is saying, I want to stay in illusions, I’m empty, I don’t want to know the truth. Biff then quotes, ‘His answer was- Dad you’re not letting me tell you what I want you to hear!’ This is very interesting, because Biff is about to tell a half lie, but that’s not what he wants to do, because he wants to get straight. He wants to come out with the truth, and he also loves his father, and doesn’t want to hurt him. With the key line of ‘he’s just a guy’ Happy shows himself as a distorted, thinner image of Willy. However, Willy has a good side to him, his love for his family, and his sense of humour are his good sides. Overall, this scene where we see Biff and Happy, can be said to be the emotional climax of the whole play, as many different ideas and concepts are revealed. Now, I will be describing the scene where Willy is left alone in the rest room, and is in a flashback. When his sons have departed from the Chop House, Willy is left alone in his daydreams and flashbacks about Biff’s visit to Boston. In his daydream he is in a hotel room in Boston with his mistress. After telephoning repeatedly, Biff is knocking on the door. The Woman pesters Willy to go answer. We learn something new about her, as she quotes, â€Å" You know you ruined me, Willy? From now on, whenever you come to the office, I’ll see that you go right through to the buyers. No waiting at my desk any more, Willy. You ruined me.† She doesn’t ‘t actually mean Willy ruined her, but it is just a sort of joke. However, this means, that Willy met her in a buyer’s office and she was presumably, the secretary. Willy is clearly nervous about the surprise visitor, and he orders her to stay in the washroom because it might be a clerk investigating their affair. Willy answers the door and Biff is there. He tells Willy he flunked maths and asks Willy to persuade the teacher, Mr. Birnbaum, to pass him. Then Willy quotes, â€Å"Come on, let’s go downstairs and get you a malted.† Willy is clearly trying to get Biff out of the room quickly. When Biff imitates the maths teacher, The Woman laughs in the bathroom. Willy insists that it is nothing. The Woman suddenly enters the room. Willy quickly pushes her out into the hall way and says that she is a buyer staying in a room next door who needed to shower in Willy’s room, because her room was being painted. Biff then, astonished, sits on his suitcase, crying silently, and not buying his father’s lies at all. Willy says he will go talk to the math teacher, but in tears, Biff says he should forget it. The most harmful blow was when he quoted, â€Å" You-you gave her Mamas stockings!† Then he quotes, â€Å" You fake! You phoney little fake! You fake!† Biff leaves in tears, and Willy is left on the floor quoting, â€Å" I gave you an order! Biff, come back here or I’ll beat you! Come back here! I’ll whip you!† Stanley pulls Willy out of his daydream. Willy is still on his knees yelling and ordering Biff. Stanley pulls him back up, and Willy attempts to tip him, but Stanley sneakily puts it back into Willy’s pocket. Willy asks him frantically where a seed store is, he must plant something, he quotes, and â€Å"Nothing’s planted I don’t have a thing in the ground† So, what did this all mean? Well, Biff discovers the affair of Willy and calls him â€Å"phoney little fake†, so, this means that he suddenly, at that moment, realises what’s beneath Willy’s facade and despises the man behind it. This is what saddens Willy the most, to be exposed in that way. From then on, Willy decides that the reason for Biff rejecting his illusions and the reason for his failure in life is because of what he found out. Of course, in logic, Biff hated Willy for his affair, and therefore hated his ambitions and dreams as well. In this way, Willy mixes up professional with personal. Willy, in his understanding of the American Dream, believes that it has no need for professional success; rather, he thinks that one can derive happiness without these things. Essentially, he thinks success derives from immaterial and ephemeral concepts, of being â€Å"well liked† and having â€Å"personal attractiveness†. Willy believes, that because Biff doesn’t respect him anymore, as a father or person, he automatically rejects the American Dream. However, Willy is correct. This knowledge of the crime that Willy has committed tarnishes any emotional aspects, so therefore Biff rejects the whole idea of the fake American Dream, that Willy is so desperate to sell. Another aspect is the symbol of Linda’s stockings. Earlier in the play, Willy was preoccupied with the state of Linda’s stockings and her mending them. Until the restaurant scene, which is the most climatic scene where Biff tries to uncover all the lies surrounding the Loman household, the only subconscious trace of Willy’s adultery is the complete and utter persistence to throw away Linda’s stockings. These stockings are the ultimate symbol of betrayal and guilt, which overpowers Willy. When Biff then rejects his ambitions for him and the American Dream, his Dream also starts to crack. Willy’s delirious interest in the seed shop and the end reveals a lot about him. At that moment Willy is a failure. He is poor, unemployed and has nothing to give to his sons. He tries to give Stanley a dollar to portray to him at least that he does own something. However, it was a pretty pathetic and feeble attempt. Stanley though doesn’t accept it, because at that time he feels dear to Willy since both sons have left him. In addition, the failure to raise Biff the way he wanted means he has to plant some vegetables at least, to prove his labour and to raise something successfully. The quote at the end, â€Å"Nothing’s planted. I don’t have a thing in the ground†, is implying how Biff was able to break free of his American Dream, and the traditions of his family. Finally, the metaphor represents Willy’s natural preferences to do manual labour, and that being a salesman, was definitely the wrong choice to go with. So, I have come to an end and the only conclusion that I can make of the play, is that it is a fantastically good idea. The themes have an extraordinary range. These include betrayal, the American Dream, material success, commerce, truth vs. lies/fantasy, family, instinct, work, death and ‘dying well’. I’ll end with a quote made by Biff, which summed up Willy very well, â€Å"He had the wrong dreams. All, all wrong.† Background Information: The whole play addresses many painful conflicts regarding the American national values. It offers a post war personal tragedy reading. I think mostly; Miller is concerned with America revolving around the false myth that is based on capitalism and materialism constructed by the post war economy. A type of view, which was held highly by the founders of America. The challenge of the American Dream was very radical at the time of World War II. Radical as it was, many of the artists and philosophers took up the idea of realistic views and personal meaning. At that time this was unusual, and the government didn’t like the idea, they had confusion already in the country. However, many people, even then, had so many conflicts, which included racial and economical, that they couldn’t take up the idea of a social reformation. Many people still kept their ideological interests in hand. However in this day and age, it is obvious that the ideas of people like Arthur Miller have been put into practise, and now, the emphasis is of the American Dream is that it only works if you want to succeed and get to the top by working hard and being positive that you will do well. So, as a final comment, I think that Arthur Miller’s ideas and concepts managed to change the way people think about how society and families work, and what are the values to keep in mind.

You, Jack Kevorkian, Pennsylvania, Your Parents, The...

You, Jack Kevorkian, Pennsylvania, your parents, the government, the church, doctors? Who has the right to make the decision to end one’s life? The controversial topic of euthanasia has been in existence since ca. 460 BC – ca. 370 BC with its origination in the Hippocratic Oath and continues to gain popularity with the advancement in media and technology (Nordqvist). In this paper, we will examine the benefits of voluntary euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and why, in the year 2017 it should be nationally legalized. Euthanasia is a process in which someone takes a deliberate action with the intent of ending a life to relieve intractable (persistent, unstoppable) suffering. Physician-assisted suicide is a form of†¦show more content†¦Refusal of treatment allows for an individual to refuse the recommendations set forth by their physician if they are found to be of sound mind to make that decision. This option does allow for a person to have a say in their medical care and dying process however may not take away their pain and suffering which in turn could affect their overall quality of life. The final legal option is a living will or advance directive. This is an officially binding document drawn up by an individual which allows them the capability to make medical decisions in the event they become incapacitated to do so (Nordqvist). If these alternative means to euthanasia eventually result in death anyway, why then should we force an individual to suffer unnecessarily rather than provide them the choice? Autonomy, or the right to self-govern is one of the major foundations of human rights in the United States and is therefore fundamental in decision-making in health care. It is the leading contributing factor in the legalization of euthanasia in countries such as Belgium, and the Netherlands (Karlsson et al., Dying cancer patients’ own opinions on euthanasia 35). Another important factor to consider in one’s decision to end their own life is how they view its quality. In a study found by Mak and Elwyn, suffering was the top reason for terminally ill patients to want to end their life though PAS (345). She describes suffering as