I believe that common people are as apt subjects for tragedy in its highest sense as monarchs are (Miller, 16). While the others who have written their own definition have reserved tragedy for the noble, I like the fact that Miller doesnt feel that tragedy is something too good for the ordinary man. He defines tragic characters as people, who are ready to lay down their lives, if need be, to secure one thing their sense of personal dignity (Miller, 16). Miller also believes that the character is not brought down by a tragic flaw of their own, but rather by a tragic flaw in the environment. Richard Sewall has a defined three-part definition of tragedy. In his essay The Tragic Form he states, [t]ragedy makes certain distinguishable and characteristic affirmations, as well as denials about the cosmos and mans relation to it; the nature of the individual and his relation to himself; the individual in society (Sewall, 166). Sewall says that in a tragedy good and evil are both seen as definite forces in the cosmos. Sewall says that the tragic character is a paradox. Sewall states that the tragic character, is no child of God, but yet feels himself more than a child of earth (Sewall, 169). According to Sewall the tragic man is very defiant to authority. This defiance is a direct result of the tragic characters pride, and is not necessarily a bad thing, according to Sewall. Sewall belives the main thing that sets the tragic man apart from the other characters of a tragedy is suffering. Sewal says that the tragic man would define himself by the statement, I suffer, I will to suffer, I learn by suffering; therefore I am (Sewall 170). And although tragic man is defined by suffering he does not seek out suffering or find it glorious.Lastly Sewall defines tragedy by the tragic character, and his interaction with society. Tragic man has the obvious options that most people pick when faced with a cituation but a tragic man picks a different coarse....
