I will preface this by saying I don't normally read plays, this is only the second time I have done so. That being said I found it to be a little hard to follow as at times multiple vignettes were happening and there wasn't a clear distinction. But I imagine seeing the play would make this very obvious and easier to follow. I also found I would skip over who was talking, again not being used to the play format, and need to go back and clarify. 

I struggled slightly with the language. That simply is the older phrases and grammatical structure that I'm not used to. Included in this is how the characters would talk over each other especially during the instances of multiple vignettes, it became cumbersome. 

But, I did like this story overall. There are some really great "one liners" that just hit you, especially during the last few scenes. The overall message is powerful and reminds one to be true to themselves regardless of expectations. The lies, deception, arrogance and delusions of the Loman family are at times infuriating but I believe that is the point. I have seen many reviews after finishing this that mention not liking Willy Loman and rating the play very low because of it. But I don't think you're supposed to like him. All of the Lomans are flawed and just because he's the MC doesn't mean he has to be liked. He's a sleazeball and one should be able to recognize that and analyze him as someone to avoid being like. 

This being a classic I won't go into it more than that as it has been analyzed and re-analyzed time and time again. 

Overall, a thought-provoking of not slightly cumbersome read. I will plan on watching the play next to experience it again in a different way 🍂 

Here’s the thing: stories written by American authors that challenge the myth of the American Dream often don’t resonate with me, at least not as much as I expect they’re intended to. There’s a cultural disconnect. That fairytale isn’t entrenched in my culture and we don’t really have an equivalent that inspires that same fanatic hope. I haven’t been fed this narrative since birth, I haven’t internalised its message, I have no attachment to it and what it represents. Refutation of a belief I do not hold doesn’t shock me, especially when I find that belief to be, frankly, obvious bullshit. To be fair, Death of a Salesman was written for theatre-going audiences in New York in the 1940s, not some anticapitalist Brit reading the script in book form more than seventy years later.

The titular salesman, Willy Loman, is painfully sympathetic and unsympathetic. He’s a deeply flawed individual who still has value simply by virtue of being human. That’s the idea, at least, but without an actor’s charisma to sell the character, to make me care about him, he’s a little too unpleasant for my liking. Shifting moral standards have no doubt shifted perspectives on Willy. For example, him threatening to beat his kids may have been seen as harsh back in the day but now most people would call that outright abusive. It makes it hard to root for him, though I understand it’s not supposed to be easy to.

Perhaps if I’d seen Death of a Salesman performed instead of reading the script I’d have had a more profound experience. As it stands, I can give a noncommittal shrug and confess it said what Miller wanted it to say but it didn’t speak to me.