Contents

1. Introduction 2

2. Women in Early Cold War America 3

3. Female Characters in Death of a Salesman 3

3.1 Minor Female Characters and Their Depiction in the Play 4

3.2 Linda Loman 6

3.2.1 Linda as Willy’s Foundation and Support 7

3.2.2 Linda as Willy’s Driving Force 8

3.2.2.1 Linda as an Enabler 9

3.2.2.2 Linda as a Believer in the Myth of the American Dream 13

4. Conclusion 14

5. Works Cited 15

Thelen 2

1. Introduction

Arthur Miller’s 1949 play Death of a Salesman is the playwright’s most critically

acclaimed work. It was adapted on stage numerous times and won both, a Tony Award

and the Pulitzer Prize. It is a modern day classic of Twentieth Century American

Drama. It is consensus amongst literary scholars that Arthur Miller’s play is criticizing

capitalistic models and materialism which have made it appealing to audiences from

then to the present day (McDaniel 22). The inequality in a materialistic society is still a

much discussed topic in our days.

However, the play and also his author have been criticized by scholars for his

depiction of women. Most of the secondary literature that is concerned with the family

structures within the play has focused on Willy Loman’s estranged relationship to his

sons, especially Biff. The role and function of women in contrast, has received

considerable less attention. Feminist writers have accused Miller of reducing women to

mere two-dimensional characters that only serve to help to develop their male

counterparts’ character. Some have implied that Miller himself had sexist tendencies

and that this is the reason that women only have small parts in his play. Others have

argued that Miller only was a man of his time who depicted women the way they were

expected to be by conservative cold war gender politics in the 1940s and 1950s. Miller,

of course, denied any sexist tendencies and pointed out that he created a very

“admirable” character in Linda. However, the other female roles in the play are small

and depict women in as naïve and promiscuous. There are also certain aspects of Linda

Loman that are less “admirable”. This is why it is necessary to analyze those characters

more carefully.

Thelen 3

2. Women in Early Cold War America

Women had been recruited as workforce during the Second World War, but soon

after it ended, “conservative gender politics that would define most of the 1950” drove

them out of the factories and back home (McDaniel 22). They were reduced to

housekeeping, to raise the children and they were expected to support their husbands

unconditionally. They in return had to provide for the family and someone who was not

able to do that was considered a failure. After World War II the American economy

picked up again and created prosperity for a new middle class. Suburbia was created

and the media started preaching that the ideal family had an own house with garden and

a Chevrolet in the driveway. While the mother was preparing meat loaf for dinner, the

two children were playing catch in the front yard and waited for their father to arrive

from a hard day of work at his city office. However, the second wave of feminism in the

sixties and seventies started questioning the gender roles and demanded equality for

women and housewives started questioning their function within a family. However the

sexual revolution was more than a decade away from the time the play was written and

so Linda Loman is depicted as the all supportive always caring housewife, while the

other female characters are presented as sexual objects.

3. Female Characters in Death of a Salesman

Arthur Miller has been accused of “creating sexist texts which demean and reduce

female characters” (Otten 14). Indeed, the fictional world in Death of a Salesman is

dominated by the male characters and the female characters are not as deep as their

male counterparts and they lack dramatic tension. They serve primarily as a means to an

end to sharpen the roles of the male protagonists (Bigsby 147). The minor female

characters are only employed to make us like the protagonists less because of the way

Thelen 4

they treat women. This makes them by definition objects. The exception is Linda who is

also passive most of the time but she also takes action when she feels the need to do so.

Their purpose is clearly defined and “in the world created by the playwright […]

women fit into narratives of personal fulfillment and American success as some version

of either selfless nurturer or sexual object”(McDaniel 23). Such statements seem harsh

when we talk about a play that is generally considered to be one of the great works of

Twentieth Century American literature, but there is too much evidence to completely

deny these accusations. The question is now if this is the expression of Arthur Miller’s

own alleged sexist tendencies, as some have argued, or if his depiction of women is just

mirroring how women were perceived in post war American society.

3.1 Minor Female Characters and Their Depiction in the Play

The minor female characters are represented only as sexual objects. They have few

lines and only little substance. Willy uses his affairs to get the affirmation that he is

well-liked. He obviously treats them poorly as they are only a mean to build his

confidence up. This is apparent in the scene where Biff catches his father in the act. He

throws the Woman out naked into the hall in the middle of the night when Biff appears

at his hotel in Boston. He humiliates the woman, which is even emphasized in the stage

directions (Miller 128). This is evidence for Miller’s usage of the Woman to

characterize Willy. His treatment of her is morally abject but also shows us his

desperation to keep up appearance in front of his son even if it is already too late.

However, the fact, that she is taking the silk stockings as payment for her sexual

services show her in a very poor light. Nevertheless, it should be noted in Miller’s

defense that the stockings are an important symbol in the play, because he promised

those stockings to his wife, which is noted by a heart-broken Biff (Miller 129).

Implying sexist tendencies on the basis of this scene is too far-fetched because Miller

Thelen 5

needs to install the stockings at this point to make ensure the function of the symbolism.

The object-like use of female characters on the other hand is undeniable, because

Happy uses them to make up for his lack of success in the business world and to get

back at more successful colleagues and superiors. While his brother Biff is

compensating his failure through stealing a “carton of basketballs” and Bill Oliver’s

fountain pen, Happy is trying to build up his self esteem through women. However, this

is not working as he finds out himself when he declares he has all he ever wanted –

“[his] own apartment, a car, and plenty of women. And still […], [he is] lonely” (Miller

21). He admits that his affairs are ruining the women he sleeps with when he tells Biff

about Charlotta, who is engaged (Miller, p. 24), but he does not really care. It is clear

that Miller uses Happy’s affairs to show how the materialistic system has corrupted

Happy. When Biff and Happy talk about the girl with whom Happy had sex for the first

time, there is no room for sentimental feeling but instead he calls her a “pig” (Miller

18). At one point Happy declares that he can never get married, because “there is not a

good woman in a thousand” (Miller 110). This is ironic because Happy is not known for

his moral perfection either. This sort of behavior shows that there are double moral

standards applied in the play. Although this statement makes Happy a sexist character

we cannot project this to the whole play, because Miller intentionally presents Happy as

an unlikeable character. Still, women are again only used as a tool to give a male

character more edge.

Nevertheless, there is at least one scene in the play where women are portrayed

in a way that supports claims of sexism in the text. Miss Forsythe, who is described by

the stage direction as lavishly dressed, and Letta are presented as promiscuous and

rather naïve. They are introduced in Act II in the scene when Happy and Biff wait for

their father in the restaurant. Happy chats up Mrs. Forsythe effortlessly and she is easily

Thelen 6

impressed by his lies of him being a successful salesman and his brother being a

professional football player for the New York Giants (Miller 109). Happy talks to her in

a commanding tone and almost orders her to cancel her appointments and to come back

with a friend (Miller 110). The way he is proudly telling his brother to “Watch this!” is

suggesting that he is used to treat women like that and that he is usually successful. Mrs.

Forsythe is accepting his rude and disrespectful behavior and reappears later in the

scene with her friend Letta. The women in this scene are presented as weak and “easy”

because Happy has no problem to make an impression even though he treats them

poorly. The waiter Stanley amplifies this observation by calling the two women

“chippies” (Miller 130). Willy’s opinion of women is not favorable as well when he

tells Biff: “Don’t make any promises. No promises of any kind. Because a girl y’know,

they always believe what you tell ‘em and you’re very young, you’re too young to be

talking seriously to girls” (Miller 27). This characterization of women as naïve and

submissive to the male characters is apparent in Death of a Salesman and cannot be

simply dismissed.

3.2 Linda Loman

Without doubt, Linda Loman is the most prominent female character in the play.

She presents a sharp contrast to the other women in the play and is arguably one of the

most likable characters. She is not represented as a sexual character but as the

“personification of family” (Porter 69). She is about sixty years old and is the heart of

the family. When she speaks to her sons, she is confident and stern, but when she talks

to Willy, she is always very careful not to upset him. She has endless faith in Willy and

hopes that things will work out but in the end it is all in vain. Her constant and

unconditional support and her never ending faith in her husband certainly make her

“admirable” but her character has been harshly criticized by literary critics such as L.

Thelen 7

Bailey McDaniel, who claims Linda “surfaces as a two-dimensional pseudo masochist

who rarely if ever acts out of any interest that does not benefit Willy first and foremost”

(McDaniel 23). However, McBailey also notes that Linda serves a “significant narrative

job” and is one of “the major sources to explain the meaning of Willy’s life” (McDaniel

28).

3.2.1 Linda as Willy Loman’s Foundation and Support

Willy calls her his “foundation and support” (Miller 15) and her son Happy idealizes

her when he tells his brother Biff: “What a woman! They broke the mold when they

made her” (Miller 71). This shows us her special role because instead of being reduced

to a sexual object like the other women in the play, her son sees her as the incarnation of

what a woman has to be. She supports Willy who is a chronic underachiever and is

constantly slipping away in his delusions. When he comes home from another day of

failure in the business world he turns to his wife for support and she selfishly does what

her husband expects from her (Schlueter 297). She tries to keep the family intact which

is not easy after Biff and Willy fell out with each other due to Willy’s infidelity. She

gets little in return, as her efforts are often not appreciated by the male family members.

It seems as if she thinks her only function within the family is to create a surrounding of

love and safety for her husband.

Linda seems to be the most rational character of the Loman family. Contrary to

Willy, she has a clear, less distorted memory of the past. She is the last anchor that is

holding Willy in the real world. This is evident in several scenes in the play. For

example, she has to remind Willy that the car he is driving is a Studebaker and not their

old Chevrolet they had years ago (Miller 15). There is another scene where Willy asks

her about a diamond watch and once again Linda has to remind him that he pawned the

watch more than ten years ago, to pay the bills (Miller 56). All her efforts to keep her

Thelen 8

husband in this world are eventually in vain as drifts away more and more.

She is also the one who tries to keep the family together, after Biff has fallen out

with his father. She tries to reconcile them, because she knows how much that would

mean to Willy. Behind her husband’s back she tries to convince Biff to make amends

with his father and encourages him to restore their once loving relationship. When Biff

calls her from Bill Oliver’s office, she tells him to “be sweet to [Willy] tonight” when

they meet for dinner and that Biff will “save his live” by making a business proposition

to Bill Oliver (Miller 80). However, she most certainly does not know about Willy’s

affairs because she still supports him, although it seems not unlikely if she would stay

with him despite his infidelities. She is never able to blame Willy for his mishaps but

instead, she is always looking for excuses.

The men of the Loman family, especially Willy, fail to appreciate Linda’s

unconditional support and treat her poorly most of the time. Her word is seldom taken

seriously. There are several scenes in the play that show the lack of respect of Willy

towards his wife. She is constantly excluded from conversations by Willy who tells not

to interrupt (Miller 67) or simply ignores her (Miller 73). However, she endures all the

abuse and lack of appreciation and keeps on supporting Willy. This submissive behavior

is a parallel between her and the other female characters, who show similar behavior

when they talk to Happy.

3.2.2 Linda as Willy’s Driving Force

However, it would be one sided to see her only as a victim, because she plays a part

in the steady decay of the Loman family. “She cannot be declared free from

responsibility any more than any other Miller character” (Otten 15), but it is not far-

fetched to assume that few people would have questioned how Linda’s concerns were

represented in the play (Shiach 31). Besides all her support and love for Willy, there is

Thelen 9

also a less positive side of the character. She constantly reminds Willy of his financial

shortcomings and thereby emasculates him. Judging by her actions, this behavior is

unconsciously but still plays an important part in Willy Loman’s downfall and eventual

death. Her unconditional support enables Willy to dwell in his past where he fails to see

his failures and puts the blame for his troubles on others. Linda thinks it is her job to

keep the family intact, to care for her husband and to create a supportive atmosphere at

home. However, Willy measures his success in monetary terms and can only keep on

living when he pursues the American Dream. That is why Linda is, maybe

unconsciously, driving him on and thus enables him to chase the myth of the American

Dream.

3.2.2.1 Linda as an Enabler

Linda is totally aware of the family’s financial situation. She tries to play her part in

leveling their financial deficit with small acts like mending her silk stockings. It is not

much but it shows her awareness perfectly. There is much to be deducted in those few

insignificant seeming lines:

WILLY (noticing her mending). What’s that?

LINDA. Just mending my stockings. They’re so expensive –

WILLY (angrily, taking them from her). I won’t have you mending stockings in

this house! Now throw them out!

(Linda puts the stockings in her pocket)

(Miller 41)

Thelen 10

She does not openly blame Willy for their financial situation because she is aware of

that it is the most important thing for Willy to provide for his family and to make a good

living for them. Her mending is making him angry because it is a sign for his failures in

the business world. He cannot even make enough money for his wife to buy everyday

items like stockings. Willy is an “American father who fails in fulfilling the

requirements of twentieth century American paternal masculinity (Wakefield 27). Linda

knows how fragile her husband is and therefore she does not dare to criticize him and

puts the stockings away so she can mend them secretly. The stockings are a symbol for

Willy’s failure as a provider and as a husband, like it was already mentioned in chapter

2.

Instead of having some sense of self-worth, Willy is obsessed with outer

appearance and especially with being “well liked” and so it is up to Linda to give him

the reassurance he desperately needs. When Willy tells her that people are laughing at

him and that he’s fat Linda assures him that he is the ”handsomest man in the world”

(Miller 39). She always feels the need to build Willy up and tell him things that he

wants to hear. There is an atypical scene where Linda displays this behavior in order to

keep him on course for the American Dream when Ben is visiting them and makes a

business offer to Willy. Instead of Willy, Linda is dominating the discussion and she

will not let him give up on his dream, even if that means his downfall:

WILLY. No wait! Linda, he’s got a proposition for me in Alaska.

LINDA. But you’ve got – (To Ben.) He’s got a beautiful job here.

WILLY. But in Alaska, kid, I could -

LINDA. You’re doing well enough, Willy!

(Miller 91)

Thelen 11

Additionally this scene also shows us, that Linda’s blind support for Willy actually

favors his delusions. Instead of addressing problems, which are undeniably existing she

insists that everything is going great. She manages to convince Willy he is doing just

fine, when he is clearly not. She supports Willy’s dreams and illusions and thus also his

inevitable downfall. Her constant support allows Willy to avoid facing reality.

This culminates in an almost comical scene when Linda treats Willy like a little

child and chaperones him:

LINDA (calling after him as she runs to the kitchen table for a handkerchief).

You got your glasses?

WILLY (feels for them, then comes back in). Yeah, yeah, got my glasses.

LINDA (giving him the handkerchief). And a handkerchief.

LINDA. And your saccharine?

WILLY. Yeah, my saccharine.

LINDA. Be careful on the subway stairs.

(Miller 79)

Willy is able to totally give into his illusions because Linda shields him from reality.

Her behavior is causing the exact opposite of what it is intended to be.

Linda also refuses to blame Willy for his miserable state and vents her anger on

her sons and especially Biff (Miller 132). She is convinced that Biff could save his

father’s live by making up with him. Thus, she cannot understand why Biff is refusing

to help his father. She believes that this is the reason for Willy’s terrible state and

ignores the fact that Willy has been struggling to support his family and to fulfill his

Thelen 12

dreams all his live. The fact that she refuses to acknowledge that Willy is not a saint

makes her also responsible for their fate, as she keeps on driving her husband on

chasing a myth.

3.2.2.2 Linda as a Believer in the Myth of the American Dream

Like Willy, Linda also avoids facing reality and existential problems, although on

another level than her husband. She suppresses the grim fact that her husband has

already attempted and most likely will again attempt suicide. In the very first scene of

the play, Willy arrives at home and tells his wife that he nearly crashed the car again

(Miller 8). Later it becomes clear that Linda knows that Willy has tried to kill himself

several times with his car, but instead of addressing the issue she chooses to ignore this

and blames their mechanic for failing to fix the steering and Willy’s glasses (Miller 8).

She is also not able to talk to him about her discovery of the rubber hose which Willy

hides in the basement (Miller 63). The blocking out of unpleasant facts is a parallel to

Willy’s delusional behavior. While Willy is dwelling in idealized fantasies of his past

she is avoiding all confrontations. McDaniel speculates that Linda could have saved

Willy with a “stern wake-up call” but this is impossible because it would require some

sort of epiphany that could enable her to see the problems like they really are. However,

as Linda believes in the myth of the American Dream just like Willy she is unable to

save him (McDaniel 28). This believe blinds her just like it blinds her husband.

Besides being the showcase model of a 1940s housewife, she is also the

financial manager of the family. She is keeping the “financial accounts that measure

success in the warped vision of the Loman household” (Otten 15) and thus, she

constantly reminds her husband that he is a failure in the business world (Miller 35 and

37). “While Linda expresses unending faith in Willy, she simultaneously measures

success in the materialistic terms of the commercially driven culture” (Otten 15).

Thelen 13

Thaddeus Wakefield even claims that their relationship “is based on the amount of

money Willy makes, and that she determines Willy’s value precisely, down to the last

penny” (Wakefield 28)

At the beginning of the Play, Linda buys American cheese instead of Swiss

cheese which can be interpreted as a symbol for her blind believe in the American Way

(Otten 17). Another clue for her devotion to materialistic values is her believe in well-

advertised products, like their washing machine, which has “the biggest ads of any of

them” (Miller 36). This is a parallel to Willy’s fixation on products which is apparent

when he regrets buying a Hastings refrigerator, because nobody has ever heard of them

(Miller 77). Additionally, she is full of joy when Biff announces his plan to ask Bill

Oliver for money to start a new life in the business world that has already destroyed her

husband and corrupted her other son (Otten 14).

4. Conclusion

The minor female characters in the play serve primarily as a tool to characterize the

male protagonists and as such they are made objects by Arthur Miller. The way they are

being treated by the men is most of the times despicable and rude, but such behavior is

presented as morally abject. Nevertheless, they are represented as naïve and

promiscuous. Contrary to them, Linda Loman presents the perfect example of the

typical housekeeper, but Willy on the other hand fails to do what society expects him to

do. He is unable to support his family and therefore one might expect that this would

create marital tension, but the opposite is the case. Against expectation, Linda supports

Willy until his tragic end. Certainly this seems to be strange behavior to us now but we

have to bear the temporal context of the play in mind. Considering the time in which the

play was written, it is a fitting representation of what society expected women to be.

This does not make Arthur Miller a sexist but some might have wished for more vision

Thelen 14

from a man who openly denunciated the materialistic and conservative tendencies in the

American society of the 1940s. However, we have to ask ourselves if it is desirable to

have only politically correct pieces of art. After all, they are artifacts of their certain

time and age and give evidence for cultural and social progress. We need something to

look back to; otherwise we would not be able to see the way we have come.

Thelen 15

5. Works Cited

Bigsby, C.W.E. A Critical Introduction to Twentieth-Century American Drama. Volume

Two. Williams, Miller, Albee. Cambridge: University Press, 1984.

Hahn, André. Family, Frontier and American Dreams. Darstellung und Kritik

nationaler Mythen im amerikanischen Drama des 20. Jahrhunderts.Trier: WVT,

2008.

McDaniel, L. Bailey. “Domestic Tragedies: The Feminist Dilemma in Arthur Miller’s

‘Death of a Salesman’.” Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman. Ed. Eric J.

Sterling. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2008. 21-32.

Miller, Arthur. Death of a Salesman. Stuttgart: Reclam, 2002.

Otten, Terry. “Linda Loman. ‘Attention must be paid’.” Arthur Miller’s Death of a

Salesman. Ed. Eric J. Sterling. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2008. 11-9.

Porter, Thomas E. “Acres of Diamonds. ‘Death of a Salesman’.” Twentieth Century

American Drama. Ed. Brenda Murphy and Laurie J.C. Cella. London:

Routledge, 2006. 53-75.

Shiach, Don: American Drama. 1900-1990. Cambridge: University Press, 2000.

Wakefield, Thaddeus. The Family in Twentieth-Century American Drama. New York:

Lang, 2003.