How Does Miller Use Alfieri in 'A View From the Bridge'?

Sarah Fearns

English Coursework

Post 1914 Drama

How Does Miller Use Alfieri in ‘A View From the Bridge’?

In ‘A View From the Bridge’ Miller uses Alfieri in a great number of ways, sometimes to support the action, to narrate and to add to the literary conventions of the play. For example, to act as the chorus would have throughout a Greek tragedy, which would have been to comment on the action and to fill in minor parts of the play. Alfieri is used for both of these things. He delivers the prologue at the beginning and also appears in the action as the lawyer who observes the events and is therefore able to tell us the story afterwards.

The story line relates to this idea of a Greek tragedy, Eddie is seen as the protagonist hero, an essential role in traditional Greek tragedy. This character would undergo an ordeal that would give some kind of religious message to the audience, in this case, the message we receive is not religious but it does convey the social realism of the ‘laws’ of society that Miller was keen to get across.

Miller was extremely interested in the theme of people as social beings, and the decline of one man in a society of law, justice, honour, and love, all of which eventually contribute to Eddie’s downfall. The laws and rules of society are clearly set out and what Miller is trying to show, is that when just one person breaks one of the unwritten laws, it can result in devastating consequences. His interest in this goes beyond ‘A View from the Bridge’. The downfall of an entire society is shown in another play by Miller ‘The Crucible’, in which he shows how a society crumbles under suspicion and distrust when just a few people lie to each other.

The fact that this theme is used in another of Miller plays shows not only his interest in it but also that the issues involved are universal. This is known as an eternal drama. This, once more, links with the Greek tragedies, the idea of which were to allow its audiences to gain messages or morals from. We are told that “...another lawyer, quite differently dressed, heard the same complaint and sat there as powerless as I, and watched it run its bloody course.” This tells the audience that the issues could affect anyone anywhere. Perhaps not exactly, but someone as desperate as Eddie Carbone could lose control of a situation and, subsequently, lose everything.

Fate is greatly involved in the play as well. We are told that Alfieri is powerless to stop the course of events even though quite early on Alfieri tells the audience “I knew, I knew then and there – I could have finished the whole story that afternoon.” At this point the audience know that something drastic will happen and that it will be uncontrollable. This idea of fate also brings us back to the literary convention of Greek tragedy, that the Gods were in power and there was nothing anybody could do to change fate. Also it enables Alfieri ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Fate is greatly involved in the play as well. We are told that Alfieri is powerless to stop the course of events even though quite early on Alfieri tells the audience “I knew, I knew then and there – I could have finished the whole story that afternoon.” At this point the audience know that something drastic will happen and that it will be uncontrollable. This idea of fate also brings us back to the literary convention of Greek tragedy, that the Gods were in power and there was nothing anybody could do to change fate. Also it enables Alfieri to act as the chorus would have in Greek tragedy, able to comment on the action, however unable to prevent the action taking place. It runs “...its bloody course”.

In my opinion one of the most important themes to run throughout the play is that of law, justice, their differences, and the relevance of understanding the difference. The dramatic ending of the play is based upon the justice that both Eddie and Marco feel they deserve. Eddie feels that Marco has robbed him of his name and Marco feels that Eddie owes him for ‘murdering’ his children by reporting the cousins to the Immigration Bureau. Of course, as a lawyer born in Italy we know that Alfieri can understand both points of view but also must uphold the law of the land. In one scene, Alfieri speaks to Marco, Rodolfo and Catherine about releasing Marco on bail providing that he promises not to kill Eddie. Marco reluctantly agrees, however, when Alfieri releases him, he already knows that Marco will break his promise as he is a man of honour and will not allow Eddie to take that away from him. Alfieri is aware of this, but understands justice in such a way that he knows he cannot stop what will happen. This also relates back to the theme of fate. The circumstances towards the end of the play are such that it only makes sense for Eddie to die, otherwise justice has not been served. It would not work if Marco had died in the fight as the audience know that Eddie lost his name rightfully. Marco was right to blame Eddie for turning them in to Immigration even if Eddie did do it for what he thought were the right reasons.

Miller gives Alfieri an important part of the action. Without this the audience does not understand how Alfieri came to know what happened. If the audience question how Alfieri knows the story, they will question whether or not their trust in him is valid and it is important for them not to do this as we then lose a voice of reason as well as a trustworthy account of events. He acts as the voice of reason both to Eddie and Marco. To Eddie, he tries to talk about letting Catherine go and giving her his blessing as he knows that if he doesn’t, Eddie will lose everything. Likewise, he says to Marco that he must promise not to kill Eddie. Alfieri knows that there is much at stake for Marco and tries to reason with him. This highlights particularly the similarities between Eddie and Marco, both of whom ignore Alfieri’s reasoning and question him on the subject of law and justice.

Possibly the most significant part of the play, especially in reference to Alfieri, is the prologue. At this point, the audience are told what happens in the play before it even begins. This was used in Greek tragedy and upholds the literary conventions used by Miller. In this case, we are told that “…to meet a lawyer or a priest on the street is unlucky. We’re only thought of in connection with disasters.” It is the reference to ‘disasters’ which immediately tells the audience that something disastrous will happen and this causes tension throughout the play as we are always waiting for the disaster to happen. In Alfieri’s monologue we are also introduced to some of the main themes of the play, particularly, the differences between justice and law, something that is important to the entire play. Here, we are introduced to the significant fact that Alfieri was born in Italy and so can sympathise with Eddie and Marco’s need to uphold their honour and ensure that justice is done. Without this explanation we would not understand Alfieri’s reasons for admiring Eddie. After his death, Alfieri tells us that “I will love him more than all my sensible clients”, this is because Eddie would not “settle for half”, meaning that he lived honestly to himself and tried to maintain his idea of justice to the very end.

Alfieri is also used in a number of ways to create tension in scenes. Miller’s language use in his opening monologue ‘bloody course’ indicates the violent and vengeful characteristics of the Sicilian community and raises the expectations of the audience. Tension is also created by Alfieri’s description of Red Hook, “…the gullet of New York swallowing the tonnage of the world.” The tonnage refers to the immigrants that flocked to America in huge numbers in search of the ‘American Dream’, however, it implies that they are ‘swallowed up’ and therefore, their new life of work and money is not successful. Referring to Red Hook as the ‘gullet’ of New York is also very negative and so the audience have immediate knowledge that the community is unpleasant. Miller also creates tension in Alfieri’s conversation with Eddie. The audience know that both characters have something important to say, but keep cutting each other off. It is a struggle between both characters to get their point across to the other, each man thinking that he knows best. Alfieri trying to convince Eddie to step aside and do the right thing strongly conflicts with Eddie’s certainty that he is doing the right thing by ‘protecting’ his niece from Rodolfo.

It is imperative that we trust Alfieri’s character as he will guide us through the play and affect our judgement. As a respected lawyer who speaks seemingly detached from emotion, we trust that he is telling us the truth, also, as he does not judge Eddie too harshly, we do not either. Alfieri’s language remains presumably detached from emotion throughout the entire play with the exception of one scene of action. This is where Eddie makes up his mind that he is going to call the Immigration Bureau. Alfieri calls after him desperately and when written down, we can see that exclamation marks are used in his speech for the first time, showing a certain amount of emotion.

As most of what Alfieri says is fact, when he gives us his opinion we automatically trust it. Personally, I think that Miller does this intentionally in order to allow us to see past certain facts. If we look at Eddie’s character unaided by Alfieri’s opinion of him, we may judge him too quickly and feel, perhaps, that his death is less tragic. This defeats the intention of the play as we must notice the realism of the tragedy instead of developing the ‘he had it coming’ perspective.

Alfieri is used often in the play as the narrator. Miller tells the story as a flashback of Alfieri’s, using a cinematic device. This highlights the fact that these events have already happened and, therefore, cannot be prevented. This relates back to the theme of fate and the idea of a Greek tragedy. The role of the narrator is to guide us through the play, informing us of the time period and of important events. For example, at the very beginning of act two, Miller uses Alfieri to inform us that there has been a leap in time “On the twenty-third of that December”, and also tells us that Catherine and Rodolfo are alone together in the house for the first time. This especially creates tension as Miller also hints that Eddie will be drunk. These events combined instantaneously tell the audience that there will be major developments in the play which we later discover to be catastrophic.

Alfieri has a constant dramatic presence. The play is entitled ‘A View from the Bridge’ due to it being Alfieri’s view of the events and subsequently Alfieri never leaves the stage. The purpose of this is so that we are given an outsider’s version of events as opposed to someone involved in the story who could not be impartial. If we were to be given Catherine’s story or Marco’s or any other character’s, the play would take on a different meaning and we would lose our knowledge of law and justice. It is imperative that we understand the two or we will not understand why the events happen in such a way. Although some stage directions have him walking away into darkness, we never hear of him leaving and so he is always close by. This combined with his act of narrator and chorus contribute towards him being almost our companion whilst we move through the play, especially as he addresses us, as the audience, directly.

In conclusion, Miller uses Alfieri in a number of different ways. As chorus, narrator, character in action, dramatic device, and to uphold many of the plays themes. Alfieri is a key character and without his input, it is impossible to identify with the themes and to appreciate the relevance of the play and the fate of its protagonist. It is through this, that we understand and judge the play correctly, empathise with the characters and gain the intended emotions from witnessing the struggle and pain caused when someone breaks the unwritten laws of society.