“I personally think that what the big (writers) have in common is a fierce moral sensibility, which is unquenchable and they are all burning with the same anger at the way the world is.The little ones have made a peace with it, and the bigger ones can't make any peace.”
In this quote by Arthur Miller, he highlights the difference between big writers and little writers. He argues that big writers possess a fierce moral sensibility and are fueled by their anger towards the injustices of the world, while little writers have made peace with the status quo. This analysis delves into the implications of this dichotomy in the literary world and society as a whole.
The statement made by Arthur Miller reflects the idea that great writers are driven by a deep sense of moral outrage and a desire to challenge the status quo. He suggests that this anger propels them to create powerful and impactful works that question societal norms and injustices. This contrast between big and little writers can also be seen as a commentary on the role of literature in society. Great writers, according to Miller, have a responsibility to challenge and critique the world around them, whereas lesser writers may be more inclined to accept things as they are. This quote underscores the idea that art and literature have the power to incite change and provoke thought, especially when driven by a strong moral compass.
In today's society, the words of Arthur Miller still hold true in highlighting the difference between big writers, who cannot make peace with the injustices of the world, and little writers, who have resigned themselves to the status quo. This quote serves as a reminder of the importance of standing up against societal ills and advocating for change.
“I personally think that what the big (writers) have in common is a fierce moral sensibility, which is unquenchable and they are all burning with the same anger at the way the world is. The little ones have made a peace with it, and the bigger ones can't make any peace.”
Arthur Miller suggests that big writers have a fierce moral sensibility and an unquenchable anger at the state of the world, while smaller writers have made peace with it. Consider the following questions to reflect on this idea:
“I slept peacefully that night, feeling exultant and determined. Little did I know that I was making the most common and the most painful mistake women have made all throughout the ages: to naively think that with their love they can change the man they love.”
“Unless and until we have peace deep within us, we can never hope to have peace in the outer world. You and I create the world by the vibrations that we offer to it. If we can invoke peace and then offer it to somebody else, we will see how peace expands from one to two persons, and gradually to the world at large. Peace will come about in the world from the perfection of individuals. If you have peace, I have peace, he has peace, and she has peace, then automatically universal peace will dawn.”
“Ultimately, we have just one moral duty: to reclaim large areas of peace in ourselves, more and more peace, and to reflect it toward others. And the more peace there is in us, the more peace there will also be in our troubled world.”
“If in this hell of a world one can bring a little joy and peace even for a day into the heart of a single person, that much alone is true; this I have learnt after suffering all my life; all else is mere moonshine. . . .”
“Great compassion makes a peaceful heart. A peaceful heart makes a peaceful person. A peaceful person makes a peaceful family. A peaceful family makes a peaceful community. A peaceful community makes a peaceful nation. A peaceful nation makes a peaceful world.”