Ian McEwan's macabre and controversial interpretive novel, 'The Cement Garden,' and inspired domestic tragedy by Ibsen by Arthur Miller, “All My Sons,” both explore in depth the societal and familial demands and expectations placed on men during these eras – 1946 and 1978 respectively. Aristotle's definition of an ideal protagonist is "a man who is not eminently good and just, but whose unhappiness is not caused by vice or depravity, but by error or frailty... [and ] is very famous and successful - a character like Oedipus. »[1]. Subsequently, the corrupt businessman Joe Keller in "All My Sons" and the confused teenager Jack in "The Cement Garden" are identified as the protagonists rather than the other male protagonists (Joe's son, Chris, and Jack's estranged brother Tom). They meet these criteria because of their shared hamartia – a hubristic nature, defined by their basic masculine desires for financial power and success, sexuality and status – which is the catalyst for their downfalls and has a cathartic purging effect on the public. Ultimately, in these two remarkable works of postmodern literature, the characters' prolonged struggle with their own identities comes to a cataclysmic end after the endings. Joe and Jack's identities rest precariously on the fact that they occupy the top of their family hierarchy. Like other men of his era, Joe is expected to not only support his family as a breadwinner, but also his country during times of war; as Miller himself says, "All My Sons is a realistic play depicting the theme that a man must recognize his ethical responsibility to the world outside his home as well as within his own home."[2] Despite this overwhelming pressure for self-inflicted wealth and security, he refuses to take responsibility for the consequences and blames his wife, Kate, for her own actions. In the third act he says, “You wanted money, so I got some.” What should I forgive? You wanted money, didn't you? »[3]. The repetition of the word "money" highlights his main goal, but the cacophonous sound foreshadows the effect his obsession will have and, although perhaps unconsciously, he is aware of it. Furthermore, his poor grammar implies not only that he is rushing into the midst of peak emotional intensity, but also that he is intellectually and socially uneducated, thus broadening the explanation for his desperate attempts at validation. This is reiterated by his rhetorical question and his inability to understand that Kate is covering for him – he lacks the intelligence to recognize the error of his crimes. In his eyes, failure to achieve the goals he has set for himself inevitably means failure as a man; so blaming her is a form of protection, preservation, and a way to keep alive the possibility of the broken American dream. Although his actions may initially appear narcissistic and selfish, it could be argued that his aspirations for himself and his family are his primary motivations. He is willing to tarnish his reputation and live in guilt for the sake of his family. Bosley Crowther expressed agreement with this opinion in response to Edward G. Robinson's portrayal of Joe Keller in the 1948 film adaptation, stating that he presented "a little tough guy who has a softer side...[which is ] tender and considerate in the presence of those he loves.” However, it was not these values ​​that were passed on to his son, but rather his greed. Chris says earlier in the first act: "If I have to look for moneyall day, at least in the evening, I want it beautiful. I want a family, I want children, I want to build something that I can give of myself to. The repetition of "I want" indicates his self-righteous nature, developed from the expectation of being the leader and therefore the most important and it is clear from the errors in the form of the sentences that he too is equally misinformed. Ultimately, Arthur Miller portrays two very similar men and the fact that Chris is in many ways a reflection of his father, suggests that the way Chris is portrayed reveals Joe's often well-hidden true character. The nostalgic nuclear family pastiche constructed by the four siblings in "The Cement Garden" provides insight into the perception of what was considered a desired family unit and the responsibility of men within it in the 1970s. Set approximately three decades after "All My Sons" and at a fundamental stage of social progression, the characters strive to assume stereotypical roles, naively imitating the unrealistic families of films and television shows such as “The Brady Bunch” and “Little House.” in the meadow. Seventeen-year-old Julie takes on the role of housewife while fourteen-year-old Jack becomes the surrogate father who protects his younger siblings, thirteen-year-old Sue and six-year-old Tom, who act like their children . It is this role that becomes its main development objective; reflecting the social psychological structures suggested by Erik Erikson, Jack is at the stage of his maturation where he is questioning who he is and the position he wishes to occupy in society. Due to his patriarchal mentality, he expects that as a father figure he will be the head of the family, but Julie, whose age gives him leverage, initially proves him otherwise. Obviously, unlike "All My Son's", there is a power struggle between the male and female protagonist, but Jack's determination and need to be the "alpha male" ultimately leads to him having power on his three siblings, which they don't like. indicated by Julie who says “he wants to be part of the family, you know, smart big dad. He annoys me.” He only aspires to this result from the opening of the book, underlined first by the pride he feels in walking "in front followed by...[his] father" rather than following as before", and it is apparently this goal that defines Jack's identity. . However, the end of the novel sees his desire to merge his newfound power with infantilization as he assumes the role of submissive while consummating his incestuous relationship with his sister. As Jeannette Baxter points out, “this act of filial desire is formulated in dizzying terms”[4] which suggest her “uncertainty of knowing how to negotiate the trauma”[5]; Jack's description of feeling "weightless, tumbling through space with no feeling of up or down" supports this hypothesis. Additionally, the whistles in this section, such as “soft shudder,” juxtapose sensuality and unsettling ambiance. Combined, these two linguistic features identify Jack as a confused individual who is merely forceful and dominant on the surface. With his "lips around Julie's nipple" he makes himself vulnerable and reverts to sexually twisted infantile behavior and childish lack of awareness, while emancipating her from the pressures of male gender stereotypes. Due to their family status, both protagonists are derogatory and repressive in their actions towards women. Joe is described as "a man among men": he views men only as his equals and his subjugation of women limits them to the domestic arena and community. This treatment was, for the most part, universal, asthis is indicated by the appearance of works such as “Feminine Mystique” by Betty Friedan. So it was something the audience could relate to, which is necessary since tragedy is defined in part as "an imitation of serious action"[6], so it must be something that exists. The abuse is made clear by the fact that Kate continually refers to Joe by name, but he does not reciprocate, and Kate is titled "mother" in the stage directions. They also describe her as “a woman of uncontrollable inspirations and an overwhelming capacity to love.” Using a word in the semantic field of hysteria, "uncontrollable" not only plays into the antediluvian view that women are unstable and inferior, but also suggests that as a woman she should be controlled by her significant other, Joe. The emotional aposiopesis in Keller's "towering outburst" that ends with the menacing phrase "I'd better-" highlights his masculine authority and the way it silences those he denigrates. The depictions of women in the play and in “The Cement Garden” are essential to understanding men, because masculine identities only exist in relation to women. Kate's weaknesses make Joe seem stronger physically and emotionally. He is a “heavy man, of strong mind and constitution”, who accepted the death of his son (unlike his wife). Additionally, Kate's comments throughout the play provide insight into the misogynistic and critical views of Joe, who likely planted the ideas. For example, the way she talks about Ann's appearance, such as "I think her nose has gotten longer" and "You've gained a little weight, haven't you, darling?" suggests that Joe potentially said these things about his own appearance and that she is in fact reflecting them, implying Joe's manipulative and subtly abusive temperament. Applying the same theory, however, would suggest that he also has a nurturing and affectionate side, implied by. the typical term of endearment - "darling", but he is pointedly portrayed otherwise as a proudly oppressive tyrant. Jack's attitude towards female "inferiority" is similar to Joe's, he expects them to be subjugated by his disgust towards his brother; dressing like a girl is recognized by Julie who tells her: “girls can wear jeans, cut their hair and wear shirts and boots because it's good to be a boy, for girls, it's It's like a promotion; a girl is degrading, in your opinion, because secretly you believe that being a girl is degrading. Additionally, his sexual objectification of his sisters and his disregard for everything except their physical attributes is, arguably, how he would perceive women in general. Just five paragraphs into the book, Jack uncomfortably describes that "the skin clung tightly to her [Sue's] rib." cage”, “muscular crest of her buttocks” and “little flower of flesh” and soon “the soft line” of Julie’s mouth. “Little,” “flower,” and “sweet” ostensibly confirm Jack’s assumption that women are innocent and pure. but weak. Defining his sisters using a series of synecdoches gives a sense of depersonalization and reveals his new hyperfocus on the female body; his burgeoning sexuality is a defining characteristic of his character. Ultimately, “The Cement Garden” is an odyssey that. revolves around the development of Jack's identity throughout his arduous rise to manhood and subsequent discovery of his sexuality. Lacking a male role model, Jack fails to pass the phallic stages of development described by Freud and Kohlberg, and as a result he has an Oedipus complex.dangerously radical. The small impact his despotic father had on him was the abuse and manipulation of women: Jack describes how he "knew how to use his pipe on her". His lack of supervision, combined with the resentment he feels towards his father (emphasized by the plosives surrounding his description) is what fuels his need for superiority and therefore the degradation of women. The protagonists' tenacious desire to emulate what they perceive as masculine values ​​leads them to make mistakes (mostly murder and incest) and become anti-heroes. Like the majority of Miller's protagonists, following Aristotelian principles, Joe's hamartia and arrogant nature bring about his demise, but unlike John Proctor, Eddie Carbone, or even Willy Loman, his suicide is a selfish rather than an altruistic martyrdom. It is true to his character that he would rather capitulate to his sins than atone and achieve redemption. Cynically, Joe believes that the masculine values ​​he strives for are unattainable. He will never fulfill the moral responsibilities incumbent upon him, as identified by the biblical reference “a man cannot be Jesus in this world”; which is his justification for abandoning his cause. How can you be something that doesn't exist? Comparing himself to "Jesus" shows that he seeks comfort from a higher power and is somewhat vulnerable, a characteristic he considers undesirable due to its feminine connotations. His name, Keller, is a play on words for "killer", marking him as guilty from the start, despite his continued attempts to hide it. The moment when “a gunshot is heard in the house” marks Joe's disillusionment and it is in fact him who accepts his identity in an extremely sinister way. This moment of anagnorisis would have shocked the audience and would have been a moment of manipulated tension. Miller said: "The audience sat in silence...and gasped when they should have, and I tasted that power...which is to know that, by his invention, a mass of foreigners were publicly stunned”[7]. However, being a tragedy of the common man and the subtle defense of the underdog, it is difficult to look at Joe in such a negative light. Both works evoke a catharsis in the audience and reader, intensified by the somewhat comparable situations the protagonists find themselves in, making their demise all the more unsettling and painful to watch. The falsehood of the concept of masculinity is portrayed: striving to become a strong and respected man has detached Joe from reality and led to a lack of morality; as a result, his identity within society is ironically demeaned, although this is the opposite of his intentions. Just as "All My Sons" created controversy among 1950s audiences with its honest depiction of the futility of the American dream, "The Cement Garden" did so with incest and sexual self-discovery - "the novel deftly inverts traditional coming-of-age narratives” – and Jack's rushed rites of passage prove extremely destructive. In this sense, it is an urbanized adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” by William Golding. Like most young adults, Jack has long yearned to be independent and manly. However, “given this moment of adulthood that they all dream of”[8] too quickly turns out to be traumatic and harmful. He develops such a degree of hegemonic masculinity in the space of a few days that he loses the sense of his own identity, in fact it bifurcates – symbolized in the sentence: "I looked at my own image until she begins to dissociate and paralyze me with her image. look". The pronoun “that” emphasizes his dissatisfaction with himself and his desire to be, 2006)