Abstract

When approaching a play by Vaclav Havel, a critic or commentator is bound to have certain preconceptions. He knows that Havel is one of the most famous "dissidents" of the Communist regime in Czechoslovakia, that none of his plays has been performed in official theatres there, that he has been harassed and imprisoned several times during the last dozen years. (In 1979—1983 he was incarcerated for four years; in early 1989 he was imprisoned again, after being charged with "incitement".) Despite all tbis (or is it because of it?), his eloquent politico—philosophical essays as well as his plays have been translated into and performed in many languages. Here, critics are bound to argue, we obviously have a literary figure whose life and writings are so closely interwoven with the political situation in his country that we have a ready—made package—deal guide to the interpretation of his works. Journalists, reviewers, and academic commentators have seemed to follow this obvious approach and discussed Havel's writings largely as the direct outcome of what he has been observing in his own society. The "dissident playwright"label has stuck hard and fast to Havel's image. But does it do him justice? In this essay I propose to peel off the label and let the reader decide whether he wishes to stick it back on again after — and if — he or she has read my remarks.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call