I was assigned "The Visit" by the Swiss playwright
Friedrich Durrenmatt in college. It was
written in 1956, with the super-obvious themes of collective versus individual
guilt, and the ability of regular folks to quickly find rationalisations for
doing evil things. FD was looking over
his shoulder at the recent events in Germany and Austria, with hints of
accusation at some Swiss sympathy and collaboration with Nazis.
At least, I thought it was super-obvious even as an
18-year-old in 1971 and my professors agreed.
There was a famous essay at the time which I have never since been able
to track down, illustrating that French writers of the 50’s had strong themes
of victimhood, German writers of guilt, Swiss writers of ambiguity,
etc. It was likely overdrawn, but
examples were given and it was based on something. Durrenmatt was also a member of Olten
Gruppen, a pretty reliably anti-Nazi collection of writers, even if their
opposition to communism was more spotty.
Apparently I missed the memo, as the wikipedia article and
other current writing about the play and its adaptations don’t include
reference to the first theme. It has
become more important to discuss the themes of money corrupting us all and
justice for purchase – both legitimately present – plus women’s rights,
prostitution as a metaphor, and dehumanisation, which are less prominent. Note that the accusations which are commonly
leveled against America are those which have remained.
Let me assure you that if one keeps listing the same dozen
faults of societies as the ones we should be concerned about, neglecting to
mention another dozen which apply to other societies, most of your better
students will have the first set of faults become their mental furniture and be
unable to think of the others unless someone mentions those to them. And think it was their own conclusion. Because…in a way it was, as some of the
lesser students don’t pick this stuff up even when you tell them it will be on
the exam.
Those will then go forward into the world knowing that they
are smart and able to understand things that the proles don’t.
It reminded me of discussions as far back as my childhood
years about how 1984 and Animal Farm were intended as cautionary
tales about what could happen in America and the West under right-wing
governments. More than one person told
me in meaningful tones in 1980 how significant and frighteningly ironic it was
that we were in danger of electing Ronald Reagan to be president when 1984 rolled
in. Heck, I may have residually thought so myself up until that time. Orwell, a
disillusioned but continuing socialist, could not have been clearer that Ingsoc
owed more to soviet socialism than national socialism. No matter. We know where
the real dangers lie. McCarthy just has to be more dangerous than Hiss.
I have mentioned before that something similar is up in our
current understanding of the plays of Ionesco. A director of “The Lesson” at
William and Mary when I was there wanted the professor’s armband to be an
American flag instead of a swastika, and in a 21st C production “the homicidal professor dons a Republican National Committee armband”
A production of "Rhinoceros" in San Francisco -
the straight characters were all reinterpreted as lesbians because...well, because
SF is a very original place where they think of things like that. "Phaedra" as a gay play,
"Othello" as an African-American lesbian, "Hippolytus" as a
play about forbidden love, or even the Bible redone as gay in Terrance
McNally's "Corpus Christi," I'm sorry, I got distracted by the originality
there. Back to Rhinoceros in San Fran:
"The rhinoceroses are dot-commers whose SUV's and cell phones signal the
call of wild greed."
I think I always associated 1984 with the Iron Curtain. There wasn't much of a drumbeat in Houston in the 70s public schools against right-wingers.
ReplyDelete"four legs good, two legs better"
ReplyDelete@ terri. Yes, scary how fast they...we...could change.
ReplyDeleteRemember this one?
ReplyDeleteThank you James. I read it again, with some pain.
ReplyDeleteI remember reading that; perhaps last year. The susceptibility of man to ideology.
ReplyDelete