Literature of Oppression and Freedom: Vaclav Havel and Natan Sharansky Essay

Often times by means ofout world biography, and cave inicularly the hi fib of granting immunity hunting expeditions, the cliche that cargoner imitates art, and that art imitates life shows its face strongly. Two of the leaders of the dissent social movement in the Soviet coalition and its bloc countries/satellites just as easily could be merely characters in a play as well as characters inwardly the world. The ironic thing is that their power derives from the corresponding source literary hero. Icons are created and soundless things whether their figure is symbolic, archetypal or actual.In the cases of Vaclav Havel and Natan Sharansky their work was naturalized through with(predicate) these literary means. Their books, their histories, and their experiences are shared ones, perhaps only overshadowed by their joint successes. Vaclav Havel began his personal movement through a certain default. His history found itself at a crossroads when his educational pursuits were pr make upt at the end of requisite levels. His familys identification with intellectuals was more than enough for the Soviet machine to drive to discourage, by force of rule, further attempts at intelligentsia pursuit.Havel thus was placed into the position of many puppylike idealists when denied something, the object induces much more desirable. This method of subjugation tends to be the downfall of many systems. It is designn often in Western countries that many talented individuals left to their own devices fail to achieve their full potential. My understanding is that if they were forcibly detained from their talents, they would begin to fight by human nature, and unlock more than they were ever able to, or nominate to, accomplish. With Havel, as with others, his power was unleashed subconsciously from his earliest days.Military service to the country, again a rigid compulsory reality, and allowance into an Economics program did not manage to reign in the young Czech. He toss away these and pursued quickly his passion one shared by his family. Humanitarian values and improvement seemed to absorb strongly in the Havel household, and Vaclav was no different and no stranger to this. Following work as a stagehand, he managed to land himself in studies of Drama at Faculty of Theatre of the Academy of Musical Arts, end his academics there by correspondence.The failure of the Czech government to discover and end Havels studies would ultimately countervail their authority over the playwright, and over those who followed his aft(prenominal)wards writing. By 1966, Havel had his first international successes, and brought himself his first attention on the world political stage . It was during this close that one of his most influential works was written and produced 1963s The tend Party. Havel was not hiding his civic tendencies and participated in what he hoped was a revival of the cultures of his home country.He took parts and positions in various mo vements, chief among them the Club of Independent Writers and the Club of Engaged Non Partisans. This did not cause him overwhelming trouble provided, even when he took a job with the non Marxist monthly paper Tvar in 1965. But the rulers did begin to take notice. In 1968, he, and many others of similar mind would pay for their deceit in the cultural revolution and its subsequent Prague Spring. Only 7 years later Havel began his transition from cultural picture to political figure by sending a series of open letters to the political bureaus. superstar of his most important early ones was a missive to then President Husak, a demonstration of his maturement mindfulness of the plight of Czechoslovakian society. This writing directly resulted in the 1977 Charter, which for the first time openly criticized the standards of life in the state. As spokesman, he began the voice of referendum, and it was his previous popularity as author that provided the groundwork for his ability to h it followers. Unfortunately for him, chief among his followers were the censors and police. But his political life was well underway.Anatoly Natan Sharansky, born in Ukraine of the Soviet Union followed a different path to his political life. It is amazing and worthwhile, however, to explore the similarities of life in yet a separate Soviet bloc land. For all intents and purposes, the two could attain grown up together. This uncouth bond, as it would turn out, would provide a common enemy of sorts for them an enemy of freedom and expression. Also ironic is the apparent lapse of judgment on the part of the government that allowed Sharanskys influence to foment, and then to spread.When dissenter Andrei Sakharov was held under state control, it was Sharansky that was allowed to be his English interpreter. Such close work with the alleged revolutionary animate the already impressionable Anatoly to develop his own ideas regarding the freedom of man poop the iron curtain. This time period saw him help found, and then act as spokesman for the Moscow Helsinki Watch Group. As with Havel in Czechoslovakia, 1977 would be the time of divergence from active young man to active international freedom fighter, in a cultural way.At the same time that the Charter was criticizing life under communism, Sharansky was first arrested for treason to the state of the Soviet Union. This initial interrogation and incarceration was based upon his supposed spying activities for the United States, charges that were later proven false, as was the case for many others. Upon conviction, Sharansky was sent to the gulags of Eastern Russia, where he would remain until 1986. When he was ultimately released, one of the first political prisoners to be, he finally realized one of his personal dreams emigration to Israel where he could recover his Jewish heritage.When he arrived and was greeted with a heros welcome, he exchanged his Soviet find Anatoly for the Hebrew Natan, by which he has si nce been known . Havel, too, would switch to escape from behind bars, figuratively speaking. After the 1977 charter, he would find himself unable to publish any of his works which were gaining attention and influence. He was now a de facto politico and had to be stopped. The Czech government attempted to do so by imprisoning him three separate times, placing him behind bars for over 5 years.At the time of his incarceration, he had become the co-founder of the Committee for the Defence of the unjustly Prosecuted, a committee that he could not have foreseen he would need the personal care of. By the second half of the 1980s, as with Sharansky, Havel would finally begin to realize freedoms. Dialogue with the communist governments and the Soviet Union was finally beginning to open up, and Havel took the opportunity to coauthor a petition of A Few Sentences. This would in conclusion be signed by 10,000 Czechoslovaks.Despite a setback in 1989 in which a freedom movement was crushed, Hav el came to his political pinnacle by gaining the presidency of the new Czechoslovakia. Havel and Sharansky have both been immortalized through their writings. We have their collected works and also now their important histories and memoirs and can study their dissent to compare their achievements and experiences. Theirs is the story of many others, and shows the power of literature, composition and political texts to connect oppressed peoples. Havels plays, and especially The Garden Party, and Sharanskys memoir Fear No Evil are powerful representations of this ideal.The Garden Party could not have been better for uniting and informing the masses. As such, it is quite surprising that the play did not simply go away, so to speak that it got into the hands of the public was a serious misstep on the part of the communist government. The play is absolutely a stunning satirical work. It uses humor to attack its target in a sideways fashion, which ultimately is a more successful frontal at tack than pure rhetoric, anyway. Its characters are simple and believable, if not highly stereotypical, and work their wonders in different ways.If no other character is remembered after reading The Garden Party for the first time, it is Hugo that sticks in the mind. All at once he is quaint, obscure from outer consciousness, and independent. Where he begins as an inner focused chess player in the home so inner focused that he plays both sides he grows into his own brutal oppressor. This is great work. We wonder at his childlike manner in playing against himself at the game, only to be shocked when he plays against himself through bureaucratic oppression later on.Most amazing of all is the ease with which he takes both sides in both undertakings. It is a comment at once on deception, and also of childlike qualities of leadership as opposed to mature development. Unfortunately, government cannot be run in this manner with its failure to police itself. beyond its characters, The Ga rden Party relies upon dramatic tools to get its message across. These tools help connect the play to its audience, which must be remembered were the oppressed citizens of the Eastern Empire.In particular the writing in of a theme paranoia underscores the feelings of the time. It becomes obvious that even supporters of the system are discomfited by their work. Even as they work for the bureaucracy, they are always aware(predicate) that they are being watched for their loyalty. They do not know who their enemies may be at any time. By way of example, Huge becomes his own enemy a position that he never becomes truly aware of. Life becomes for him the prevention of danger to his position, the ultimate revelation of paranoia.His ongoing chess metaphor becomes the way of expressing this feeling. alternatively than allowing himself to be open to abuse, he checkmates his way out of trouble, squashing perceived opponents squashing freedoms and liberties and ideals before they can get to him. Sharansky in his life developed similar tactics. He, like many other civil liberties prisoners, had to create methods of dealing with rough realities. Unlike Havels characters in many of his plays, of which The Garden Partys Hugo remains the archetype and easiest to digest, Sharansky understood and faced his danger openly.His methods of using humor to disengage a situation, though, were the same. Both Havel and Sharansky understood and expressed within their lives, their lifeworks, and the awareness that even in their oppressive modes, humankind are humans. Even interrogators can be reached through their own humanity. For all of the things we in the West think we know about the KGB, who were in charge of depriving Sharansky his freedom, we see through Fear No Evil that the secret police still were made up of humans. They were humans that could still be swayed, tempered or delayed through a humorous play.We can more or less hear checkmate come from Sharanskys mouth at tim es, bringing Hugo right into his cell with him. The connections become obvious. We see the power of dissidence through language, whether spoken, read, written or performed. In this way, we see now the connections between Sharansky and Havel. BIBLIOGRAPHY Havel, Vaclav. The Garden Party and Other Plays. New York Grove Press, 1993. Sharansky, Natan. Fear No Evil The Classic Memoir of adept Mans Triumph Over a Police State. New York Random House, 1998. .