In one corner,Â Michael Crowley is a study in stoicism as Vanek while Ivan Zizek shows the firmness and barely-contained desperation of Stanek, the writer who knows he has become a success at the expense of his reputation among his peers. But whereas these male characters generally display a typical male reserve, their poker-faces stand in contrast to the more demonstrative, edgy performances on the distaff side of the arena. Sissel Bakken, as Vankova (Havel’s part), bristles at the treatment she gets from her hostess, “Stankova,” (Hanna Bondarewska), who becomes increasingly panicked and paranoid as their conversation proceeds. As Stankova, Bondarewska makes explicit the tortures suffered by those who know what is right but who cannot or will not do it-the price any artist pays when they sell out to the authorities. Bakken meanwhile, is free to reveal the truly conflicted nature of this encounter, and from her we get the strong impression (not even hinted at among the boys) that this was not a free visitation, but was in fact somewhat coerced…To Read More
MD Theatre Guide
November 26, 2013Â byÂ J.D. Star
Before The Ambassador Theaterâ€™s inventive rendition of Vaclav Havelâ€™sÂ Protest even begins, the set transports you to another place and time. CafÃ© tables are scattered around the black box theater, leaving only enough space for the actors to bustle through. A small stein of pilsner and a dish of pretzels and nuts give theater-goers something to sip and nosh as they get their bearings. Moody music pipes in over the speakers as chatter from the audience rises. Before you know it, youâ€™ve arrived. Itâ€™s circa 1978, and youâ€™re about to foment revolution in a coffeehouse in Soviet Prague. Even black-and-whites of Havelâ€”Czech dissident turned presidentâ€”line the wall; smoke-filled air is the only thing missing…To Read More
Two friends sit in a study, sipping brandy. Both are intellectuals; one is a dissident, while the other has become a collaborator. Summarizing the state of television, one of the men laments, â€œNothing but sterility and intrigues.â€ Itâ€™s a fitting description for this production ofÂ Protest, as Ambassador Theater presents an intellectually intriguing â€“ if not emotionally satisfying â€“ take on a modern classic.Â Protest is the final event of the 2013Â Mutual Inspirations Festival, celebrating the life and work of artist-dissident VÃ¡clav Havel, and the final play in â€œHavelâ€™s Trilogy.â€ Featuring Havelâ€™s most lasting contribution to the theater, the partly autobiographical character of Ferdinand VanÄ›k became a national symbol. InProtest, Vanek (Michael Crowley) goes to visit his old friend Stanek (Ivan Zizek) â€“ donâ€™t worry, the similiarity in name is intentional. Where Vanek was recently jailed by the authorities for his political views, former comrade Stanek has reached an accord with the government and found himself a comfortable position writing for television. The two men mirror each other, each viewing the other as an object lesson in might-have-beens. Stanek wants Vanekâ€™s help with a tricky political situation, hoping that his politically active friend will be willing to take all the risks….To Read More
Vaclav Havelâ€™sÂ Protest Tackles the Dangers of Conformity
Ambassador Theater, founded in Washington, DC five years ago to raise cultural awareness and open cultural dialogue on the international level, has brought to the stage an innovative production of Vaclav Havelâ€™sÂ Protest. The production is part of theMutual Inspirations Festival, an annual Czech embassy sponsored exploration of the works of important Czech artists. Havelâ€”a playwright and human rights advocate repeatedly jailed for dissentâ€”was a pivotal force in Czechoslavakiaâ€™s Velvet Revolution and became the Czech Republicâ€™s first president.
Protest, the final play in Havelâ€™s Vanek Trilogy written in the mid 1970s is, like the other short one-acts, semi-autobiographical. Ferdinand Vanek, Havelâ€™s alter ego, has just been released from prison and is summoned to the house of his old friend, Stanek, who once was an idealist but now works for the government as a writer for state television. Stanek boasts about his gardenâ€”he has managed to triple the growth of magnolia trees, since moving inâ€”and presses liquor, peanuts, and a pair of comfortable slippers on Vanek, as if anxious to convert Vanek into a version of himselfâ€”comfortable and well provided for. Stanek wants Vanek to be impressed with his lifestyle or at least approve of the choices heâ€™s made, perhaps even pity him for the kinds of compromises he must make in his job and the kinds of people he must surround himself with. Vanek remains noncommittal, cool, and removed.
Under Gail Humphries Mardirosianâ€™s thoughtful direction, two female characters have been added to the cast, Vankova and Stankova, who mirror the interactions and utter the same lines as the men, often simultaneously. The addition is important. We see a woman in the role of courageous human rights advocate, just released from prison; a women, also, in the role of government collaborator.
Jonathan Rushbrookâ€™s setâ€”two raised platforms at opposite ends of the room, with the audience seated at tables in betweenâ€”helps build a sense of complexity and movement into what might otherwise be a talk-heavy, static play. The four characters switch sides periodically, meet in the middle, and change up into different couplings. Mike Crowley (Vanek) and Sissel Bakken (Vankova) time their lines perfectly, speaking in seamless tandem. Ivan Zizek (Stanek) gracefully matches his lines to Hanna Bondarewskaâ€™s Stankova. All are mesmerizingly convincing.
At opposite ends of the room, Stanek and his female counterpart Stankova question Vanek and Vankova about their current activities. At times it seems they may be informing for the government; Stankova inserts a piece of paper into a typewriter at one point and types up Vankovaâ€™s answers, as a prison official might do. Yet Stanek and Stankova praise their guests as heroic, laud them for carrying out important work, and bemoan the constraints of conformism their own jobs impose.
Well into the play, Stanek/Stankova reveal the true reason they have invited Vanek/Vankova over. Stanek/Stankovaâ€™s daughterâ€™s fiance, a popular musician critical of the government, has been arrested. They have tried through their government connections to get the young man released, without success.
As it turns out, Vanek (and Vankova) have just such a petition already written. Surely their hosts would like to sign it. Stanek (and his female counterpart, Stankova) consider carefully. As they approach the conclusion that they should sign the petition, music (by Jerzy Sapieyevski) swells, triumphant, heroic, resolute. Then begins a ludicrous back-pedaling by Stanek and Stankova, accompanied by a kind of dirge. They twist logic so furiously that their main reason for not signing is that it will look bad for Vanek if they sign; the government will say Vanek forced them into it.
Once they have established themselves as unwilling to sign, news arrives that the musician has been released. Stanek and Stankova smugly conclude that if the petition had gone out, the government would have gotten its back up and would have resisted releasing him. Your kind, they concludeâ€”transforming into agents of repression set on destroying morale and squashing dissentâ€”sometimes do more harm than good.
Without meaning to, Stanek/Stankova have become the oppressorsâ€”not by writing for the government TV station per se, but by being compelled, in conversation with Vanek/Vankova, to defend their own choices and privileges.
Protest is a fascinating study of how, in accommodating oneself to the system and refusing to take personal risks, one can easily become, not simply neutral, but an oppressor, not through ill intent but as a by-product of self-justification. Ultimately, the â€œProtestâ€ of the title is an ironic reference to Stanek/Stankovaâ€™s long-winded and tortuous refusal to sign the petition.
The message is an apt one for any era. As human beings, we are always balancing risk, personal gain, and a commitment to our values. In present-day Washington, with its aggressive war on journalistic leaks, its prosecution of whistleblowers, broad surveillance, and an increasingly militarized response to dissent, Havelâ€™s incisive analysis and unbending example are especially needed.