Omar Azam
Two Cultures Seminar
1993
"Businessmen and Politicians: Where are the honest?"
By the time I finished The Physicists, I was sure that Durrenmatt must somehow have been influenced by Capek; the latter's play, R.U.R., was written in a similar style, and had the same deadpan tone. More importantly, both had apocalyptic endings. Furthermore, both authors seemed to feel that a mass movement, guided by a superman, was the source for change. The only major difference in the plays is the ideological difference of their authors. Capek seems to think that there is hope for mankind, but Durrenmatt thinks that it is just too late.
In R.U.R., not only does armageddon take place, but it is followed by a rebirth of mankind in which the mass laborers acquire feelings and motivation. The robotic creations of Domin are practically human beings, and this intertwining of human and robotic creations is proof that Capek believed that science was a very human thing that could successfully be a part of civilization even through the end of the world. In The Physicists, the outlook is much bleaker. Not only is science more comfortable in a madhouse than in the laboratories of the world, but its foremost genius is a man that has just murdered a nurse! This metaphor for science's perversity goes against most previous "scientist stereotypes." The Physicists also sees science come to a more terrible end; by the end of the play, Mobius, the last bastion of innocent genius, is exploited by the Doktor, who is ready to take over the world. No matter how hard he tries to protect humanity from science and science from authority, he still cannot escape the wrath of Solomon, and of science in general: once you go too far, you have killed yourself. Or in the words of Mobius, "...my wisdom destroyed the fear of God, and when I no longer feared God my wisdom destroyed my wealth." To Durrenmatt, science in itself is a seed of destruction, because once it gets too far advanced, mankind, who is not advanced enough in matters of judgement, will get control of it and misuse it.
Aside from this major disparity, both authors believe in the same means for change, if there is ultimately going to be any. Capek is pretty overt about his communist sympathies; not only does he label the labor class "robots," but he portrays the businessmen quite ruthlessly, in order to convince us of the need for social change through a mass labor movement. The armageddon at the end of R.U.R. is more aptly described as a revolution of the opressed. In The Physicists, Mobius is a Solomon who could be leading the masses in a variety of directions; he could follow Einstein's advice and lead the scientists from a position of workers into independent politicians, or he could lead the masses into a worldwide refutation of the exploitation of science by governments....
Although Capek and Durrenmatt have ideological differences as to the inherent morality of science and its compatibility with humanity, it seems that they are definitely on the same wavelength; they are arguing on the same issues. Perhaps the reason Capek was more optimistic is because he lived 50 years before Durrenmatt, and his play was written 25 years before the bomb. It would be interesting to know if Capek felt the way Durrenmatt did after the bomb made its appearance. Also, by the time The Physicists was written, Russia was no longer the working-class utopia and enigma that it had been in the 1920's; the general bleak outlook of Durrenmatt can be attributed to the spirit of the times in which he was living; one of fear of the cold war, and of the possibility of nuclear war on any given day. In retrospect, these plays can be viewed as criticism of the scientific and political world from the point of view of a Marxist, before and after his disillusionment.
Copyright 2003 Omar Azam