Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

Václav Havel: 1936-2011

The former Czech president has died at the age of 75.

The former Czech president has died at the age of 75.

Václav Havel, playwright, dissident and statesman, has died at the age of 75. He led the pro-democracy movement in Czechoslovakia and became the country's first post-communist president in 1989. Havel opposed the break-up of Czechoslovakia and stood from the position in 1992 but he was subsequently elected president of the Czech Republic, a role he held until 2003.

His assistant, Sabina Dancecova, was quoted as saying that Havel died at his weekend house on Sunday morning, and the news was announced on Czech television during an interview with the current prime minister, Petr Necas.

David Cameron said: "Havel devoted his life to the cause of human freedom. For years, communism tried to crush him, and to extinguish his voice. But Havel, the playwright and the dissident, could not be silenced.

"No one of my generation will ever forget those powerful scenes from Wenceslas Square two decades ago. Havel led the Czech people out of tyranny. And he helped bring freedom and democracy to our entire continent.

"Europe owes Vaclav Havel a profound debt. Today his voice has fallen silent. But his example and the cause to which he devoted his life will live on."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she learned "with great dismay" of Havel's death.

"His dedication to freedom and democracy is as unforgotten as his great humanity," Merkel wrote in a message to Czech President Vaclav Klaus. "We Germans also have much to thank him for. Together with you, we mourn the loss of a great European."

13 comments

David Lindsay's picture

Eastern Europe went through, and is largely still going through, a phase of gangster capitalism after the Wall came down. Hardly what those Polish priests and East German pastors had had in mind. But Havel contributed significantly to it.

Far too many of the dissidents went on to flag-wavers for neoconservatism. Havel was one such.

Opposition to Stalinism only proved what they were against, not what they were for. Edward Norman had warned about that all the way back in his Reith Lectures. Richard Nixon took the same view. In many ways, Havel proved their point.

The same was largely true of South Africa. The same was true of Iraq. The same was true of Libya. The same is true of Iran. The same is true of China. The same is true of Syria.

And just how good are Havel's plays, really? I might be wrong, but I suspect a Beyond The Fringe effect here, making anything appear earth-shattering if it is a little bit daring for its time and place, and a bit clever-clever in that well-heeled, male, undergraduate way.

Freeman2's picture

'Havel’s father was a wealthy real estate tycoon, who developed a number of Prague properties.

'One was the Lucerna Palace, “a pleasure palace…of arcades, theatres, cinemas, night-clubs, restaurants, and ballrooms,” according to Frommer’s. It became “a popular spot for the city’s nouveau riche to congregate,” including a young Havel, who, raised in the lap of luxury by a governess and chauffeured around town, “spent his earliest years on the Lucerna’s polished marble floors.”

Then, tragedy struck – at least, from Havel’s point of view. The Reds expropriated Lucerna and the family’s other holdings, and put them to use for the common good, rather than for the purpose of providing the young Havel with more servants.

'Four decades later, Havel, as president –celebrated throughout the West as a champion of intellectual freedom — presided over a mass return of nationalized property, including Lucerna and his family’s other holdings. As a business investment, Havel’s anti-communism proved to be quite profitable.'

Nixon is Lord's picture

Havel as a champagne socialist/Volvo activist? Unlikely-he was actually in prison and in real danger, at several points in his life. Comparing him to those who get arrested as a liturgical act or people who are praised as "courageous" for writing an unpopular article that only makes them more popular with their circle of well-paid pals is repulsive.

anarchteacher's picture

Brutal totalitarian Communist regimes killed over one hundred million of their own citizens in the 20th Century.

The playwright/president Vaclav Havel is to be saluted and remembered for bringing truth and clarity about these sordid facts to the world. While others sat in complacency and blind obedience, he acted to change the world. We are all in his debt.

Statism Kills! I would like to call your attention to a virtually unknown little book, The Lost Literature of Socialism, by George Watson, Fellow in English at St. John's College, Cambridge and editor of the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature.

As the publishers explain on the back of this book: "In this hard-hitting and controversial new book, the author examines the foundation texts of socialism to find out what they really say… and the result is blasphemy against its canon of saints. This study, the first review of socialist literature since 1945, reveals how closely socialism was linked to conservative, racist, and genocidal ideas. As a literary critic the author's concern is to pay a due respect to the works of the founding fathers of socialism, to attend to what they say rather than to what their modern disciples wish they had said. The book forces the reader to abandon long-standing assumptions in political thought, enabling a genuine debate to be revived."

In this brilliant work examining the foundation texts of socialism, Watson provides a powerful indictment of their reactionary, racist and genocidal ideas. There is a direct line from Marx and Engels to Hitler and the Holocaust; to Lenin and Stalin and the liquidation of the Kulaks and the extermination of the Ukrainians; to Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald and Auschwitz, and to Kolyma, Vorkuta and Karaganda.

Lox's picture

@Freeman. So what if Havel's family were wealthy? So what if he returned property back to the people the communists stole it from? He suffered under a totalitarian regime, which is more than you'll ever have to do. Besides someone with his courage and intellectual depth, you appear to be a posturing, wannabe-radical mouthing clichés from a safe distance in an intellectually and politically free society that you affect to despise. Which is, I think, what you are.

john woods's picture

Freeman: You put these comments inverted commas: where did you extract them?

"The Reds expropriated Lucerna and the family’s other holdings, and put them to use for the common good."

Really? Did they? Whose common good? I seem to remember Havel was elected in a free poll, which no Communist govt in history ever was.

And, as someone above says, what's wrong with being wealthy? I am. Fairly.

Sylvia Cooke's picture

Does anyone know if his assistant, Sabine, who was with him when he died, was born in Germany?

swatantra nandanwar's picture

Nothing wrong with being wealthy.
When the Revoltion comes, we'll all have servants.
The trouble with eulogies is that they always go over the top. Same with Havel. Its just that he happenened to be in the right place at the right time.
Czechoslovakia should never have broken up, Havels 2nd term as President was not as good as his first. The trouble is heros of the Republic never know when to give up; the outstay their welcome.
But its good to have a Scholar Statesman from time to time instead of the career politicuan straight from school we seem to be getting these days.

aCzech's picture

For many of us in the Czech Republic Mr. Havel was a person who understood the ordinary people. Though brought up in abundance,he had been hit very hard by the Communist takeover in 1948. And perhaps because of his wealthy origin he was not so greedy as those who came after him.
It is a strange feeling to mourn for a person I have never met personally. But it feels somebody very close has passed away and there remains an empty space after him.

Hugh Markey's picture

We know it's pretty trite but it seems to be a fact of life:
Havel's mum thought he had married beneath him.
Admittedly Havel's mater came from the upper strata of Austro-Hungarian society -an aristocrat - the ones all those waltzes were composed for - but she did marry a property-developer. A wealthy one for all that, but not a blue-blood.
Some Slovakian expat colleagues we worked with did not have a good word to say about Havel when he became president. According to them he turned his presidential guard into a Ruritanian laughing-stock and imported Western Rock Gods instead of re-invigorating the music of Stauss, father and son. And those 'gypsy' violins? Hungarian?
One even had a photo of a bumptious teen Havel sporting a bow tie. This portrait appears to have surfaced in Wikipedia.
Unless one is Mickey Rooney - this was probably early fifties - one should not wear this type of accessory. Makes it easy for the secret police.
By the by, Havel's first wife did well by him. One story which appears to have legs - Havel was prosecuted for anti-communist behaviour and was given some sort of community punishment.
Havel apparently ended up in a furnace-room with several other career furnace-stokers. It's claimed that these other workers shovelled away, allowing the intellectual dissident to concentrate on his writing. There's gratitude for you.

The Hostess with the Mostest

Freeman2's picture

Lox writers, '@Freeman. So what if Havel's family were wealthy? So what if he returned property back to the people the communists stole it from?'

The NS began as a 'socialist' paper Lox. Have you ever asked yourself about the mechanism by which the wealthy get their property?

Mr Danger's picture

Isn't Freeman an odd name for someone who promotes totalitarianism?

Lox's picture

Why don't you tell me, Freeman, how the wealthy get their property? Here's an example-Bill Gates gets rich by inventing something lots of people are prepared to pay for, paying lots of other people to produce it-at a rate less than the value of their work, so that he can make a profit. They make money, he makes money, and consumers get something they're happy to use. So everyone's happy, aren't they?
Of course, the downside is when capitalists corrupt politicians, who then allow them to form cartels and monopolies. You might think the way to prevent that is to give politicians more power-whereas I think the answer is to give them less.
Alternatively, someone gets rich by inheriting money. So what's your problem with that?

Anyway. Havel was persecuted for his opinions by a shower of apparatchiks who had the gall to claim that they represented the people-when the truth is, of course, they were just a group of self-interested cynics and dull witted ideologues. Pretty much like the apparatus of every other totalitarian state, then.

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets