🔗 Share this article

All the finest dramatists broaden the limits of drama. Samuel Beckett and Harold Pinter succeeded in their own manner. The feat of Tom Stoppard was to take seemingly esoteric themes – ranging from chaos theory to moral philosophy and the mystery of the mind – and turn them into humorous, creative and often emotional plays. Drama, Laurence Olivier noted, is a great glamoriser of ideas. Stoppard affirmed that with his talent to bring concepts to life.

Early Introduction

I had the good fortune to discover Stoppard early on. That was completely thanks to Philip French, who, aside from being a film critic, was also a British Broadcasting Corporation producer. In 1966 he requested that I to give a mini-speech on two radio plays by a back then little-known writer described as Tom Stoppard. In Dominic Boot's Dissolution, an broke writer racked up an constantly rising taxi bill. And in Glad I'll Be Frank, a bus operator tried to reach his wife who was the time announcement service. I was impressed by the cleverness of both plays and had the chance to meet their young author.

It says much for Stoppard’s grace of spirit that even after I had gone on television in 1968 and given a critical first-night review of Real Inspector Hound – which I currently admire – he stayed exceptionally gracious. But one thing people forget about Stoppard is that, as an former journalist himself, he understood the nature of the media.

Intellectual Virtuoso and Emotional Depth

From the beginning, Stoppard was celebrated as an cerebral acrobat: a man who was motivated by concepts as much as by personality and plot. But, just as we later came to understand that Pinter was always a political dramatist, so we finally came to see that there was an depth of emotion to Stoppard’s intellectual concepts. The Death of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern was commended for its ingenuity in creating a drama out of two peripheral characters from Hamlet, but multiple watchings indicate that it is about how we are all prey of chance circumstances causing our extinction. I remember John Wood, who had acted Guildenstern on Broadway and who became an definitive Stoppard actor, saying to me, “In Tom’s plays, the word is all. The word is resisting the silence, pushing back the darkness … I think this is what makes his plays so moving and even sorrowful.”

The typical blend of daring ideas and emotional substance was also evident in Stoppard’s 1972 popular play, Jumpers. This, after all, was a play that asked a major ethical dilemma: whether social morality was a instilled reaction to history or whether moral sanctions followed an absolute, God-given law. Not your typical subject for a play, but here the focus of a lecture being prepared by the play’s main character, George Moore. But the more one saw the play, the more one grasped that it was also about the anguish of a fractured marriage and the dangers of a disintegrating society in which space travelers were fighting on the moon and a ex- minister of agriculture had been made archbishop of Canterbury.

Meticulous Research and Affecting Breakthrough

Stoppard’s achievement – one he had in common with Michael Frayn – was to show that viewers were open to plays about complicated ideas. His work was also thoroughly investigated. I remember, shortly before Jumpers, encountering him on the steps of the London Library where he was clutching a mound of books that came up to his chin. “What is that?” I asked. “My next play,” he answered.

With the passage of time, the emotional content of his plays became ever more evident. The turning point likely came with Real Thing (1982) which ages better than most of his plays to restaging. It raises a plethora of issues such as whether any public commitment is the consequence of private derangement and whether concepts such as justice and national pride exist outside our understanding of them. But behind this – and what makes the play so relevant – is a acute realization of the bliss of love and the pain of betrayal.

Even Arcadia (1993), which deals with fatalism and volition, classical ideals and the Romantic movement, and a myriad of other things, succeeds because it is deeply emotional. Ideas and feeling perfectly coincide in a moment where a exceptional youth, Thomasina, laments the demise of past civilisations to which her tutor replies: “Intellectual breakthroughs glimpsed and lost to view will have their moment.” And that is just what happens, in that Thomasina’s revolutionary revision of the Newtonian universe endures beyond her sadly truncated life.

Debating the Power of Art

Stoppard’s talent as a playwright was seldom questioned. What was discussed, particularly in the early years, were his doubts about the effectiveness of art: something he frequently talked about in discussions. “I used to feel isolated,” he said in 1976, “because when I started to write, you were a jerk if you weren’t writing about Vietnam or social housing. Now I have no compunction about that. To avert indirectly to Travesties [his 1974 play], Importance of Being Earnest is important but it addresses no major issues.”

I think he was completely wrong about that since the play by Wilde offers a running commentary on money, marriage, ethics, social class, the fall of the upper class and the dominance of business. But Stoppard contradicted his own point by writing a series of works that grapple to significant impact with the misuse of individual freedoms by oppressive systems. One of the most stunning was Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, first presented at the Festival Hall in 1977. It depicted a Russian dissident wrongly diagnosed insane and locked in a cell with an real psychiatric patient who imagines himself in control of an orchestra. It was startling both to see the entire LSO on the stage and to see Stoppard exposing the brutal ridiculousness of communist repression with dark humour. As I wrote at the time, “brutality is met with irony and inflexibility with a