Havel Lecture Misrepresented CC

As Contemporary Civilization Chair Philip Kitcher presents it, the argument for having former Czechoslovakian President Václav Havel deliver this year's CC course-wide lecture is that he is someone who "has not just thought about these ideas ... but has also lived them." This, of course, is true. In choosing a CC lecturer, however, we should prefer a speaker who has something to say about the issues addressed in CC over one who has experienced them.

Havel did say several insightful things during his lecture. For example, he said, "Truth and morality could have stronger power than weapons," and he also said, "I can't say that I don't like people who have actually managed to find some truth and to come to some conclusions, but I don't like people who are obsessed with this." Nevertheless, even when led to do so, his speech refused to directly address the themes and texts of the course.

The most compelling connection between what Havel said and CC was his binary worldview that emphasized the supremacy of Western civilization. Indeed, Havel may be right to say that "the world was very strongly divided" during the Cold War. Then he went on to characterize this division as between "the West and communist East"-although technically right as a geographical distinction, this is problematic in that it falsely suggests that communism and totalitarianism are inherently antithetical to the West. This suggestion became more ominous after a subsequent question that might as well have been written by Samuel Huntington: "What should be the appropriate response of Western society to terrorists and terrorist ideology that targets Western conceptions of morality and truth?" Havel's response suggested that, in addition to security, it is important to try to understand and confront "why terrorism enjoys the sympathy of the societies from which it arises." By not challenging the question's vision of Western society in opposition to terrorist societies, Havel tacitly supported a divisive and incorrect dichotomy between Western values and those of terrorism.

Of course, it is hard to really know whether anything Havel said actually reflects his own thoughts or merely a corruption of translation. After all, in his response to a question about his essays, Havel said that he, as a politician, was not able to read speeches that he did not write, "to speak in a little bit different language" because "everybody has his own language or nuances in language." This frustration at expression in a different language was plainly evident throughout the lecture, from Havel's opening quip ("I don't like my English") and groping for words to his decision to switch back to speaking through a translator during the middle of the event.

I by no means wish to undermine whatever "political triumph" Havel achieved during the Velvet Revolution. His political achievements, however, do not in and of themselves make him an appropriate CC lecturer. Rather, a good CC lecturer, like a good essay, must both have something to say about CC and also have the appropriate means of expression to give these ideas justice.