07 December 2025

Tom Stoppard Remembered, Part 2

 

[This is the conclusion to my small tribute to Tom Stoppard, the wonderful British playwright who died on 29 November at the age of 88.  If you haven’t read Part 1 of “Tom Stoppard Remembered,” published on  3 December, I recommend that you turn back and do so now before reading Part 2, below.

[This installment consists of just one piece of writing, an autobiographical essay Stoppard wrote in 1999 about his discovery of his Jewish roots, kept hidden from him until he was in his 50’s.  As you’ll read, it had a profound effect on him, and eventually led to his writing his last play, Leopoldstadt, in 2020.]

TOM STOPPARD: ON TURNING OUT TO BE JEWISH”

["On Turning Out to Be Jewish" is the title of a widely-read autobiographical essay originally written by Tom Stoppard and published in the inaugural September 1999 issue (vol. 1, no. 1) of Tina Brown's Talk magazine (which ceased publication in February 2002).  In the essay, Stoppard recounts his surprise discovery through contact with distant Czech relatives in the mid-1990s that he and his parents were fully Jewish, a fact that had been suppressed by his family after they fled Czechoslovakia during the Nazi era.   

[The playwright’s mother had avoided discussing the family’s Jewish roots, only confirming details after Stoppard began asking more questions following her death at 85 in October 1996.  Stoppard, who was born Tomáš Sträussler in 1937 in Zlín, Czechoslovakia, learned that all four of his grandparents were Jewish and had perished in Nazi concentration camps, including Auschwitz and Terezín.

[Stoppard describes his prior self-professed “almost willful purblindness” about his heritage and his regret for not questioning his mother further during her lifetime.  He wrote of feeling “no more Jewish than I felt Czech” after the revelation, but the discovery prompted him to reckon with his family's history, which later inspired his play Leopoldstadt, his final work for the stage, which explores Jewish assimilation, loss, and identity.

[I haven’t had time since I put together this tribute to Stoppard to get to a library that might have a paper or microfilm copy of the issue of Talk with the dramatist’s essay, and there’s apparently no online version.  This publication from The Huntington, the program guide and occasional online outlet of the Huntington Theatre Company (Boston, Massachusetts), appears to be a republication of Stoppard’s essay.

[The Huntington’s “Tom Stoppard: On Turning Out to be Jewish” was posted on 11 September 2024, 25 years after the Talk publication.  The essay was republished in support of the Huntington Theatre Company’s staging of Leopoldstadt, Stoppard’s last play which was inspired by his discovery of his lost heritage.  The production ran ftrom 12 September to 13 October 2024 and was produced in association with Washington, D.C.’s Shakespeare Theatre Company (which ran the show from 30 November to 29 December 2024).

[On 22 October 2022, I posted a collection of articles on and reviews of Leopoldstadt on Rick On Theater as “Tom Stoppard & Leopoldstadt.”  On 26 December 2022, I published “Tom Stoppard” by my friend Kirk Woodward, accompanied by a report by Dick Brennan of WCBS-TV, who talked about the play and the playwright with Brandon Uranowitz, the 2023 Tony-winner for the Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Play for his work in the Broadway production of Leopoldstadt.]

Here, now – here and now in this room in the only country that is my country and among books in the only language I can remember speaking – the English writer who is myself considers the Czech family Beck in 1908. There are seven of them. Dressed up for the studio photographer: Rudolf and Regina, my maternal grandparents: my future aunties Wilma, Berta, Anny, and Irma: and their little brother Ota in his sailor top. They stare back across 90 years of war and peace and war and peace. This is a photograph we have seen countless times, each time different, the family group who never made it together through the Holocaust. 

My table is covered with old photographs newly acquired from Wilma’s son and from Berta’s grandson. Here are the Beck children again, a few years older, in front of the same backdrop. There is a fifth girl now. The new sister, from her scuffed boots to her clapped-on bonnet, is a heartbreaker. She is pushing palms-down with her clasped hands as though literally holding herself still. She is trying not to smile and not quite succeeding. This is my mother, Martha, in 1914, age three. 

Privately, I always hesitate over the word Holocaust – a headline writer’s word for an act too actual for trope, too vast and monstrous for summation. But until quite recently it didn’t seem to be my place to jib at it. 

When my mother was in her sixties I asked her to write down as much as she could remember about her life before I could remember it for myself. I sent her a leatherbound notebook as an incentive, which was a misjudgment. She sent it back years later, unmarked (“It seems a waste”), and instead filled a few pages in a cheap exercise book. 

The move to England, she wrote, had been so sudden, unplanned, an[d] drastic that I – perhaps subconsciously – decided the only thing to make it possible to live and truly settle down (I mean the three of us [Stoppard seems to be referring to his older brother Petr, who later became Peter]) was to draw a blind over my past life and start so to speak from scratch. Whether this was realistic or possible I don’t know. I mean whether it was the right thing to do. 

Her little memoir does not raise the blind very far. My mother wrote it when she was 70 in 1981, which happened to be the year Ota, the boy in the sailor top, died. There is no mention of this brother, and I did not learn of his existence until later. As to the names or number of her sisters, or what happened to them, the memoir is equally uninformative. She writes about family life before and after her marriage and about my father. She describes her parents and my father’s parents but does not say when or where or how they died. The word Jew or Jewish does not occur. 

~

When I was born, in July 1937 in Zlin, a small town in Moravia, Czechoslovakia, my name was Tomas Straussler – Tomik to my mother and father. We left Czechoslovakia – my parents, my brother Petr, and I – when the German army moved in [16 March 1938]. By the time I understood that there was a connection between these two events I was an English schoolboy, Stoppard Two at prep school (Peter being Stoppard One), Tommy at home. 

[Of the three historical regions of what became Czechoslovakia in 1918 (after World War I, when the Austro-Hungarian Empire was dissolved), Moravia is the second largest and was in the middle of the newly formed nation. (The other two historical regions are Bohemia and Czech Silesia [so named because parts of Silesia are in Poland and Germany].) As a province, it was named Moravia-Silesia; it now forms the eastern end of the Czech Republic, though it is no longer a province (země or ‘land’). It has a significant German-speaking population.

[Stoppard’s family name at birth was actually Sträussler (pronounced stroy-sler) because they were Czechs of German descent. His father’s given name was Eugen (oy-ghen), the German form of Eugene, not Evžen (ev-zhen), the Czech name.]

So we were Jewish? My mother would give a little frown and go “Tsk!” in her way and say, “Oh, if anyone had a Jewish grandparent at that time . . .” 

I believe I understand her “Tsk!” It was less to do with denial than irritation. To ask the question was to accept the estimation put on it not by her but by the Germans. She had no sense of racial identity and no religious beliefs. Of course there were Jews in Zlin, she said, but they were proper Jews who wore black hats and went to the synagogue and the rest of it, Jews who were Jewish. 

During the last 18 months of her life – I did not know this then – my mother corresponded with a researcher in Zlin, Dr. Emil Máčel [chronicler of Jewish life in Zlín], who was trying to put together the almost forgotten story of the Bata Jews. Zlin was the world headquarters of the Bata shoe company, and my father was a doctor at the company hospital. “In Czechoslovakia,” my mother wrote (in Czech) to Emil, “there were so many mixed marriages that the matter lost importance. In my family the ratio was about 50-50. Three nephews and one niece lived in Bohemia, three generations in a modest Catholic environment.” 

[At the time the Sträusslers lived in Czechoslovakia, Bohemia was the westernmost province (země or ‘land’) of the country. Formerly a sovereign principality, it was the largest and most populous province of Czechoslovakia; the national capital, Prague, was in Bohemia. It has a large and influential German-speaking minority. (In today’s Czech Republic [Czechia], Bohemia is no longer a separate administrative district, but it remains a significant historical region.]

As I understand it, if l do, “being Jewish” didn’t figure in her life until it disrupted it, and then it set her on a course of displacement, chaos, bereavement, and – finally – sanctuary in a foreign country, England, thankful at least that her boys were now safe. Hitler made her Jewish in 1939. By the spring, comfortably before the European war started, all that was behind her, literally: We embarked at Genoa [Italy] for Singapore [a British colony until the Japanese invasion in 1942], in good time for the Japanese onslaught. 

For the Japanese were a different story. They killed my father and did their best to sink the ship that got the rest of us to India, but it wasn’t personal, we weren’t on a list, it was simply the war and being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

My mother remarried in India in November 1945 and died in Devon in the west of England in October 1996, age 85, of cancer. The last words she spoke – in the front passenger seat of my car when we were taking her to the hospital – were (crossly), “And Tom hasn’t got any sweets!” She persisted in the idea that sweets in the car were a surety against the likelihood of my falling asleep at the wheel on my journeys back to London. I was 59. 

~

My stepfather, formerly Major Kenneth Stoppard of the British army in India, believed with Cecil Rhodes [1853-1902; British mining magnate and Prime Minister of the Cape Colony (roughly half of British South Africa’s land area centered on Cape Town), 1890-96] that to be born an Englishman was to have drawn first prize in the lottery of life, and I doubt that even Rhodes, the Empire builder who lent his name to Rhodesia, believed it as utterly as Ken. Ken’s utopia would have been populated by landed gentry, honest yeomen, and Gurkhas [members of the dominant ethnic group in Nepal]. When my mother had just died, the words that came to him were “She was a very gallant lady,” a formulation dating from Kipling’s hill stations and the officers’ mess. He was already ill himself, and he died nine months later, by which time his Raj-nurtured sense of superiority over what [Rudyard] Kipling [1865-1936; English journalist, writer, and poet] called the lesser breeds had long since festered into a bile against Jews, blacks, Irish, Yanks, foreigners in general, and the urban working class. (Homosexuals were hardly mentioned because they were hardly mentionable.) He was an unlikely personality to have married a Czechoslovakian Jewess with two children. But marry her he did, and brought us to England four years to the day after we landed in Bombay. “Don’t you realize,” he once reproached me when, at the age of nine, I innocently referred to my “real father,” “don’t you realize that I made you British?” 

Ken was one of the very few Englishmen my mother had known before she got here, so perhaps it’s not surprising that she thought Peter and I would be given a hard time at school and in English life if we were to start off as foreign Jews. As it turned out she was quite wrong, at least about the schools we went to. 

She herself remained engagingly foreign, keeping her accent and making us plum dumplings powdered with cinnamon and delicious jam-filled buns called buchti that often found their way into the parcels of “tuck” [British slang, mostly among children, for ‘snack food’] she sent to us at school. Her tuck parcels were misshapen triple-wrapped double-trussed Kellogg’s boxes overstuffed with things she thought were good for you, like glucose tablets and dried fruit, to offset the quantity of things that were definitely not. 

She had a third son, Richard, in 1949, and a daughter, Fiona, in 1955. Her concern for the good health of her children on the one hand and of the rest of mankind on the other weighed about equal, even when we were grown up with children of our own. 

When we came to visit, she’d see us off by pushing bags of toffees and homemade rock cakes [small traditional British dried-fruit-filled cake or bun with a rough, uneven surface that resembles a rock] and the occasional scarf, pair of gloves, or piece of crockery at us, at the last moment rushing back into the house for a bag of prunes but alas forgetting the fruitcake, which she would lament when we phoned in to report that we’d survived the journey home.

But for every homemade cake and knickknack she gave out, my mother held back much more, whole histories. 

~

Some things I knew. Auntie Irma had married and gone to live in Argentina well before the war. The two sisters wrote to each other regularly until Irma died in 1995. I remember her. In 1948 or thereabouts, Irma came over to visit us. She and my mother spoke rapid emotional Czech while Peter and I bore up under Irma’s tears and kisses. 

Nor was it any secret that we had family in Czechoslovakia. Letters in Czech, photographs, and Christmas cards were occasionally exchanged, but as time went on the signal died. I was busy being English and seldom thought about these mysterious distant relatives.

One of them, I discovered when I read my mother’s memoir, was my father’s sister: After a while I had the feeling she did not want any letters from here. Her husband became a Judge of the People’s Court, whatever that means, and of course I never wrote again. It was safer not to, as not to embarrass him. 

That was the other thing. Having relatives “in the West” was not good in communist Czechoslovakia. When newspapers began referring to my Czech background, my mother would become cross and fretful. “Why do they harp on about that? It’s got nothing to do with your life now. Can’t you stop them?” 

But there came the day when the communists fell and the blind went up. 

I was in Czechoslovakia, President [Václav] Havel’s Czechoslovakia, for a PEN conference [PEN International, a worldwide association of writers founded to promote friendship and intellectual co-operation among writers]. Returning very late from Pilsen to my hotel in Prague, I found a young man waiting for me in the lobby. I learned later that he had traveled from his home in another town and had been waiting in the lobby for several hours. He had read in a newspaper that I was coming to Prague. It was now about two in the morning. He couldn’t speak much English, and I couldn’t work out what he was trying to tell me. He had an old photograph album that he put on the hotel counter and opened. There was a photograph of me and my brother Peter with the family spaniel in the garden of our first house in England. 

[Havel (1936-2011) was a Czech statesman, author, poet, playwright, and dissident. He served as the last president of Czechoslovakia from 1989 until 1992, prior to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia on 31 December, before he became the first president of the Czech Republic from 1993 to 2003. Havel was the first democratically elected president of either country after the fall of communism on 10 December 1989.]

Alexandr, I discovered, was the grandson of my mother’s sister Berta. There were many photographs, including that one of the Beck children in 1914, and – even more astonishing to me – Martha in 1927, age 16, a flapper in beads, slave bracelet, Charleston shoes, and party dress, looking amazingly pretty; and again in 1930, almost glamorous, with carefully plucked eyebrows and a fur-collared coat. The fact that my mother was beautiful had escaped me, and the realization was shocking – and then touching, when I saw that the dress had obviously been run up at home and the coat was a poor girl’s best. She is wearing the coat again in cold weather in 1931, on a park bench with Wilma and Wilma’s sons Jaroslav and Milan near trees and water among the buildings of the Baca hospital. 

By this time, 1994, I knew that my mother had started life with four older sisters and an older brother. I knew their names and I knew how Wilma, Berta, and Anny had died. The person who had told me was the daughter of one of the boys in the photograph on the park bench: Wilma’s granddaughter Sarka. 

The year before, Sarka had written to my mother from Germany, where she now lived, proposing to visit her in Devon, and my mother (I can see it all) had slightly panicked because Ken would not have been receptive to this sort of thing and could not be relied on to behave gracefully. So we met in London, in the restaurant of the National Theatre, where I was working that day: my mother, my sister (half-sister, but I never call her that), my sister’s little girl, and Sarka and I, who was Sarka’s father’s cousin. 

After a while, at one end of a long table cluttered with the remains of the meal, I got into a tête-à-tête with Sarka. She wrote down the family tree of my mother’s generation on a sheet of foolscap [paper of 8 × 13 inches (203 × 330 mm)], which she turned sideways to get them all in. This was the first time, at least in my memory, that my Czech family had been given names and relationships, and I was conscious that my English family, myself not least, must be looking distinctly odd to Sarka. It was a little embarrassing, even shameful, and I immediately made it worse. 

“Sarka, were we Jewish?” 

“What do you mean?” 

I adjusted. 

“I mean, how Jewish were we?” 

“You were Jewish.” 

“Yes, I know we were Jewish, my father’s family . . .” 

“You were completely Jewish.” 

I looked at the family tree. I went left to right. 

“What happened to Wilma?” 

“She died in Auschwitz.” 

“Berta?” 

“Auschwitz.” 

“Anny?” 

“She died in a different camp. I don’t know where.” 

“Ota?” 

“He survived.” 

Irma was dying in Argentina, nearly 90, a widow and childless. Martha, the youngest, was busy with my sister and my niece at the far end of the table. 

My grandparents all died at the hands of the Germans. My father’s parents, Julius and Hildegard Straussler, were part of a “transport” of Moravian Jews taken to Terezin, in Bohemia in northern Czechoslovakia, where they arrived on December 2, 1941. On January 9, 1942, they were among 112 prisoners transported “to the East,” to Riga in Latvia. This is the recorded date of their deaths because it is the last fact known about them. 

[There are two posts on ROT about the Terezin (aka: Theresienstadt) Concentration Camp: “Performing for Survival – Cultural Life and the Theatre in Terezin‘” by Bahar Akpinar (7 March 2022) and “The Last Cyclist (2 and 5 September 2022). A personal note: both my paternal grandparents were from German Jewish families from Eastern Europe and emigrated to the U.S. as children at the turn of the 20th century. My grandfather was born in the Ukraine when it was part of the Russian Empire, but my grandmother came from Riga, Latvia (also part of Imperial Russia).]

Rudolf and Regina Beck, my mother’s parents, were also transported to Terezin, and died there, in July and April 1944, while we were in India – Peter and I at school, my mother in charge of the Baca shoeshop in Darjeeling. 

~

From a few paces’ distance, the interior walls of the 15th-century Pinkas Synagogue in Prague seem to shimmer with tracery tight as knitting. But it’s not tracery, it’s names – the nearly 80,000 Bohemian and Moravian Jewish victims of the Nazis. I am here with Sarka and her father, Jaroslav. They have been here before. We three find the names again, the Strausslers and the Becks. Anny, I tell Sarka, died at Riga, on January 9, 1942, as far as anyone knows – the same place and date as my father’s parents. (I’m the one with the information now. A year earlier Peter and I had returned to Zlin for the first time, to meet Dr. Emil Máčel, my source.) Anny was the sister who never married. Wilma, the eldest, and Berta, the next eldest married gentiles, but that had not saved them. 

Jaroslav and I were meeting today for the first time since I was in my pram. Jaroslav was 16 then. He remembered that he took two-year-old Petr for a walk, holding him by the hand. Petr had a runny nose; Jaroslav wiped it for him. After leaving the Pinkas Synagogue, Sarka and Jaroslav took me to the station for the train to Zlin, three or four hours to the southeast. 

On the train with me I had a fold-out gazetteer of “Jewish Monuments in Moravia and Silesia.” Zlin merited only three lines and two items of interest: There was a small Jewish section in one of the cemeteries, and it was the birthplace of the English playwright Tom Stoppard, “in proper name Tomas Straussler (born 1937).” 

~

All my life I have been told that I “take after my mother,” whatever that is supposed to mean, and now it does appear to mean more than a compliment. In August 1968, when the armies of the Warsaw Pact [the Warsaw Treaty Organization, a military alliance of the Soviet Bloc nations to counterbalance NATO, 1955-91] put down the movement for reform in Czechoslovakia [the Prague Spring, 5 January-21 August], my then wife was firstly incredulous and secondly infuriated that I didn’t get worked up about it as a Czech. It was true. I had no special feeling other than the general English one of impotent condemnation, tinged with that complacency one feels when the ogres of one’s personal demonology behave true to form. I knew I was – used to be Czech, but I didn’t feel Czech. That year I had some money for the first time, and I was buying first editions of Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, and Evelyn Waugh and beginning to collect 19th-century English landscape watercolors in a thatched cottage in a commuter-belt mock-up of rural England. I felt about as English as you could get. 

Even when, in 1977, I made my first return to Czechoslovakia, I felt no identification at all. Everything – the landscape, the architecture – looked interestingly foreign. My purpose was to write about human rights, and I could as well have been in Poland or Hungary. Indeed there was something slightly irritating about the way newspapers then and later would call up to ask for a quote or an article about Czech affairs – of which I usually knew little – as though I were a Czech expert. 

Earlier that year I had been to Moscow and Leningrad on another human rights story, the imprisonment in psychiatric hospitals of Jews who applied for exit visas to Israel [“refuseniks”]. I continued to write about this persecution and sometimes to speak from platforms, finally in 1986 organizing a 24-hour “event” in London, for which I recruited scores of notables (Senator Bill Bradley [b. 1943; American Democratic politician and former professional basketball player; U.S. Senator from New Jersey: 1979-97; unsuccessful candidate for the 2000 Democratic presidential nomination] flew over specially). As a result I received letters thanking me as a Jew, and I remember that once or twice, feeling obscurely that I was receiving credit under false pretenses, I replied that I was not Jewish or at any rate not really Jewish. I had become habituated to the unexamined idea that although – obviously – there was some Jewish blood in me (my father’s father’s?), enough to make me more interesting to myself and to have risked attention from the Nazis, it was not really enough to connect me with the Jews who died in the camps and those who didn’t. 

This almost willful purblindness, a rarely disturbed absence of curiosity combined with an endless willingness not to disturb my mother by questioning her, even after – no, especially after – our meeting with Sarka, comes back to me now in the form of self-reproach, not helped by my current state of mind now that I’m Jewish. I feel no more Jewish than I felt Czech when, 22 years ago, I went to Prague for a week to do my English bit for Charter 77.

[Charter 77 was an informal civic initiative in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic from 1976 to 1992, named after the document Charter 77 from January 1977. The Charter criticized the government for failing to implement the human rights provisions of a number of international documents it had signed. Despite explicit rejection of “oppositional political activity,” the Charter was declared illegal and the government launched retaliation against its supporters and signatories.] 

Moreover, unlike my attitude toward the Czechness of things, which always had the neutrality of disinterest, I am definitely uneasy with Jewish orthodoxy, which I do not exempt from the general unease I feel with all manifestations of exclusive ritual and heightened religiosity – bleeding Christs, Hindu temples, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etcetera. And another thing. Before I was Jewish my attitude toward Israel teetered between admiration and a disquieting sense that the Palestinians were paying for the Allies’ conscience about what the Germans did – picking up the bill for the Nazis, in fact – and now that I’m Jewish I have the same disquiet. 

My friend Manny Azenberg [Emanuel Azenberg (b. 1934); American theater producer and general manager] in New York has been asking me for years to go with him to Israel. I’ve never had the time (that is, of course, enough interest to make the time) and now I have the odd sense of its being too late. I don’t want to be claimed as if I’ve turned into someone else. This is why I think I understand my mother going “Tsk!” But we shall see. Until a couple of years ago I never had any interest in going back to Zlin. 

~

Zlin, 15.11.97 

Dear Sir, 

When studying the archives of the Bata Company in Zlin I found a personal file of your father Mr. Eugen Straussler M.D. who lost his life in Singapore when his ship was sunk by Japanese bombers in 1942. 

In this file is perhaps the only preserved photograph of your father. I sent your mother a copy of the file. I would like to mention that I exchanged letters with your mother for about two years, but for one year I did not hear from her. In her last letter she wrote she was ill and since then I am without news about further life . . .

My mother had been dead for 13 months when Emil Máčel introduced himself by letter. 

My brother Peter and I went to Zlin to meet Emil in May last year, 59 years after we’d got out. Neither of us had any memory of being there. We found our family home, a brick cube with its own garden, one of scores of similar houses built by Bata in a grid of leafy streets not far from the hospital. My parents moved into it in July 1934, a month after they were married. 

From my mother’s notebook memoir: 

When I left school I took a secretarial course and like everyone else joined the Finn [sic: this is probably an error and should read “the Firm,” referring to the Bata shoe company, a major employer in Zlin]. After I started working, I must have been 18 then, life became less restricted. I started skiing and going to dances (with my mother sitting there). On one ski trip – away day only – and without my mother! – a young doctor from the hospital invited me to a dance there, and that’s where I met your father, who was still studying but working there during vacations. He was one of a group of students from various universities . . . 

I was saving like mad knowing we will be poor to start with. Continental custom is very different. The man does not (or does not have to) provide a thing. In most cases men expect and get a dowry. Money. And to marry a girl without money is heroic. Well, he was and he did . . .

The next five years were blissful. We must have had our ups and downs but as always one only remembers the good times. Just as well. 

Your father was perhaps not handsome in the conventional way, he was very intelligent, had great charm (I was always fighting off the nurses!) and had a first class brain, but was very modest. His integrity was total. Everyone in the hospital liked him – the staff and the patients. I don’t want to sound too fulsome but this is how I remember him and when I die there won’t be anyone left to say what kind of a person he was. What he would have finally achieved one can only guess. He had no intention of going into general practice and was well on the way to becoming a heart and lung specialist. 

In my mind I always knew what my father looked like, and my memory of him is supported by (or perhaps consists in) a few tiny snapshots. The Bara [sic: Bata] archive adds a few dispassionate touches to the portrait. His letter of employment in February 1932 promises him board and lodging at the hospital and 200 crowns per week (there were 140 crowns in an English pound). His personal property was “nil,” his savings were “nil,” his debts were “nil,” the money he had to tide him over till his first payday was “nil.” He had been recruited by the head of the Ba[t]a hospital, Dr. Albert. 

Germany annexed Austria in March 1938, and in September the disputed Czech territory of Sudetenland was ceded to Hitler. On September 19, my mother (who in her memoir wrote I have no recollection of any special holidays and I am sure we did not go abroad) was issued her first passport. 

In February 1939 she received 30 English pounds from the Firm – “Mrs. Straussler is going with her husband, who will stay in Singapore for at least three years.” 

On March 14, the company’s “Social and Health Institute” reported that Dr. Straussler and family were fit for the tropics. 

In April this year [1999, when Stoppard originally wrote this essay], the 96-year-old widow of Dr. Albert, chief of the Bata hospital, receives me in her flat in Prague, with her two daughters, Senta and Zaria. She is telling me what happened on March 14, 1939. Very early in the morning, Dr. Albert got a phone call from the Ba[t]a directorship to tell him that the German army had crossed the frontier. He then got on the phone himself and called the Jewish doctors to his house. “My husband said, ‘You have to get out, right now.’” Bata had factories and offices in many countries, and the Jewish doctors (Emil believes there were 15) were assigned to places where they’d be out of danger. Mrs. Albertova shows me a photograph. “This is the room where they met.” Most of the photograph is occupied by a bookcase, which I realize is also in the room I’m sitting in. Her younger daughter Zaria was only six years old but she remembers the meeting: “Afterward the room was full of smoke.” 

All three remember Dr. Straussler. The two “girls” tell me he was considered the nicest of the young doctors, the one they asked to have when they had measles and other childhood illnesses. “When Dr. Straussler talked to us we knew everything would be all right.” It seems, too, that among Dr. Albert’s young assistant physicians, Dr. Straussler was the highflier, the chief’s favorite. “When there was a problem, my husband would send for him and tell him, ‘You sort it.'” 

When Zaria was very young she put her hand through a glass pane and cut it. Dr. Straussler stitched the cut. Zaria holds out her hand, which still shows the mark. I touch it. In that moment I am surprised by grief, a small catching-up of all the grief I owe. I have nothing that came from my father, nothing he owned or touched, but here is his trace, a small scar.

Your father chose Singapore. It was all marvelous in the beginning. I liked the heat, the exotic fruit, the food, and the local people. You had a perfectly sweet Malayan ayah [South Asian female servant or nanny, usually one working for a European family] who pushed you and Peter around in a double cane pushchair and tried hard to speak Czech to you. She Would say, “Oh, don’t cry!” or “Hurry up – bathtime!” It was her party piece and she loved you both. Later you both went every morning in a rickshaw to a kindergarten. 

We lived in a small house belonging to a Dutch shipping company or KLM, can’t remember. The house was for temporary occupation and we had just started looking at houses nearer the sea when war broke out. Even now I can’t write about it all. We were not panicking and we were together but like for everyone else it was traumatic. By the middle of January, a lot of women and children left because they wanted to but by the end of the month all women and children were evacuated. I stayed as long as I could, specially as I did not want to go on my own to Australia. Hoping that we might all go eventually. It just did not work out and the last few days were chaotic, boats, days, and times always being changed. The journey from Singapore was pretty dreadful. We were bombed just about everywhere. In the harbour, standing three days just off Singapore, then on the way to Australia, then turned back to Singapore and finally to India. 

At the time we were so worried about the men left behind in Singapore we did not really notice or mind anything. Cabins were overcrowded and mattresses on decks preferable. Children were always getting lost (not mine!) but I cried myself silly one night because I lost two silver medallions engraved with your names my best friend gave you. Hung them on a hook in the bathroom instead of putting them into my pocket – will I never learn?

I remember this. I remember the medallions, and the loss, and most of all my mother crying. 

Personally I did not like being in India. The constant worry about your father, what happened, where he was – did he know where we were and mainly did he survive? Nobody had any information although the Red Cross and Czech Consul in Calcutta tried hard for us all. There were columns of notices in the Calcutta papers where people wanted information about missing husbands, wives, even children. 

The four years seem even now like a lifetime and a nightmare. I have no idea how and why I came to Darjeeling. By that time I was feeling rather ill, depressed, and it was all getting too much. Darjeeling was the change I needed. The air was so good and I was busy working and enjoying it. Otherwise it was just a matter of waiting and waiting. Once I was asked to go to Calcutta, only to be told that after all the people were accounted for, your father was amongst those missing, presumed lost, and as they were all listed as civilians, it was all they could do. 

I returned the next day to Darjeeling but did not tell you. Rightly or wrongly. Rightly, I think. You had enough to cope with. 

But one day in Darjeeling a woman friend, at my mother’s request, took Peter and me for a walk and told us that our father was dead. Then she walked us back to the house, where my mother was waiting for us, teary-eyed and anxious about how we had taken it. For my part, I took it well, or not well, depending on how you look at it. I felt almost nothing. I felt the significance of the occasion but not the loss. 

How had my father died? On land? At sea? No one seemed to know. As far as I was told he had simply disappeared. But in fact there were people who did know and at least one of them, a Singapore survivor married to a close friend of my mother, must have told her. So that was something else she preferred not to go into. 

~

In Singapore in one of those Dutch company houses there lived an English family, Leslie and Katherine Smith and their son Tony, who was the same age as my brother Peter. Leslie, today a spry and dapper 90, was the manager of a British company that made optical and navigational instruments. He got in touch with me this year. Our families, he said, had been friends. On Sundays sometimes we would go to the Singapore swimming club together. Katherine Smith and Martha used to have each other in for coffee. When Peter answered the door he would shout, “Mama! Pani [Mrs.] Smithova!” 

Two days before the fall of Singapore: said Leslie, after the women and children had left, my father and another Czech, Mr. Heim, came to his office one evening. They said, ‘Look, we have to get out. Can you help?’ Because of my work, I had a pass to the docks and I knew the ships’ captains. So we got into my car. It was dark. The sentry at the docks let us through. There were several ships but only one of them seemed to have any activity going on. We went on board. I knew the captain and I asked him if he would take these two Czechs. He said yes, he would. Your father tried to persuade me to go with them, but I said I couldn’t leave my staff. So we all shook hands and that was the last I saw of your father.” 

The ship was sunk by the Japanese in the strait between Sumatra and the island of Bangka, trying to make it to Australia. 

~

A few days after my mother died, Ken, whom from England onward I had called “Daddy” or “Father” or “Dad” (though he objected to “Dad,” which he thought was lower-class) wrote to me to say that he had been concerned for some time about my “tribalization ” by which he meant mainly mv association, 10 years earlier, with the cause of Russian Jews, and he asked me to stop using “Stoppard” as my name. I wrote back that this was not practical. 

Leaving aside the anti-Semitism and, frankly, the dottiness, I know what made Major Stoppard, himself the father of two half-Jewish children, so angry. Whatever his opinions about Jews, his prejudice had an obverse side, a paternalism toward other races who were grateful to adopt English ways and modes of thought. Blacks were admirable when they were Anglophile Indians. Gurkhas were especially admirable. But when it came to Jews (or Indians) who to their good fortune received honorary membership in the club but persisted in their “tribal” ways nonetheless – that was sheer ingratitude, an insult to his country. Don’t you realize I made you British? 

Until I went to the bad, and the first sign of that was when I turned out to be arty, I was coming on well as an honorary Englishman. Ken taught me to fish, to love the countryside, to speak properly, to respect the monarchy. In the end I disappointed him. And yet, did he but know it, it’s all too late, this going back, these photographs, that small scar on Zaria’s hand. They have the power to move, but not to reclaim. I was eight and a half when our ship docked at Southampton on a freezing February day. My feet were so cold I cried. We had to travel halfway up England to Ken’s mother’s house. 

The train journey from Southampton to Retford was nerve-racking to say the least. I hope I wasn’t irritable or cross with you. You could not possibly have known what state I was in! I did not know what to expect at the end of that long journey. As it turned out, it was all very friendly, and Ken’s mother could not have been kinder to us. 

I was still Tommy Straussler, but English was my only language when Ken gave me his name three weeks later, and long before he asked for it back Englishness had won and had lost. 


03 December 2025

Tom Stoppard Remembered, Part 1

 

[Tom Stoppard (1937-2025) is one of my favorite playwrights.  Ever since I first saw one of his plays, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, in 1969 or 1970, I have loved his work.  His death on 29 November was a shock. 

[I first experienced Stoppard’s work while I was in the army and stationed at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  I attended several plays at the five-year-old Actors Theatre of Louisville, just 45 minutes north of the army base, where I was posted from December 1969 to February 1970.

[The third play I saw at ATL knocked me out because I’d never before seen anything like it: Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.  The deconstruction of Hamlet, the verbal play, the twisty logic, the philosophical underpinning, the fundamental question of how we know what we (think we) know, all made my mind spin and my mouth gape.  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern immediately became one of my top favorite plays. 

[I’ve seen many of Stoppard’s plays since then.  I did one of my first acting-class scenes from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.  Later, I played Moon in The Real Inspector Hound and I used a speech from Jumpers as an audition piece for a number of years.  

[I returned to graduate school in 1984, and for a class in theatrical structure, I wrote the course paper on R&G; it’s posted on Rick On Theater as Theatrical Structure“ (15 and 18 February 2011).  I haven’t caught all of Stoppard’s plays, but many of them have been part of my theater experience.] 

SIR TOM STOPPARD OBITUARY:
PLAYFUL AND PROLIFIC PLAYWRIGHT

[The obituary notice for Tom Stoppard in The Times (London) ran without a byline on 29 November 2025.  It’s posted online at Sir Tom Stoppard obituary: playful and prolific playwright. (Readers will note that the typography and spelling in this posting, because it is from a British newspaper, follows a different standard than we usually see here the U.S.)]

A popular and exotic figure, Stoppard was known for his dandyish appearance as well as his wit and eloquence

With his Jim Morrison mane and Mick Jagger pout, Tom Stoppard looked more like a brooding rock star than one of Britain’s most critically acclaimed and commercially popular playwrights.

Although he came to prominence at a time of excitement in the theatre when John Osborne [1929-94], Arnold Wesker [1932-2016] and Harold Pinter [1930-2008] were producing some of their best work, and the generation of David Hare [b. 1947] and David Edgar [b. 1948] was emerging, his writing and his concerns were utterly distinctive and personal. And just as every cultured person more or less knows what is meant by Pinteresque, so the adjective Stoppardian entered the language as a shorthand for wit, linguistic cleverness and dazzling eloquence.

Incorporating multiple timelines and visual humour, his work was generally optimistic and good-natured at a time when others were investigating squalor, degradation, silence and anomie. “I want to demonstrate that I can make serious points by flinging a custard pie around the stage for a couple of hours,” he explained.

He rarely aimed for realism, least of all the gritty kind. His theatre is a place of carnival, where the extraordinary happens and ideas are taken to absurd logical extremes, and he had a wonderful ability to combine disparate elements beneath a dazzling surface. In his early career he was criticised, after the immense success of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead [premiered at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe in 1966; London, 1967; Broadway debut, 1967] and Jumpers [1972], for failing to portray people convincingly and for the lack of social conscience. His reply was that much of his dialogue was “simply stuff which I’ve ping-ponged between me and myself”.

“I write fiction because it’s a way of making statements I can disown,” he said, “and I write plays because dialogue is the most respectable way of contradicting myself.”

Accordingly, his younger years were amusing and productive, but as he grew older part of him was determined to write about darker matters, and to investigate what he really thought and felt. He was genuinely interested in the life of his times, but in its intellectual rather than its social manifestations.

For his own part Stoppard affected indifference to his high reputation. In 2010, when asked what he thought Stoppardian meant, he said “another hapless, feckless, fatuous episode in my life, brought on by my own forgetfulness or incompetence”.

He was born Tomas Straussler [Sträussler; his family was among the many Czechs of German descent] in 1937, the younger son of Eugen, a doctor employed by Bata shoes, and Martha in Zlin in Czechoslovakia. The exotic way he rolled his Rs as he spoke hinted at his Bohemian origins. The family moved to Singapore two years later to escape the threat of Nazism [Germany occupied Czechoslovakia on 16 March 1938], only to find themselves in danger again, in 1942, from the Japanese invasion [8-15 February 1942]. His mother took him and his brother Petr to India [a British colony until 1947] while his father stayed behind, only to be killed in a Japanese bombing raid. Martha rarely spoke of any of these events and it was only years later that Stoppard discovered that his family was Jewish and that most of his relatives, including his four grandparents, had perished in the death camps — a discovery he would reckon with in his play Leopoldstadt [2020].

After the war, his mother married a British army officer, Major Kenneth Stoppard — who, according to Tom, “believed with Cecil Rhodes that to be born an Englishman was to have drawn first prize in the lottery of life’’ — and returned to England with her two sons, who took their stepfather’s name. Tom went to boarding schools in Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire, the latter of which, Pocklington, he hated.

He left school at 17 to become a reporter for the Western Daily Press [Bristol]. Four years later he moved to the Bristol Evening World, where he stayed until 1960. It was during this period that he worked, he claimed, as the only motoring correspondent who could not drive. “I used to review the upholstery,” he said. He was also a second-string theatre critic.

He continued to work as a freelance journalist until 1963, when his first play, A Walk on the Water, was produced on television. He then devoted himself to full-time writing, which meant living in some poverty — though not without flamboyance — until, in 1967, his fortunes were transformed by the popularity of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The play’s premiere had been given by an Oxford University drama group at the Edinburgh Fringe the previous year, and after a favourable review it was snapped up by Kenneth Tynan for the National Theatre at the Old Vic, where it stayed in repertory for four years. It was also seen on Broadway and in translation around the world.

The task of translation must have been made harder by the piece’s dependence upon recognition of Shakespeare’s lines. The play is a kind of backstage Hamlet, in which the leading players become bit parts and the minor characters take the key roles, finding, as in the tragedy, that their world has been turned inside out. A further clever conceit is Stoppard’s identification of Samuel Beckett’s [1906-89] Waiting for Godot [French premiere: 1953, Paris; English language: 1955, London; U.S. premiere: January 1956, Miami; Broadway: April 1956] as a Hamlet for the 20th century. The dialogue of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is a comic take on that of Vladimir and Estragon in Waiting for Godot, which had been the theatrical revelation of the previous decade; and just as these anti-heroes are assimilated by Stoppard, so are the enigmatic Prince and the elusive Mr Godot.

Beckett never saw or read Stoppard’s play, but the next best thing was a friendly telegram from another playwright, Pinter. It was signed “PINTA” and Stoppard recalled: “I thought that in some curious way it was connected with the Milk Marketing Board.”

[The Milk Marketing Board was a producer-run product marketing board, established to control milk production and distribution in the United Kingdom 1933. It guaranteed a minimum price for milk producers until it was dissolved in 2002.

[The only explanation I can find for Stoppard’s quip about “PINTA” for Pinter’s name is a reference to the Milk Marketing Board’s memorable advertising campaigns in the 1950s and onwards.  Slogans included “full of natural goodness,” “is your man getting enough?,” and “milk’s gotta lotta bottle.”  Another slogan of the era was “drinka pinta milka day.”]

In 1968 A Walk on the Water was recycled for the stage as Enter a Free Man, a minor piece, and The Real Inspector Hound opened at the Criterion Theatre in the West End. Inspector Hound is an ingenious satire on the traditional murder mystery, in which two theatre critics become entangled. Stoppard pokes fond fun at the mechanics of the genre, as when Mrs Drudge answers a phone she happens to be dusting with the ultra-informative words: “Hello, the drawing room of Lady Muldoon’s country residence one morning in early spring.”

Three years later, the one-act After Magritte showed Stoppard’s talents for wordplay and for brilliantly surreal but infallibly logical plotting. These were to reach their height in 1972 in Jumpers, a play about a moral philosopher wrestling to demonstrate that there are objective values while his wife, a musical comedy star, suffers a breakdown and his university becomes a sort of intellectual gymnasium.

At one point, for entirely evident reasons, the philosopher answers the door to a policeman while covered in shaving foam and holding a tortoise, with the words: “I’m sorry, I was expecting a psychiatrist.”

Jumpers was a huge success, being at once entertaining and cerebral. In Stoppard’s rollicking style it addresses a profound question and the author’s sympathies are clearly with the flailing philosopher, but the treatment itself is facetious even when Stoppard is deploring the unseriousness of trendy academia. Like most of his pieces it is something of an exercise. Very often, Stoppard’s lines are designed for a palpable but momentary effect: in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, for instance, Rosencrantz idly muses on the growth of the fingernails after death solely as a cue for the convulsingly theatrical line: “The toenails, on the other hand, never grow at all.”

Between major plays, Stoppard wrote one-acters, scripts for radio and television (including a version of Three Men in a Boat, starring Michael Palin [BBC, 1975]), film scripts (including Graham Greene’s The Human Factor [1979] and JG Ballard’s Empire of the Sun [1987]), and translations and adaptations (Federico Garcia Lorca [Spanish; 1898-1936], Arthur Schnitzler [Austrian; 1862-1931], Anton Chekhov [Russian; 1860-1904]). He also contributed anonymously to Steven Spielberg scripts, which were sent to him privately. Some of these seemed to be chips from the workshop, but all contained memorably hilarious lines.

His next stage play was Travesties (1975), in which [Vladimir] Lenin [1870-1924], the Dadaist Tristan Tzara [1896-1963] and James Joyce [1882-1941] meet in Zurich during the First World War and become involved in a production of [Oscar Wilde’s] The Importance of Being Earnest. Again, Stoppard was spurred or enabled to write by a classic work, already familiar to his audience, around which he played his variations and cerebral games.

Dogg’s Hamlet, Cahoot’s Macbeth (1979) also used this technique, spinning ideas (this time out of [Ludwig] Wittgenstein [1889-1951; Austro-British philosopher], about the nature of language) around an immediately recognisable framework. When he attempted something freestanding, as in Dirty Linen and New-Found-Land (1976) or Night and Day (1978), the results were less happy. In 1980 he admitted that some of the excitement of the theatre had worn thin, saying: “When I started, I wrote a play because I wanted to be a playwright. Now I write plays because I am a playwright.” He was by now one of the most successful in the world, and in 1979 he became “lord” of Iver Grove, a Palladian-style house in Buckinghamshire.

In that year he also wrote Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, a play with full on-stage orchestra, with music by André Previn [1929-2019]. This remarkable hybrid concerned the plight of political prisoners in the Soviet Union, and featured a sane man put in a mental hospital for saying that sane men were being put in mental hospitals. This was the kind of ramifying conundrum on which Stoppard had always thrived, but now the comedy was poignant because the pressing truth was so tragic.

Stoppard had now exhausted the vein of travesty, and his significant output slowed considerably, with perhaps a really good new play emerging each decade. One answer to his dependency problem was to adapt little-known foreign work. Undiscovered Country (1979) was from Arthur Schnitzler; On the Razzle (1981), at the National Theatre with Felicity Kendal playing the lead, was a sublimely funny, fast-moving version of a comedy by Johann Nestroy [Austrian; 1801-62]. Rough Crossing, at the National in 1984, was adapted from Ferenc Molnar [Hungarian; 1878-1952], and concerned the writing of a Broadway musical set on a ship by a composer and its two stars as they are sailing to New York. This was Stoppard’s “sine qua nonchalance” at its best.

His most substantial plays of the 1980s and 1990s were The Real ThingArcadia and The Invention of Love. The title of The Real Thing (1982) referred to the sincerity or otherwise of art and love, but also contained a defence of language used well which may be taken as an attack on the use of blunt propaganda in the theatre by some of Stoppard’s more radical contemporaries.

Whether the play itself was the real thing or merely a tale of adultery among theatre folk, with Stoppard’s fizzing language disguising some fairly trite comparisons, is hard to say.

Reality took a bow shortly afterwards when Stoppard and his leading lady, Kendal, left their respective spouses for each other. He would later describe her as his muse. She starred successively in On the RazzleJumpersHapgood [1988], Arcadia and Indian Ink [1995] (which drew on her early years in India) at the National or in the West End.

Arcadia (1993) was classic Stoppard: a story of love and literature, philosophy and coincidence. Ranging from the age of Byron [English poet George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron, 1788-1824] to that of chaos theory, it combined the suspense of The Aspern Papers [a novella by Henry James (1843-1916), originally published in The Atlantic Monthly in 1888; two film adaptations on 2010 and 2018] with the excitement of the most speculative modern science. “It’s the best possible time to be alive,” declares one character in the present, “when almost everything you thought you knew is wrong.” Like his characters, Stoppard was dancing for joy at what lesser minds would find a frightening prospect. For him, the infinite permutations of life were a cause for celebration.

The Invention of Love (1997) was a far more sombre piece: a profile of AE Housman [1859-1936; English classical scholar and poet] as a classicist who has perhaps failed to seize the day. Once again, Stoppard had done his research, and transformed it into something much more remarkable than a critical biography. Set on the banks of the Isis and the Styx, the play had coincidental appearances in Stoppard’s most elastic manner by Oscar Wilde [1854-1900; Irish author, poet and playwright], Benjamin Jowett [1817-93; English writer and classical scholar] and Frank Harris [1856-1931; Irish-American editor, writer, journalist, and publisher]; yet the staging was unrelievedly drab. There was pathos and an impassioned speech about the importance of truth, and the run was a sell-out, but audiences probably left the theatre knowing more than they cared to about the editing of Latin poetry.

Stoppard’s care for English had something in common with Housman’s care for Latin. It was not his first language — he had spoken only Czech until he was taught English at school in India at the age of five — and he seemed to interrogate language rather than merely use it. Of all his interests, ranging from cricket to mathematics, the tricks of language was the most absorbing.

Between stage work, Stoppard continued writing for the cinema and won an Oscar for the 1998 film Shakespeare in Love, a witty and entertaining piece in which the young Will (Joseph Fiennes) falls for Viola (Gwyneth Paltrow), the daughter of a wealthy merchant.

Stoppard shared the writing credit with an American screenwriter, Marc Norman [b. 1941], who had the idea for the film in the 1980s. Norman’s draft screenplay failed to impress and Stoppard was brought in to improve it.

In 2002 came his most ambitious stage work to date, The Coast of Utopia, a sprawling trilogy about Russia’s 19th-century romantic exiles, Alexander Herzen [1812-70; Russian writer and thinker], Ivan Turgenev [1818-83; Russian writer, poet, and playwright] and Mikhail Bakunin [1814-76; Russian revolutionary anarchist], and their intellectual and personal preoccupations. Directed by Trevor Nunn [b. 1940] at the National, it had a mixed reception, with even favourable critics finding it uneven and flawed. Revived five years later at the Lincoln Center in New York, it enjoyed a decent run and won seven Tony awards.

In 2006 the Royal Court asked Stoppard for a play to mark the 50th anniversary of the English Stage Company. As Stoppard had no previous connection with the theatre, he was a controversial choice, but Rock ‘n’ Roll was good enough to win the opposition over. Partly it was about a Czech rock group’s ability to challenge an autocratic regime through its music, but it was also a wider discourse on liberty, in Britain as much as in communist eastern Europe.

He spent three years, more or less, working on the well-received TV adaptation of Ford Madox Ford’s Parade’s End [2012] but then he seemed to slip back into writer’s block until 2015 when he produced The Hard Problem, his first script in nine years. The Guardian’s critic thought it suffered from “information overload”, while the Telegraph deemed it a “major disappointment”. If he was upset he hid it well behind a façade of levity. When asked whether he found it difficult to talk about work in progress, he said: “Not at all. I’m normally so thrilled to have had an idea at all I tell everyone, even people who have no interest in hearing.”

Four years later it was announced that he had written a new play, Leopoldstadt, set in the Jewish community in Vienna from 1899 onwards, which he described as his most personal play. It culminates in 1955 with an Anglicised schoolboy who is confronted with a family tree showing all his relatives who were butchered in Europe.

Stoppard’s only novel was Lord Malquist and Mr Moon (1966), which he claimed to have written in two days.

He won innumerable theatrical awards, and was appointed CBE [Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire] in 1978, knighted in 1997 and appointed to the Order of Merit in 2000. He gave a number of academic lectures, but they were amusements and insights into his own practice rather than revelations about other writers.

His first wife (1965-72) was Jose Ingle, a nurse, and his second (1972-92) was Miriam Moore-Robinson, the agony aunt, broadcaster and anti-smoking campaigner (Stoppard was a dedicated smoker). There were two sons by each marriage. Oliver is a postman in Norfolk, having abandoned a doctorate in physics for a simpler life; Barnaby runs a restaurant in London; Ed is a successful Shakespearean actor and Will manages his wife, the celebrated violinist Linzi Stoppard. It was while married to Dr Miriam Stoppard, as she was better known, that he embarked on his affair with Kendal. That ended in 1998 and, 16 years later, he married the television producer and heiress Sabrina Guinness, a one-time It girl who had dated Prince Charles [now King Charles III]. They lived in Dorset.

Stoppard always claimed that he wasn’t engaged enough politically to be able to know where to place himself, on the left or right, yet he and Margaret Thatcher [1925-2013; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom: 1979-90] had a soft spot for each other and he once attended a literary dinner held in her honour. Of his politics he said he felt a bit sheepish. It did not stop him becoming one of the founders of the political magazine Standpoint in 2008 [ceased publication in 2021], just as his own lack of formal university education did not stop him becoming a visiting professor in theatre at Oxford in 2017.

He couldn’t wait to be out of education aged 17. “It was years and years before I felt I missed out on something,” he said. “I began to have certain kinds of regret about it. There are probably aspects of the autodidact’s life that compensate. The thing you have to understand is that, as a playwright, you can cover a lot of waterfront without being able to hold your own against an expert in any of those areas.”

A sense of insecurity and a tendency towards self-deprecation may explain his unwillingness to help posterity by keeping a diary, or indeed most of his papers. “I keep some letters,” he said. “I have a couple from Laurence Olivier [1907-89; English actor and director] and one from John Steinbeck [1902-68; American writer], but the rest of my life I destroy as I go along.”

And perhaps insecurity, or at least a nervousness about being exposed as an intellectual impostor, may also account for what he called his cheap side, his love of cheap gags: “The days of the digital watch are numbered,” as one of his characters says, or “if Beethoven had been killed in a plane crash at the age of 22, the history of music would have been very different. As would the history of aviation, of course.”

His sense of humour even extended to his own obituary. Asked in later life what he imagined the first line of his would be, he replied: “Tom Stoppard, the father of Ed Stoppard, has died.”

*  *  *  *
THE GIFT TOM STOPPARD GAVE TO ME
— AND TO ALL WHO ADORE HIM
by Talya Zax

[Tayla Zax’s article was posted on the Forward (New York City) website on 29 November 2025, the day of the playwright’s death.]

The great British Jewish playwright asked profound questions about what it means to live a significant life

In 2022, during a reporting trip to London, I had tea with a source who confessed to me that her mother’s central interest was the work of Tom Stoppard. It was more than an interest, really: “He was the main thing in her life,” she said.

There are artists you admire, and then there are artists you flat-out adore. Particularly cerebral types, like Stoppard, risk falling into the first category: They may generate great thoughts, but those great thoughts have a great chance of leaving you cold. That wasn’t the case for Stoppard, who died Saturday at 88, and was a thinker worth adoring. His best work achieved a rare balance: Audiences left his most affecting plays with both a fresh perspective on the world, and a feeling of great warmth toward it.

I felt that myself, after seeing a much-heralded revival of Stoppard’s Travesties on Broadway in 2018. It’s quite a highbrow play, about the brief intersection, in Switzerland during World War I, of the lives and work of James Joyce, Vladimir Lenin and Tristan Tzara, founder of Dadaism. It made me laugh until I cried. And the gloss Stoppard bestowed on this obscure episode of history followed me out of the theater, giving a brief sheen to everything and everyone I saw. I felt as though I floated back to Brooklyn, and as if the Q train might be full of personalities I’d never guess were important until years afterward.

Much of Stoppard’s work revolved around the question of what it really means to live an important life — one that is not just full, but has some kind of identifiable impact on others. The main character of Travesties isn’t Joyce, Lenin or Tzara; he’s an endearingly self-satisfied British diplomat, Henry Carr, who briefly found himself in the same circles as those luminaries. As the play opens, decades later, he’s trying to conjure up a memoir about his time in the presence of the greats, with the implication that he deserves to be considered among their ranks.

In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, the play that made Stoppard into a star at age 29, the two title characters grapple with their inability to in any way change the course of a narrative — that of Hamlet — that they know will lead to their deaths. In Shakespeare in Love, the film that won Stoppard an Oscar in 1998, he and his coauthor Marc Norman imagined the king of English playwrights as a young man full of talent but still struggling toward greatness, in need of an overwhelming emotional shock to propel him into complete ownership of his gifts.

There are the 19th-century Russian revolutionaries of the ambitious trilogy The Coast of Utopia; the intellectuals seeking to redefine the world and its history in Arcadia; the striving academics of The Hard Problem; the newly emancipated Viennese Jews of Leopoldstadt, the play Stoppard wrote that most profoundly invoked his heritage. Over and over, variations of the same question emerge. What does it mean to live completely and well, as an individual and a member of society?

“If there is any meaning in any of it” — “it” being the brutal course of history, its neverending cycles of destruction — ”it is in what survives as art, yes even in the celebration of tyrants, yes even in the celebration of nonentities,” Joyce declares in Travesties. Later, Carr echoes him — a surprise, as the two hold very little respect for one another. When told that the only relevant function of art is “social criticism,” he protests.

“A great deal of what we call art,” he says, “has no such function, and yet in some way it gratifies a hunger that is common to princes and peasants.”

Not everyone wants to be an artist, and, as Carr reflects at the end of Travesties, it’s a sure thing that not everyone can be. But in the wake of Stoppard’s death, I’ve found myself thinking about the mother of my one-time source, so enraptured by what Stoppard created that her own child saw his work as the most profound passion of her life.

It’s easy to say that kind of effect made Stoppard’s life important. But the quieter story, I think, is that it made that devoted fan’s life important, too. Because she loved Stoppard, she saw herself as more firmly secured in her own existence; she saw herself as having a purpose and place.

To help someone experience their own significance — to gratify the common hunger that afflicts us all — is a great gift. And Stoppard gave it to many, including to me.

[Talya Zax is a culture critic, journalist, and editor based in Brooklyn.  She’s the Forward’s opinion editor.  In addition to Forward, her criticism and reporting has appeared in The Atlantic, the New Yorker, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the website Literary Hub.]

*  *  *  *
HIS WORDS WERE ABLAZE WITH ENERGY AND URGENCY
by Ben Brantley 

[While the New York Times published Stoppard’s obituary, “Dramatist Whose Wit Put a New Spin on Shakespeare, and Love” by Bruce Weber, in its print edition on 1 December (“Tom Stoppard, Award-Winning Playwright of Witty Drama, Dies at 88” online), it ran several companion pieces that day and the next.  On that same day, in “The Arts” (sec. C),  Elizabeth Vincentelli published “Tom Stoppard’s Imprint Is Enduring on Film” (“Movies Written by Tom Stoppard to Stream”). 

[The next day, in the arts section, the Times ran Marc Tracy’s “Final Play Confronts a Revelation” (“When Tom Stoppard Confronted His Background in His Final Play”) and Eric Grode’s “Skilled in Screenwriting as Well as Stagecraft” (“Tom Stoppard Wrote Dialogue for Indiana Jones and Obi-Wan Kenobi”), another piece on Stoppard’s screenwriting.

[In that same arts section, Ben Brantley had “His Words Were Ablaze With Energy and Urgency” (“The Language of Tom Stoppard, Ablaze With Energy and Urgency,“ posted on 29 November 2025 and updated on 30 November).  It’s former Times drama reviewer Brantley’s analysis of Stoppard’s stage language.]

Tom Stoppard embraced big questions and wrestled language into bold shapes.

On a sticky August day in London 23 years ago, I walked into the Royal National Theater with glazed eyes, a heavy tread and what felt like an unconquerable weariness. I was fresh — or rather stale — off a plane from New York, and before me lay nine-plus hours of people with unpronounceable names talking about Russian history.

A picture of me, unidentified, appeared in The Evening Standard the next day, sitting in the audience behind a reporter who was writing about how to survive the event in question: the marathon performance of Tom Stoppard’s trilogy about the ideas behind the Russian Revolution, ‘‘The Coast of Utopia,’’ which was officially opening that day. I looked close to dead.

That was taken before 11 a.m. If I had been photographed again that night, walking along the Thames 12 hours later, you would have seen an improbably energized man, who looked as if he’d just fallen in love. Wouldn’t you know it? Stoppard’s words had cured me of terminal jet lag.

I should have known that would be the case, of course. The language of Stoppard — the Czech-born British dramatist who has died at 88 — has always affected me like an intravenous cocktail of adrenaline and endorphins.

He may well have been the most prolix playwright in the English language since George Bernard Shaw, as he wrestled with subjects that were, if not arcane, then unusually academic by most standards. The play that made his name, ‘‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead’’ (1966), retold ‘‘Hamlet’’ from the point of view of two inescapably marginal characters in that tragedy. And his penultimate work, ‘‘The Hard Problem’’ (2015), debated the nature of consciousness itself.

Such topics were analyzed in a thick, continuous flow of theorizing given polysyllabic life that, examined dispassionately and out of context on the page, might indeed make the eyelids grow heavier. Dispassionate, however, is not how I ever felt watching a Stoppard play.

That’s because Stoppard invested words with an energy and an urgency that were less purely intellectual than they were existential. Not for nothing did his 1972 play ‘‘Jumpers’’ — about physics, metaphysics and the elusiveness of moral absolutes — feature a supporting cast of bouncing, bending gymnasts.

Words, for him, were confounding, exhilarating, form-shifting phenomena that we are all forever trying to wrestle into coherent shape. And actors in his plays over the years — John Wood, Simon Russell Beale, Sinead Cusack, Diana Rigg, Tom Hollander, Jeremy Irons, Jennifer Ehle — allowed us to feel the tragicomic heat that emanated from such wrestling matches.

For words were what we — and particularly he — had to work with in giving order to the glorious, irreducible chaos that is life. He loved his words to the point of mania and yet fretted over their inadequacy, making the mere act of speech seem somehow both heroic and doomed. He caused words to explode like fireworks, dazzling us with their bright, multicolored patterns.

Stoppard also would not let us forget that such fireworks were ephemeral displays that faded against the night sky. But as he had his version of Oscar Wilde say in ‘‘The Invention of Love,’’ about the donnish poet A.E. Housman, ‘‘Better a fallen rocket, than never a burst of light.’’

I fell in love with Stoppard’s work in late adolescence, when I was easily seduced by cloud-scraping cleverness and appalled by cheap sentimentality. (The one we discussed most feverishly in college was an English major’s teen dream: ‘‘Travesties,’’ which imagined an encounter, centered on an amateur production of Wilde’s ‘‘The Importance of Being Earnest,’’ among James Joyce, Tristan Tzara and Vladimir Lenin.) I made the mistake, then, of subscribing to the common view that Stoppard was a cerebral being, who concerned himself more with matters of the mind than the heart.

Yet the more I saw of Stoppard’s work — and I reviewed more productions of his plays during my years as a critic than I can count — the more I realized how misguided this point of view was. And it wasn’t just the plays that were proclaimed as voyages into the more personal realms of semi-autobiography: the midcareer ‘‘The Real Thing’’ (1982), about an inhibited playwright who learns to get in touch with his feelings, and the magisterial ‘‘Leopoldstadt’’ (2020), his last complete play, in which he reckoned with the legacy of his Jewish roots and the Holocaust.

All of Stoppard’s plays, in performance, were likely to bring tears to my eyes, including the seemingly esoteric and hyper-intellectual ‘‘Travesties,’’ ‘‘Jumpers’’ and the time-traveling ‘‘Arcadia,’’ a sort of academic mystery play set in a past and present shadowed by an unseen Lord Byron.

That’s because of the inevitably thwarted but valiant and vital attempts of their characters to solve the mysteries that confront them and us daily. These embrace not only the really big questions — the hard problem of consciousness or the mechanical clockwork of the universe — but also the issues of simply how to be in a world that keeps changing its rules on us and of the impossibility of fully knowing another human being.

Yet if the great conundrums could never be solved, Stoppard never discounted the mystical beauty of the attempts to do so. When I heard Stoppard had died, the first image that materialized in my mind was of Cusack, playing a cancer-riddled classics professor in ‘‘Rock ‘n’ Roll,’’ making an impassioned argument against materialism: ‘‘I am not my body. My body is nothing without me.’’

I found this declaration comforting. The essence of Stoppard’s words will continue to blaze long after his death. Fireworks may be only for the moment, but they leave traces of light that are never quite extinguished in the memory.

[Ben Brantley was the chief theater reviewer of the New York Times for more than 20 years.  He wrote more than 2,500 reviews over 27 years beginning in 1993, filing regularly from London as well as New York.  He retired from regular reviewing in 2020.

[I often disagreed with Brantley’s assessments of plays we both saw.  There was more than one occasion when I wondered if he had even seen the same play that I had.  But reading his sense of Stoppard’s dramaturgy, I can’t help but feel we received this playwright the same way.

[“Tom Stoppard Remembered” is being posted in two parts, with Part 1 above.  The second part, which consists of a single essay by the playwright, himself, from 1999, will be posted on Sunday, 7 December.  I invite ROTters to come back to this site then for the completion of this short series in honor of the renowned British dramatist.]