Ariel Dorfman's play "Death and the Maiden," conceived in the early 1980s and completed in 1990, reflects Chile's fraught journey from dictatorship to democracy. It gained international acclaim, first in London and then globally, for its riveting exploration of themes related to truth, justice, and reconciliation. While the New York production was criticized for lacking the political nuance that made it resonate elsewhere, its complex narrative continues to engage audiences worldwide.

The Genesis of the Play

"Death and the Maiden," originally titled "Scars on the Moon," was born during a period of significant political unrest in Chile. Ariel Dorfman completed the play in the wake of Patricio Aylwin's election and the establishment of Chile's Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. These events provided fertile ground for Dorfman to transform his initial concept into a compelling narrative. Though set in a fictional country reminiscent of Chile, the play's universal themes of justice and retribution captured the attention of global audiences, beginning with its critical success in London. There, it featured in the London International Festival of Theatre, before transitioning to a popular West End production.

International Reception

From its inception, "Death and the Maiden" was warmly received on the international stage, reinforcing Dorfman’s reputation as a vital voice in contemporary theater. Critical acclaim in London contrasted with mixed reviews from the Broadway production. While the performances by Glenn Close, Richard Dreyfuss, and Gene Hackman were star-studded, critics were divided on whether the play's perceived weaknesses stemmed from the direction by Mike Nichols or from the play itself. American and English audiences, less attuned to the immediate political context of transitioning democracies, found the play accessible yet less potent compared to its reception in nations grappling with similar historical narratives.

Exploring Universal Themes

Despite regional differences in reception, many reviewers acknowledged the play's exploration of universal themes. Matt Wolf of the Times of London noted its unlikely success given its subject matter, stating that "Dorfman argues that its time is now." By grounding the character Paulina’s anger in tangible historical contexts, the play also universalizes her rage as a product of systemic injustice, resonating with audiences beyond those directly affected by political turmoil. Dorfman himself remarked that Paulina's fury "comes out of something ... that can be understood as the product of a system," yet she speaks on behalf of more than just torture victims.

Critical Perspectives

The critical discussion around "Death and the Maiden" reveals a tapestry of opinions. Andrew Graham-Yooll, inspired by the London production, praised the "gapping, thrilling and intense theatre" created by the interplay of the three main characters. Meanwhile, John Butt from the Times Literary Supplement described the play as "harrowing," and acknowledged its strength in refusing to offer "easy answers" to the moral dilemmas it presents. This refusal, according to Butt, lent the play a more realistic edge as it mirrored the ongoing struggles of new democracies dealing with past injustices.

Conversely, Frank Rich from the New York Times criticized the Broadway rendition for trivializing the play's depth. Although he recognized the "ingenious" nature of Dorfman's ability to weave complex issues into a suspenseful narrative, Rich found that the lighter tone of Nichols' production detracted from its power, reducing it to a "fey domestic comedy" instead of a serious political work. Mimi Kramer in the New Yorker echoed this sentiment, pointing to the play's "flaccid" handling and its failure to move beyond its initial premise of Paulina contemplating revenge.

Debate Over Dramatic Technique

The differences in opinion also extended to the play's dramatic techniques. John Simon, in New York magazine, critiqued the "unconvincing" devices used to establish...