Bridging the Gap between Vision and Reality: History and Audience Engagement in Howard Brenton's Weapons of Happiness

Howard Brenton's play Weapons of Happiness seems to be caught between the political situation, where positive, constructive utopian designs are no longer possible, and the critical atmosphere, where even sympathetic left-leaning critics join in the general criticism of the lack of clear political vision in the play. In fact, to a degree, Weapons of Happiness avoids the definition of the socialist ideal, and the achievement of vision is postponed. This huge gulf between the ideal and the real in Weapons of Happiness misleadingly has made the critics condemn Brenton's lack of political message or has forced them to find the core of the play only in apocalyptic aspect. However, the nature of the conflict between historical vision and social reality in Weapons of Happiness should be examined in the context of the establishment of more active relationship with the audience. This essay argues that instead of the failed revolutionaries in the play, it is the audience who must perform the hard work of analysis and make the connections in Weapons of Happiness. In Weapons of Happiness, the series of contradictions largely revolves around the huge gap between historical vision and contemporary reality. The historical perspective provided by the political leaders at the 'macro' level of history including revolutionary vision and heroism is contradictory to the dreary reality of the workers at the 'micro' level of history. In two separate but interrelated storylines, one relates Josef Frank's fragmented recall of his revolutionary past, and the other charts the on-the-spot events of the workers' endeavor to achieve the revolution. The two series of events collide with each other, maximizing the audience's critical assessment of their own role in history. In the play, the past is suggested as a fundamental foundation on which the present is constituted, and against the future, the present is measured and founding wanting. The utopian potential of final word depends upon the audience.