Milan Kundera’s “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”,

The conclusion of the tale of three of the four main characters in Milan Kundera's "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" represented a sarcastic critique of the ideals of communist paradise. This is clear in the conclusion of these characters' storylines in the book's final parts. Certain aspects of these characters' lives were created by Kundera to imitate or reflect some aspects of socialism, and he used these elements to show the reader the pitfalls of a socialist paradise, which was a belief that all means of production should be equally owned and implemented by the collective, rather than just the wealthy few, as opposed to capitalism. As Kundera pointed out in the book, the leaders who once thought this paradise is possible have already resigned to the reality that it could not be achieved, but only after they have already made a considerable damage on the society, so they decided to continue with this failed system and not take responsibility of their actions due to ignorance. This is the main premise of the protagonist, Tomas in his alleged subversive article wherein he contrasted the government leaders to Oedipus. In his essay, he explained that they both do not know of their fate, but upon finding out of all the damages that they have done to others because of their ignorance, Oedipus took out his eyes and took responsibility for the consequences of his actions, whereas the leaders pretended that they did nothing wrong and continued to pursue power. In the end, Tomas dies in an accident as a country fellow, despite his prestigious education and medical background as a successful surgeon. His gravestone read, “He wanted the kingdom of God on Earth” (P.145). This is Kundera’s comical way of imitating an aspect of socialist paradise in the characters’ stories. In socialist paradise, all people are equal despite their differences in education, skills, knowledge and the way they lived their lives, thus, everything that have set Tomas apart from everyone else such as his individuality, his philosophies on lightness, his perceived moral superiority for the article that he has written, all his sexual conquests, all his numerous experiences has been reduced to nothing but a gravestone that does not even reflect how he lived his life nor what he wanted in his life. He recognized the imperfection of man and the world and he lived his life according to his perception of the ugly reality of life, and he did not want the perfect kingdom of God on Earth, yet that was what was left of him after his death, which represents how people are stripped off of their own views, philosophies and morality by the socialist system that promotes compliance and thinking like everyone else in the collective.

One of the most evident parodies of the socialist paradise in the book is depicted in the case of Sabina’s character and her story. Kundera created Sabina as a character who pursues the lightness of being. She is noncommittal to her lovers, and she has the tendency to betray them, which was evident when she left Franz after he left his wife for her. Sabina’s character represents defiance of the socialist paradise wherein absolute equality prevails. She is a strong person who is very confident and aware of her individuality and the things that sets her apart from everyone else. She mocks the system and called it “kitsch” wherein the ugly truth of the socialist society are hidden from the awareness of the people, and everything has been made sentimental and dramatic just to appear presentable, aesthetically pleasing and desirable. “My enemy is kitsch, not communism“ (p.133), Sabina said this referring to all things that cover up the reality and present an illusion that everything is beautiful and well. “Kitsch has its source in the categorical agreement wit being… there are various kitsches: Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Communist, Fascist, democratic, feminist, European, American, national, international.” (p.134). Kundera comically pointed out what’s wrong with socialist paradise and totalitarianism by relating it to a story about Stalin’s son who died because of his adherence to the social standard of denying that “shit” exists. “The aesthetic ideal of the categorical agreement with being is a world in which shit is denied and everyone acts as though it did not exist” (p.140), that is how Kundera described kitsch, and it is prevalent in the socialist society wherein only the positive, agreeable, pleasant and desirable are presented to the people, and the people are brainwashed to deny all the negative things about the society which is represented by “shit”. Kundera’s comical metaphor regarding “shit” and the decays of society was aimed at poking fun at the socialist paradise and to raise the reader’s awareness about how they are constantly being manipulated to deny the wrong things that have been happening.

In Franz’s story, his fascination with the Grand March, or the movement towards leftist system, and his death is also one of the most obvious parodies that Kundera has written about socialist paradise. Franz viewed the Grand March as “the splendid march on the road to brotherhood, equality, justice and happiness” (p.135), which suggests that his desire to be a part of it represents his desire for socialism. However, like many of the socialist leaders, as described by Tomas in his article, Franz also woke up to the realization that socialist paradise could not be achieved and that the march is meaningless and it must end. This was evident when he realized why people are doing it such as the actress and a pop singer who marched in Cambodia in order to get the sympathy of an audience for their own vanity, while most other people are simply indifferent to do anything, an others are simply protesting to keep up with what is relevant or in fashion. The Grand March is contantly changing: “Yesterday against the American occupation of Vietnam, today against the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia; yesterday for Israel, today for the Palestinians; yesterday for Cuba, tomorrow against Cuba… to keep up with events … platform is shrinking … to a mere dimensionless dot” (p.139-140). Kundera points out in these events how inconsistent and indecisive people are and they are just continually going towards wherever they think the new “underdog” is. In Franz’s death, the parody was how irrelevant, untimely and meaningless his death was, after he tried to live a life in support of the oppressed. He went to Cambodia to fight for the rights of the common people, while it is also ironic that he died in the hands of the people he was marching for.

In conclusion, the death of Tomas and Franz, and Sabina’s existence are all some of the creations of Kundera in the book in order to present socialist paradise as something laughable, ironic and unattainable. He described all the negativities of the socialist society in a comical yet deep way in keeping with the theme of the book of lightness and weight.



Work cited:

Kundera, Milan, and Richmond Hoxie. The unbearable lightness of being. New York: Harper & Row, 1984.