Petr Šesták: Capturing the global human anthill

When and where did the idea to write a play based on the phenomenon of so-called Darwin Awards come about?

Petr Šesták: I think it was sometime around the end of February and beginning of March this year, when the idea that I could write a play for Provázek first came about. Finding a theme is probably the most challenging part of the creative process for me. When I write prose, the theme has to be established at the same time as the form; it has to relate deeply to my experience, and such a constellation occurs only very rarely. I probably wouldn't be able to write prose based on someone else's theme, but I took the challenge of writing a play as an opportunity to try creative collaboration, which has always appealed to me. So I was happy when Martin Sládeček and Veronika Onheiserová came up with several ideas right away. In the end, the Darwin Awards resonated the most.

How did you know that this was the right topic for you?

When we were discussing possible topics in a café, ideas immediately started popping into my head about Darwin Awards. I enjoyed the idea of theatrical grotesqueness and absurdity, which this phenomenon automatically carries with it, but at the same time, I immediately saw the broader themes and topicality of the subject in relation to today's world, where Darwin's theory continues to resonate more and more strongly in a vulgarized form in society and political discourse. It is also significant how it is linked to capitalism and free market ideologies, for example by using economic vocabulary, words such as competition or inheritance. Of course, the theme also opens up the topic of growing concerns that our own superpowers or superstupidity will wipe us out of the evolutionary chain as a whole. When I then began to study the texts and videos on the real Darwin Awards, I was completely horrified by the mocking and lecturing tone associated with them. I knew I had to go in a completely different direction in terms of meaning. So all that remained of the Darwin Awards was inspiration from real cases and fundamental contradictions: if stupid death is evolutionarily beneficial, is it still stupid? What can we possibly know about what will prove beneficial for the survival of our species in the future?

What made you finally accept the offer?

First of all, it's hard to turn down an offer like that. I learned about Husa na provázku Theatre in high school! Then there was also a bit of a misunderstanding, because at first I thought it was a non-binding offer, that I would try to write something, and if it had potential, then maybe we could work on it further in the future. So I said I'd go for it, and Martin Sládeček replied, "Okay, the premiere will be in early November, and Anna Davidová will direct it." At that moment, my heart skipped a beat, as they say. But what gave me courage after the initial shock was the team of the theater, whom I had met before when I had the opportunity to see the preparations for the adaptation of my book Vyhoření (Burnout). Knowing that Martin would be behind the project as a dramaturge, Anna as a director, and their entire team full of inspiring people gave me the confidence I needed.

Petr Šesták at the first read-through rehearsal of Darwin & co., Divadlo Husa na provázku
Photo: David Konečný

To what extent did your original idea of what you were writing change during the writing process?

Overall, I think I fulfilled my original idea of where I wanted the text to go in terms of meaning. Not much changed there. But it was often surprising to see how different scenes developed and how specific characters took shape. Martin and Anna were very helpful in this regard. Together, we discussed various cases of our "Darwins" and figured out how to work with them. I often elaborated on their impulses and ideas, and I am very glad that I was able to try working more collectively. Writing prose, on the other hand, is a very solitary activity. I learned a lot from thinking about the text as a basis for theater together. And for the first time, I also wrote some longer dialogues! I was surprised how, until the last moment before I write a line, I don't know what the character will actually say. Although I must know somehow, because the character is also me. Interesting creative alchemy!

What sources did you draw on when writing?

I am not an author who does meticulous research. I feel that too much knowledge of a particular area might help me with the details, but it would distract me from the overall meaning of the work. However, I need to create some kind of intellectual background on which to build. The basis for the individual cases of sophisticated deaths caused by one's own fault was Darwin's actual awards; the vast majority of the situations I used are real. Then, of course, I read parts of Darwin's works, his biography, and I reached for authors who inspired him or whom he inspired. I listened to lectures on evolutionary biology. And then there are many other sources that are not directly related to evolutionary theory, such as Chekhov, Lermontov, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, a recording of the mass "suicide" of a sect in Jonestown, dialogues from Pulp Fiction or Jim Jarmusch's films, interviews with technology magnates, quotes from Immanuel Kant, or reels of influencers...

What role did Charles Darwin or his work play for you?

Although I was primarily interested in the Darwin who is somehow simplified and misused in current cultural and political disputes, I tried to delve a little deeper into his ideas for myself. At first, I perceived him in a rather simplistic way, as some kind of bogeyman who always appears in social discourse with his absolute and final truth. Gradually, however, I began to find him quite likable. An anxious guy, not an adventurer at all, who by coincidence found himself on a great adventure sailing around the world, from which he drew inspiration for the rest of his orderly, peaceful life. Basically, he was probably a deeply religious man who, with his theory, denied the dogmas of his own faith and was a little confused by it. But even his seminal work, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, is interesting. Mostly, it is the ideas about the struggle for life and competition that are highlighted, and it must be said that Darwin himself emphasized them a lot, but at the same time he often writes about the diversity and interconnectedness of everything in nature. I think that even in his work we can find many arguments as to why the "victory of the stronger" is not always a victory for the species as such.

This is your first play ever – what was new or different for you about writing for the theater?

We've already touched on this a bit, but what's new for me is primarily the collective dimension that suddenly enters the creative process with the entire theater. While writing, I received a lot of input on the text from the dramaturge and director. And at the first read-through, when I had basically finished the text, I realized how unfinished it was until the production was created. How much it could still blossom in the hands of other people without losing the meaning I had imbued it with. Ideally, it should be an open, inspiring challenge for staging, but at the same time, it should guard and preserve the meaning of its message. Hopefully, I succeeded.

First read-through rehearsal of Darwin & co., Husa na provázku Theater
Photo: David Konečný

How important was it for you that this was a specific theater with which you had previous experience in terms of its poetics and ensemble?

As a spectator, I am quite selective and do not tolerate every theatrical poetics without pain. I became close to Provázek and his team last year during the preparation of the adaptation of my book Vyhoření (Burnout). I did not want to interfere with the creation of the production in any way, I just wanted to see how it was created. To get at least a little taste of theater. And I was thrilled by the respect and honesty with which the entire ensemble approached the text, how they all thought about it and discussed it. For the first time, I truly hoped with all my heart that I had written it well, since poor Dominik had to learn almost the entire thing by heart! I would have been mortified for every poorly written sentence. In any case, I feel close to Provázek's way of working and theatrical poetics, and I feel a strong kinship on a human level, which is certainly decisive for the final form of the play!

How did you search for linguistic gestures? Did you aim to individualize each character through language?

Our theme called for a lot of characters and for capturing a kind of global human anthill. The play should connect diverse situations and themes, and logically, different linguistic layers also find their way into it. There are a lot of micro-situations, so it's not possible to go into any deep psychology at the character level. Nevertheless, I tried to portray them as vividly as possible, and specific linguistic gestures are a good means to that end—just a few sentences and the character's language alone will reveal a lot about them. But at the same time, even when I write prose, for example, I don't imagine any real people behind my characters; I perceive the characters as carriers of certain meanings that work for the meaning of the work as a whole. And in a way, I like it when the reader or viewer perceives them in this way, when they can identify with the characters on a human level, but at the same time they constantly maintain a bird's-eye view and perceive them from a distance as bearers of symbols and parables.

In your novel Vyhoření (Burnout, 2023), published here last season under the title Jednou nám za to děcka poděkujou (Someday the Kids Will Thank Us), you write, among other things, about the ability of tools to connect to the brain and reset our perception. It seems that the relationship between "man and tool" continues to fascinate you. While Vyhoření (Burnout) was primarily about a means of transport, this time the text features a whole range of tools that humans have used and, as a rule, lost during the course of evolution, from sticks to AI technology. How do you think AI resets our perception of the world?

In Vyhoření (Burnout), alongside cars and bicycles, there is also a digital tool, the Platform, which mediates the relationship between the courier and the customer. The Platform itself is growing, while those who work for it are stagnating. The Platform uses algorithms to determine the rhythm of the courier's life, almost every move they make. I think that since the beginning of the industrial revolution, we have been creating tools that also turn us into tools, and there are moments when I begin to doubt whether we are still emerging victorious from this contradictory movement—I use tools to achieve something vs. tools use me to achieve something for some abstract super-tool, apparatus. I don't want to speculate too much about what AI will cause, but it is already causing something. Our shift to the virtual world is already happening on many levels. For example, when it comes to texts, if AI generates texts based on some averaging and compilation of existing texts, and we read these compilations, even if only as aids in our studies or to speed up our work, it is difficult to imagine that this will not affect us in return. I am not afraid that AI will start writing texts like humans, but that humans will start writing and thinking like AI.

Director Anna Davidová and dramaturge Martin Sládeček, Husa na provázku Theater
Photo: David Konečný

So you're more pessimistic about the development of AI and the future of the human race?

I'm rather pessimistic about the near future. The problem is not AI itself, but rather that its development is not being driven by good intentions. Technological development is not currently driven by a desire to improve people's lives, fight poverty, give people free time to devote to education, and so on, but by an excessive desire of profit for profit's sake, power for power's sake, superiority for superiority's sake... Certainly, a dangerous tool can be created with good intentions, but I doubt that the reverse is true, that a safe tool can be created with bad intentions. And this is where vulgar Darwinism comes in: that's just the way it is, it's natural, it's evolution, there's nothing you can do about it, you can't stop progress... But I would like to believe that we, as humanity, have the will to stand up to this technological fatalism, to start thinking about whether the path we have taken makes any sense at all. Perhaps the production should lead the audience to these reflections.

And finally, what literary genre do you think human evolution belongs to?

I would say the same as our play: existential grotesque with a fairly open ending!

Petr Šesták (1981) is the author of the novel pamphlet Vyhoření (Burnout), nominated for the Magnesia Litera 2023 award and presented at Provázek under the title Jednou nám za to děcka poděkujou (Someday the Kids Will Thank Us). His previous works, which span a wide range of genres, have also been highly acclaimed: the poetic and philosophical travelogue Kočovná galerie (2014), the collection of short stories Štvanice (2015), the novel Kontinuita parku (2021), and the children's book Cesta je pes (2023). He lived in a camper van for two years, traveling across Europe with a mobile photography exhibition. He currently lives mainly in Prague. He operates analog photo booths and organizes cultural events in Mikulov in South Moravia. The text Darwin & co., written specifically for the Husa na provázku Theater company, is his dramatic debut.

The premiere of Darwin & co., directed by Anna Davidová, will take place on November 7, 2025, at the Husa na provázku Theater.