Rossum's Universal Robots in the play were more like clones or
artificial humans than mechanical devices, but their role in the story was the
modern codification of the Robot War trope, in which the robots destroy their
creators by the end, except for one human being they keep alive in the hopes
that he can make more of them. The play touches on many themes that are still
relevant today, and quite a few that are rather outdated, but one of the most
interesting plot developments of this play, early on, is the least talked
about:
The first thing the robots do, that really FREAKS THE HUMANS OUT, is
they form Unions.
No shit.
In the play, that's kind of what does it. Humans get really freaked out
when the robots organize. This is before there is any
indication of a genocidal human-robot war.
Like I said... No shit.
Čapek was not an anarchist or a socialist. He was a liberal. His play
reflected the bourgeois anxieties of his day. That is why these themes are
relevant: it's almost 100 years later since this play premiered in 1921, and
labor is on the rise again. The past few years have seen a significant increase
in strike activity. The teachers in West Virginia staged a successful Wildcat
Strike. And then there is the conspicuous resurgence of the Industrial Workers
of the World.
Much of the discussion these days about this play is misleading. It is
often thought of as a play about civil rights (it's not). It is about
dehumanization, but humans, the master class, are portrayed largely as victims in the play of the
robots, the working class. The word "robot" came from a Czech word for "serf" that the play appropriated to indicate an "automated worker." The narrative does not favor labor. This is not a play about the liberation of an underclass. It is a warning to the master class to manage the working class well, or the violent and subhuman working class will kill them. It has to be read in the context of
liberal anxiety regarding radical labor. In 1921, the neoliberal hegemony had yet to totally suppress radical labor, and Čapek was not exactly
sympathetic to radicalism. This play was about dehumanization via
mechanization, but his overall philosophy was pessimistic about change. Hence,
capitalist society creates artificial life; capitalist society enslaves
artificial life; artificial life massacres humans, artificial life (the underclass) is just as bad or worse than the master class. It's about our fear of
losing what we have to the "Other," not about the radical potential
for change. And that is a the difference between Liberals and the Left.
Čapek himself did not even consider the play his best work, and seemed to regret that it was his most influential.
That being said, no reading is complete without a note about the list of characters in the beginning: Yes, there is a character named Busman, who is an extremely offensive stereotype of Jewish people. He is literally described in the character list only as "fat, bald, short-sighted Jew." He is the only character whose ethnicity or race is specified, other than, you know, the robots. He is an accountant. His Jewish ancestry is not even plot relevant, which is why the writer chooses to stuff that short description in the character list with as much anti-semitism as possible, since it wouldn't be covered by the plot. Clearly, it was very important to note that this character was an ugly Jew who deals with money. None of the other characters even have physical descriptions. Except the "fat, bald, short-sighted Jew." Who just happens to be an accountant.
Fuck you,