Demirski on the Myth of Wałęsa

«Paweł Demirski: I wish it were so. I wish young Poles would stop fearing political engagement. Lech Wałęsa could by a modern icon for a new workers movement, a subject for discussion not only amongst intellectuals but amongst factory workers and corporations as well. It is a pity that it seems this scenario will not play out in real life. Wałęsa exists in their general memory, but he is a dead symbol, one that does not motivate them to change the world.

Q: And you? Do you carry the myth of Wałęsa in your heart? You were born in 1979, so you were a child when Wałęsa lead Solidarity.

PD: I am a citizen of Gdańsk, and the myth of Wałęsa was very strong in my home. I remember him; and I remember my father having stickers with his image. To this day, I am fascinated by Wałęsa as being a leader of a great social movement. I would love to see a movie made about Wałęsa; about a guy from a factory who leads a social movement against the government; but I would change the language from one of national independence to the language of rebellion, battle with the existing realities. It would be interesting to re-evaluate Wałęsa in this way. It would be very sexy.

Q: It would have to be a movie about a flawed hero.

PD: But his flaws make him all the more heroic. I like heroes that we can love, but also hate a little bit. Such heroes are not sterotypes. Wałęsa was the type of guy who would sometimes get angry at people and not shake hands with them - I like that.

Q: In other words you like the fact that he's politically incorrect?

PD: Yes; he brought the manners and habits of working class life into the public arena. This is the source of his behavior - for instance during the debates with Kwaśniewski. He was just behaving as if he were in his house. Maybe Wałęsa feels at home no matter where in Poland he might be? I don't think this is bad. I remember talking to an intellectual once; she was going on about how badly behaved Wałęsa was due to his working class upbringing. I don't like when people say such things. It is precisely Wałęsa's bad behavior that helped us bring about a revolution in Poland.

Q: But his bad behavior didn't help Poland after the revolution. He would quarrel with everyone. Perhaps it just goes to show that revolutionaries should not hold power?

PD: That would be too shallow an interpretation. The guy fights the system, goes to jail, turns everything on its' head - and then he's supposed to step aside? The real problem was that the people around Wałęsa had no clue how to use him as a positive instrument following the revolution.

Q: But isn't that a very shallow interpretation? Wałęsa became very stubborn and wouldn't let other opinions influence him after 1989...

PD: Well, that's a different matter. But I think that the intellectuals gave up trying to talk to him far too quickly. The global potential of Wałęsa was wasted...because he was not well mannered? I remember that initially everyone spoke well of Wałęsa, and then afterwards everyone spoke only ill of him. When preparing to write my play about Wałęsa, I noted how deeply ingrained the false propaganda of the Communist security services had become in the Polish mentality. Prior to 1989, the propaganda was that Wałęsa was an ignorant man, who stole money and lived in luxury. Following 1989, this propaganda became the mainstream view. We Poles destroyed the myth of Wałęsa ourselves; and the intellectuals helped accomplish this.

Q: You keep blaming the intellectuals, but the working classes also believed the negative propaganda.

PD: True, but I will persist in this view; the intellectuals could have helped stop the smearing of Wałęsa.

Q: Do you fear the books by Cenckiewicz and Gontarczyk?

PD: No. Initially I wasn't even going to buy the book, because I figured that authors were just playing the politics of personal destruction. I might read it to see if my view if confirmed or not. If there are some historical facts in the book then these will have to be confronted; nothing should be hidden.

Q: You seem to be a believer in the myth of Wałęsa; aren't you afraid reading the book will dissillusion you?

PD: I don't know if anyone can dissillusion me. I really don't idealize Wałęsa. I read his book and when he admits to having signed the loyalty oath of the Communist regime, I wasn't surprised.

Q: Wałęsa doesn't make things any easier on himself. Rather than using facts and logical arguments, he simply lashes out at his detractors.

PD: Wałęsa is tired and angry. He still has his old temper. This explains his behavior. He already admited to signing the loyalty oath - so what else is there to require of him?»