Analysis Of Testaments Betrayed By Kundera

In the passage from “Testaments Betrayed”, Kundera speaks about how there should be a division between one’s private and public life. As she uses Jan Prochazka as an example basically explaining how he was raped of his life as his private conversations with his friend were recorded and broadcasted to the public with the intent to discredit him. She uses a curtain that should never be removed as an analogy to explain that no one should play with someone’s private and public life. Basically, inferring as those who tamper with someone’s privacy and turning it into a public matter should be identified as a criminal. Since when you are not allowed a private life, there is no way you can be a free man. In even current day politics candidates dig for confidential information to use against each other basically causing voters’ minds to be persuade and this is seen in the 2016 US election and even in the election of 1800. Also, in current day, communist countries like Syria, North Korea, and Russia people lack the ability to have a private life as the government puts restrains and policies that prevents one’s privacy. Even in US history when slavery was allowed the slaves where rewarded to expose fellow slaves who talked “dirty” about their master basically creating no freedom what so ever and the restriction of not being able to speak your mind. Privacy is necessary for everyone and should never be tampered with as when one’s privacy is exposed to the public it is problematic as their life and freedom would be negatively affected. In the U.S elections we can see an example of candidate’s privacy being robbed from them as their private life is exposed to the public for everyone to see. An example was the 2016 election, Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton in where they were many scenarios that exposed Trump or Hillary. The closest example to this topic was a private conversation that was recorded between Trump and Billy Bush in where the mics where on without Trumps consent in where he said an extremely inappropriate phrase when asked a question. When this …show more content…
The well renounced Nat Tuner’s rebellion which was the most successful was almost put down as a fellow slave told their master, that Nat was planning to do a rebellion, but he did not believe him as the he believed no slave can do such a thing. But when Nat and his followers found out that there was a tattle tale he was killed during the rebellion as he was a criminal in their eyes since he pulled the curtain between the private and public life of the slaves at the time. This is similar with Jan’s story as in both situations what is considered a criminal tried to expose and take another man …show more content…
As tampering with these two worlds cause chaos. This is seen in her example of Jan Prochazka who was discredited when his private conversation was exposed to the public which caused more hate from people in his direction. We see through many types of people weather it is civilian just like me and you, slaves, or politicians that your private life should never interfere with your public life because it makes people look at you differently and in most cases negatively. Concluding that no one is perfect in our private life so if you expose one’s flaws then you stealing his freedom of being