What interests you most in Professional Foul? Why?

Tom Stoppards construction of binary opposites is particular

interesting in the play Professional Foul. In this play, Stoppard
juxtaposes working class footballers with middle class university
professors, polite theoretical morality with the horrors of an
oppressive totalitarian state, as well as elements of seriousness with
slapstick comedy. The construction of binary opposites creates the
comedy of misunderstanding and also raises some serious
considerations about justice and morality.
In the 10th scene, the conversation between drunken Mckendrick
and the footballers Is highly amusing. Mckendricks drunken state
allows him to speak the truth about morality and ethics of football to
the footballers Broadbent and Crisp. His drunken state allows
Stoppard to raise some important morality points that the
footballers find highly offensive. Stoppard juxtaposes the comic
mismatch between Mckendricks highly intellectual mindset with the
footballers inability to understand and react on an intellectual
level.However, Stoppard give the footballers the ability to
understand just enough to feel offended and react in aggressive and
patronizing manners.
The contrasting mind sets of Anderson and Pavel Hollar reflect the
differing levels of freedom of a citizen of a democratic country, and
one of a communist country. Hollar is a university graduate with a
first, and the fact that an educated academic who should be at the
upper echelon of society is in the opposite end of the spectrum,
working as a cleaner, reflects the loss of social order and perverted
dystopia in an oppressive regime, Czechoslovakia. In contrast,
Anderson, a highly respected university professor of a democratic
society seems to be placed rightfully in the upper echelon of society.
Stoppart may indicate through this that a democratic society
rewards those who are capable and do well, whereas a communist
society may feel threatened by intellectuals, as it is usually them,
who are more capable of realizing the injustice and unethical
conduct of the country and who are more likely to make others
realize and overturn the government. This is indicated by the way
the police planted money in Pavels home in order to provide a legal
reason for capturing him, when they were really simply concerned
about his essay, which they saw as a threat as it questioned the
morality of the country. Anderson, conversely, is citizen of a
democratic society who takes his freedom for granted and is
unaware that he is in a state that severely restricts the freedom of

individuals. The scene in which Pavel turns the bath water on as he

persuades Anderson to smuggle his essay is particularly humorous
as Anderson is unable to understand the reason behind Pavels
cautious acts. He declines to help Pavel smuggle his thesis, as it
would be seen as bad manners, as he is unaware of the horrors
Pavel has endure living in a totalitarian state. This exposes
Andersons naivety and further emphasizes the freedom of which
democratic citizens take for granted, and the oppressive state
citizens of communist countries need to endure.
Stoppards use of binary opposites allows serious considerations of
morality in a comical light. He juxtaposes elements of seriousness
with slapstick comedy to raise social issues and ultimately,
entertain.