Accidental Death Of An Anarchist

How does Dario Fo use satire to critique corruption within the police and government? Is his satire effective? Why or why not?

How do The Chief, Captain Pissani, and Inspector Bertozzo different aspects of the play’s portrayal of Corruption and Abuse of Power? In what ways are they similar and how do they differ?

How does the alternative ending impact your interpretation of Accidental Death of an Anarchist? What is gained by the change? What is lost?

Given that Fo does not indicate either of the play’s two endings as definitive, how might a director choose between them? What considerations might influence this decision?

Dario Fo argues that scandal is a tool used by corrupt societies to maintain the status quo. What evidence does Fo provide to prove his point? How is this theme explored in Accidental Death of an Anarchist?

Rather than a name, The Fool is identified by a title connected to a character archetype. In the tradition of Commedia dell’arte (and in Renaissance plays including Shakespeare’s King Lear), The Fool is one who, by making himself appear ridiculous, gains the freedom to speak truth to power. Does The Fool in Accidental Death of an Anarchist fit this archetype? Why or why not?

Why does Dario Fo break the fourth wall in Accidental Death of an Anarchist? Is The Fool’s need to act and play new roles part of Fo’s fourth wall break? How so? What does it add to the play? Does it impact the audience’s experience, if so, how?

How do The Fool, The Police, and The Reporter view the nature of truth? Do they see it similarly? If so, how? If not, why not? How do their views on truth reflect their roles in society?