Most of Tom Stoppard’s critics have tried to assess his greatness in terms of his conserving and developing the tradition of British high comedy. Thus, his Arcadia (1993) has been largely acknowledged as the best of high comedy, with “a quality of high Englishness” (Kelly, Introduction 17). In fact, as a major British playwright, he has experimented with dramatic strategies to lure his audience into a series of critical engagements with British politics and culture. As for his politics, critics have argued that he is not a radical but a conservative. This study, however, will argue that he is revolutionary and subversive b y pointing out how he has taken a l ine of f light f rom being a “molar” major writer. It can be argued that Stoppard, a Czech Jew, writes, as Deleuze puts it, “like a foreigner in [his] own language” (Deleuze and Parnet 4), with a political purpose of deterritorializing the dominant Oedipal system, like Kafka, who was admired by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari as a great minor writer (Deleuze and Guattari, Kafka). The Czech-born English playwright has left some clues in his plays as to how they may be read as a form of minor literature whose main characteristic is political (Deleuze and Guattari, Kafka 18). Especially his play Arcadia, which is in the form of a seemingly traditional high comedy, shows how to “minorate” this traditional form of major literature (Deleuze, “One Less Manifesto” 243). Thus, as Deleuze tries to do with Shakespeare, this reading will subject Stoppard, who is considered a major contemporary writer, to “a minor author treatment” in order to rediscover his potential for becoming minor (243). In other words, it will extract his development or process of becoming in antithesis to the major tradition in order to recover the active force of the minority in Stoppard.