Although Friedrich Schiller's Wilhelm Tell is truly and certainly one of my all time favourite plays, period, and while I have indeed read and reread this masterpiece of German Classicism religiously and repeatedly since I first had to peruse Wilhelm Tell in 1986 (for a fourth year undergraduate German literature course on both Goethe and Schiller that I somehow was at least partially manipulated into taking during my second year), I have actually and unfortunately never had the chance to see it performed, to see the play staged (and although I do very much hope this sorry scenario will change, I kind of doubt that Wilhelm Tell will ever be staged in Canada and if by chance, in German, and I do not really want to consider viewing the play in English or in French translation, at least not for a first time attendance, as going to an English or a French language performance of Wilhelm Tell would at least for me personally totally defeat the purpose).
Aside from having absolutely loved reading Wilhelm Tell as a literary drama, but never having had the chance to see it staged, I also tend to often forget that historically, it was actually Schiller's wife Charlotte who already in 1789 (the play was completed in 1804, less than two years before Schiller's death from tuberculosis at the relatively young age of 45) made her future husband aware of the Tell legend (as well as his good friend Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who during his own travels to Switzerland not only researched Wilhelm Tell, but had also at one time seriously considered Wilhelm Tell for a possible literary work before deciding against this and handing the information and research he had amassed over to Friedrich Schiller). And therefore, while Friedrich Schiller is definitely and in all ways to be considered the sole author of Wilhelm Tell, it must and should be noted that the genesis of the latter, that the production and development of Wilhelm Tell does indeed owe much to Schiller's wife's Lotte's enthusiastic encouragement and his friend Goethe's Swiss travels and research (for Friedrich Schiller himself actually never did visit, never did manage to travel to Switzerland).
With regard to the play itself, for me personally, what I have always found both most enjoyable and really even essential with regard to Wilhelm Tell is the cheering fact that unlike other dramatic works of German Classicism (and even a number of Schiller's own offerings), Wilhelm Tell in particular is presented in a generally reasonably approachable, comparatively easy to understand manner, both not too difficult to read and also therefore not too difficult to watch performed (never simplistic, never trivial, but fathomable for a lay person, for someone who does not necessarily need to have advanced degrees in literature and philosophy to enjoy and appreciate settings, dialogues, monologues, descriptions etc.). For basically, the main themes of Wilhelm Tell, the both individual and collective historical struggles of the Swiss against Habsburg, against their often cruel and ruthlessly arbitrary Austrian overlords is shown clearly, concisely, and even with a sense of adventure and thrillingness (kind of like watching a movie or at least, I have always been able to visualise Wilhelm Tell as a movie, as a running adventuresome script, when I read, when I peruse the play).
Now especially in German Classicism, most dramas need to present a clearly delineated turning point, and Schiller's Wilhelm Tell is no exception here. During the first scenes of the play, while the main protagonist, while Wilhelm Tell is indeed portrayed as being much sympathetic to his fellow countrymen's concerns about and struggles against the Habsburg Empire, he does tend to keep himself rather aloof and apart, he is intuitive, nature-bound and does not want to embrace politics, political struggle, or entertain thoughts of rebellion (which of course then changes after the arrow incident, as Tell must realise that he can no longer remain neutral and is thus also no longer unwilling to actively strive against the oppressors, no longer unwilling to stalk and personally assassinate the nastily tyrannical Gessler).
And finally, with regard to the famous apple/arrow scene, in my humble opinion, it is actually first and foremost Gessler's broken promise to Tell that he would not face arrest or execution if he (if Tell) truthfully gives the reason why there were two arrows placed in his quiver which finally and firmly cement not only Tell's desire to kill Gessler, but also convinces him to fully and wholly join the rebels against the Habsburgs (namely that if Tell had missed and had injured or killed his son Walter whilst trying to shoot that apple from his head, the next arrow would have been for Gessler himself). For if one looks at the entire apple shot scene realistically, if Wilhelm Tell had been an active and yes dedicated adversary against Gessler, against the Austrian overlords right from the start, he would or at least he should not have actually bowed down and done what was being demanded of him by Gessler, he would not have shot the apple from his son's head, he would instead have immediately used his bow and arrows to kill Gessler, to punish with death his tyranny and his outrageously hateful demands. Yes, at the end of Wilhelm Tell, Gessler has been assassinated and the main character, Wilhelm Tell has one hundred percent now joined the rebels, but it has taken an attack on himself and his family, as well as Gessler's broken promises (that truth loving and honest Tell was arrested to be executed even after Gessler had specifically promised that he could speak without fear of the latter) for Wilhelm to finally realise that Gessler is indeed an evil monster who needs to be gotten rid of and that the struggles of the Swiss against the Habsburgs are both just and necessary, that his support, Tell's expertise, his marksmanship are not only appreciated, but desperately needed.