OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Short Playscript On Torture

                                   ACTOR (CONT'D)
                          (glancing at A.-G.)
            Anyway, I do feel for him--for all playwrights--for the real
            playwrights. I mean can you imagine going to college,
            nailing down all the big ideas about life and living--from
            truth tables and logic to romantic literature--gearing up to
            do what playwrights have always done--and then some planes
            fly into buildings and suddenly objective fact and opinion is
            pulverized into gray dust, and we're all covered with it, and
            there's a collective vertigo, and people like him are
            suddenly fools for attempting to make sense of it?

                                   (Beat.)

                                   ACTOR (CONT'D)
            I mean real sense, not fake sense. Not entertainment for
            entertainment's sake, but for the sake of combining art and
            idea to transform a person's reality. Can you imagine?

                                   (Beat.)

                                   ACTOR (CONT'D)
            We were having a beer once after rehearsals, and he told me
            how when he was a little boy, he went around telling everyone
            he was going to be a scientist when he grew up. A scientist
            to the little boy was someone who knew the truth about
            things, or if they didn't, their job was to find out. He
            should have been a journalist.

                                   (Beat.)

                                   ACTOR (CONT'D)
            Eventually he discovered that raising consciousness is
            paramount--that scientific fact is the salt/flour/eggs, but
            theater is the bread. Creative fact. Then 9/11 happened.

                                   (A. puts paper down, perplexed.)

                                   (Actor notices, sits in chair apart
                                   from A.-G.)

                                   A.
            Alotta talk about prosecuting the administration for
            authorizing torture. Questions are floating around like,
            should we do it? Can we do it? Will we? Plenty of
            arguments pro and con, but something's getting lost. The
            President said he went out of his way to get legal counsel
            and legal backup for everything he authorized.

                                   (D. chuckles. Others turn/look. D.
                                   gets self-conscious, signals for A. to
                                   continue.)

                                   A. (CONT'D)
            We all know the Nuremberg Defense doesn't cut it anymore.
            Someone who commits war crimes can't maintain they were
            forced to--can't say 'they made me do it.' But the President
            says the lawyers told him it was legal.

                                   (D. stifles laugh, gets self-conscious,
                                   signals for A. to continue.)

                                   A. (CONT'D)
                          (re-reading from paper)
            He says here, "I asked them specifically, 'What can I do that
            is legal? And this is what I was told.'" We all know which
            lawyers he consulted, and how they were quoted saying the
            Geneva Convention was "quaint," and torture is only
            equivalent to organ failure or death. The lawyers were the
            enablers. If this were a murder, they provided the weapon,
            knowing full well what it would be used for.

                                   (Beat.)

                                   B.
            So what's your point?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5