OUR
LITTLE REVOLUTION
A
Play in One Act
by
Tamara
Peachy
Cast
of Characters
Rachel
Linheart: Strong-willed woman.
Late 20’s.
Daniel
White: A
well-educated man. Opinionated. 30’s
Peter Lock: Well
read. Lazy. Naturally smart. Sarcastic. 30’s
Kennedy
Dalve: Nurturing. Insecure.
Late 20’s
Katy
Summers: A mute. Sweet
and caring. 30’s
Scene
Low-end
apartment in Washington DC. Main door has door lock, deadbolt, and chain lock.
A couch, a desk, and stairs to a bedroom.
Time
Approaching
evening. A cold winter.
ACT
I
Scene
1
SETTING: Apartment.
AT
RISE: The room is cluttered with Pro-Life
protest signs. Pro-Life flyers are stacked on the desk and coffee table. RACHEL
is sitting at the desk, typing on a laptop computer. DANIEL is using a stencil
to create another Pro-Life sign that will read: If It’s Not A Baby, Then You’re Not Pregnant.
Rachel
(Stops typing)
It’s useless.
I’m useless.
DANIEL
You’re not
useless.
Rachel
I’ll just
summarize my thoughts in a flowery tweet. Who needs a lengthy article?
DANIEL
(Annoyed)
Not the
twitter argument again.
Rachel
Who wants to
read a brainy article about injustice when one can read a Facebook status about
farts?
DANIEL
You’re
delusional. There are thousands of intellectual activists salivating for a
tantalizing read.
Rachel
You live in
an activist bubble.
DANIEL
A what?
Rachel
An activist
bubble. All your friends rage at injustice, but you ignore the fact that the
youtube generation is apathetic and nearly unconscious. They are watching
Brittany Spears dance with a snake.
DANIEL
Even my
activist friends are watching that.
Rachel
You’re sick.
DANIEL:
It was a
joke, Rachel. Laugh.
(RACHEL
doesn’t laugh, instead sneers.)
DANIEL CONT
Last night,
all you could talk about was Margaret Sanger and the repercussions of her work
with birth control. You told me people must be held accountable for their
actions, no matter what their motivations. You knew this article would change
people’s perspective. You couldn’t wait to write it. What changed?
Rachel
I woke up the
next morning sane. I know the majority of people won’t read it. They don’t care,
Danny. They don’t have the motivation or the drive to process the atrocity.
They don’t even know the definition for infanticide. They don’t want to think
about it.
DANIEL
Don’t rob
them of the opportunity. Just write it. Stop worrying about who will read it
and who won’t.
Rachel
Fine. I’ll
write the article. After I send this flowery tweet.
(Types
on Computer)
“Dear American Public, you murder unborn
babies. I hate you all.”
(Presses
enter key)
Send!
(Laughs to herself)
DANIEL
(Sarcastically)
That will win
them over.
(Knock at the door. DANIEL looks
through the door’s peephole and unlocks the door’s various locks. PETER barges
in)
PETER:
Adam
Groderman has done it again! Let me read you this quote from the Project Paper. Rachel is “a weepy prophet
who is too emotionally charged to see the issue rationally.”
(Rachel
is noticeably angered)
DANIEL
(Goes
to her)
Rachel, stay
calm. The Project Paper is an insignificant college newspaper. I think only 23%
of the student body even reads it.
RACHEL
Peter has
read it. He isn’t even a part of the student body.
DANIEL
Peter reads everything from everywhere by everybody.
PETER
It is
essential to stay cultured by processing an amalgamation of varying viewpoints
by immersing oneself in samples of scholarship with minute levels of
circulation.
DANIEL
(Gives
PETER a look of disgust)
Peter! You’re
doing it again. You didn’t just spout out that sentence to teach us something.
You’re just trying to impress us by sounding astute. You know that drives me
crazy. Rachel and I are trying to have a civilized spat. Don’t interrupt.
Rachel, continue.
RACHEL
Adam
Groderman is an egotistical reincarnation of Hitler! A pampered two-year-old
who only has a master’s degree. He publically insulted me! He needs to be held
accountable for his slanderous words.
(After
some thought)
We need to
have an official debate.
PETER
That’s a
great idea!
DANIEL
That’s a
horrible idea. (To PETER) Can’t you
see she wants blood?
RACHEL
We can have
it on the college campus. If the college newspaper covered the rally, the
campus might be open to hosting a debate.
DANIEL
Rachel, you
need to write your article. Bicker with Adam some other time.
RACHEL
Adam can’t
just throw words around and not face retribution. I should be able to defend
myself.
PETER
He said you
were “a weepy prophet” and “too emotionally involved”. Those are accurate
compliments. Adam is the one who is inappropriately detached. Adam remains calm
and composed while we go insane. Rachel, you should be emotionally involved. It’s slaughter!
DANIEL
Don’t waste
your breath on Adam. He’s a hard head. Write your article for those who are
wrestling with their conscious. We don’t have the money or the time to organize
another debate to argue with someone who won’t budge. We need to focus on those
who will listen - for those who are malleable.
RACHEL
(Playfully
dejected)
We can’t
convert Hitler?
DANIEL
Nope.
(With
youthful enthusiasm)
However, we
might be able to reach those under his influence - with information.
(Returns
to stenciling the sign)
PETER
I
still love a good debate with a hard head.
DANIEL
That
is because you don’t respect results like I do. You worship the intensity of
truth battling with a lie, even when that battle rages with no culmination. The
thrashing of words stirs your adrenaline. However, it does nothing to change our society. A riveting debate that falls on deaf
ears, in my mind, is senseless.
RACHEL
(Seizing an opportunity for another
debate)
And
an intellectual article written about Margaret Sanger presented to a generation
who sings Justin Bieber lyrics is just as senseless.
DANIEL
That
isn’t the same thing.
RACHEL
Yes
it is Daniel. Deaf ears. It is the same argument.
DANIEL
It
is not the same argument. Your article will be available on the Internet.
Search engines use algorithms that cater to the users’ social demographics.
Your audience is already filtered for you. Those who come across your article
will be receptive scholars and activists. They will want to hear what you have
to say and will appreciate your astuteness.
RACHEL
That’s
a fine rebuttal, but we can’t ignore the lazy Facebookers! Or the Wikipedia
researchers! The tweens will be receptive to our message. We just need to use
their language.
DANIEL
We
are limiting our audience to the impressionable scholar because we, as a group,
decided they influence the sectors of society that needs to be changed:
lawyers, doctors, politicians. Let the youtube generation skim over our article
link and click the porn advertisement. It isn’t our concern. Out target
audience is the receptive scholar.
RACHEL
I
know that is what we decided, but…
DANIEL
If
we target a larger audience, we will compromise our message. You aren’t willing
to do that. None of us are willing to do that. We met together as a group and
decided, “We couldn’t afford to taint the message to captivate a broader
audience.”
(Looks to PETER)
Wasn’t
that the exact phrasing?
PETER
(In jest)
Yeah. I think our group argued more
about the phrasing than the actual philosophy behind our motive.
RACHEL:
(Becomes more somber)
I
know we are supposed to avoid spiritual jargon when we…
PETER:
Uh
oh.
DANIEL:
Rachel!
If you want to limit your audience, start talking about spirituality!
RACHEL:
I
have no religious affiliations. You know that. I approach this subject from a
purely scientific and political perspective. But, today, as I was ruminating
over my article, which you are
pressuring me to write, I just felt this urgency to reach people who aren’t as
intellectual as us. It felt like it came from my soul, I guess. If that even
explains it.
PETER:
(Mocking)
Your
soul told you to reach out to a broader, less educated audience?
RACHEL:
I
don’t think it was exactly “my soul”. I don’t have a descriptor for the
experience because it was foreign to me. But, it doesn’t really need an
explanation. All I know is— we need to rally the apathetic, overstimulated
tween.
DANIEL:
What
will they do with the information? Nothing. They will return to playing angry
birds on their cell phones. We need to influence lawyers, doctors, scientists,
and…
RACHEL:
and
our future teen mothers and those impregnating bad boys.
PETER:
That
is a valid point.
DANIEL:
We
don’t speak their language, Rach. It would be like a gorilla talking with a
fish.
RACHEL:
We
are researchers. We can learn their language. The entire world is investigating
how the Internet has affected the up and coming generation. It’s the current
research topic for almost every branch of the social sciences. We have access
to a vast array of material. If we understand their psychology, maybe we can
learn to not only talk like them, but also to feel like them. Then we can make
them sympathetic to our cause.
PETER:
I’m
with you, Rachel. I love a good challenge. It will give me a reason to flex my
anthropologic muscles.
DANIEL:
Our
work won’t last for generations if it is demeaned. There is no honor in what
you’re suggesting. I’m done arguing about this. I’m going to the grocery. I
need to restock my fridge. I’ll come by to finish the sign tomorrow.
RACHEL:
You
are such an introvert. You always avoid spontaneous confrontation. You say a
few rehearsed statements and then you exit the building to plot your next
profound statement. Go! Enjoy yourself. Find solace in your loneliness and
avoid everyone around you.
DANIEL:
Thank
you Doctor Rachel Lineheart. I will be sure to pay the receptionist on my way
out. It is good to know you put your college degree in human behavior to work.
Now write the article and stop wasting your breath on a hard head like me.
(Exits the door)
ACT 1
SCENE 2
Three days later at
4:00am. In the same apartment. PETER and RACHEL have been awake all night
working on RACHEL’S article. PETER is lying on the couch. RACHEL is sitting at
the computer.
RACHEL:
(Exhausted from a long night)
I
really appreciate you helping me out with this, Peter. I think having a man’s
perspective will control my bias. (Pause) Not that I am bias or anything. But,
it will protect me from accusations.
PETER:
Anything
I can do to help.
RACHEL:
I
still think the introduction is more potent than the conclusion.
PETER:
(Yawn)
Yes, Yes. When did you say Kennedy would get
here?
RACHEL:
She
promised to bring us breakfast “in the morning”. She didn’t give a specific
time. It’s 4:00AM now, so she should be here in the next few hours.
PETER:
She is such a good cook. She is going
to be a great mother someday.
RACHEL:
She is a good cook. I can’t concentrate. Stop
talking about food.
PETER:
Sorry.
RACHEL:
(After
glaring at the screen)
I
have to ask you a question that might require a complete rewrite.
PETER:
(Aggravated)
Give
it to me slowly.
RACHEL:
Okay.
We already decided to reach a different demographic: the less educated and the
apathetic. I am using simple language and explaining more. (Pause) Here’s my
question. Should Margaret Sanger be the central character in my article? Maybe
I should use someone from pop culture. Someone who is more well-known?
PETER:
I
can’t support that.
RACHEL:
Why
not?
PETER:
Rachel,
what is your thesis?
RACHEL:
(Reciting it from memory)
Margaret Sanger couldn’t
predict how her views on birth control would fuel the future abortion industry;
similarly, our society can’t predict how abortions will fuel future societal
breakdowns.
PETER:
You
can’t replace Margaret Sanger with some current icon because that is massacring
your original epiphany. I saw your initial reaction when you first proposed the
idea to Daniel and me. You can’t abort
your initial idea.
(Chuckles
at his pun.)
RACHEL:
Be
serious.
PETER:
I
am being serious! Margaret Sanger is the perfect person to argue your case. I
won’t pull late nights for Lady Gaga or Kristen Stewart. You can mention those
girls, if you think it would spark a connection to your audience, but I think
Margaret Sanger needs to be your focus.
RACHEL:
I
don’t want to rework my entire thesis, so maybe you’re right. It is too late in
the process to do that. However, I fear introducing them to Margaret. I think
it is too dangerous. She is dangerous. I don’t want them to know about her. I
don’t want them to know about her philosophies. She’s evil. Why would I want to
expose an apathetic generation to a killer?
PETER:
Rachel,
you’re a genius. You need to abort your essay!
DANIEL:
(Knocking)
You
two had better have something worthy of Winston Churchill!
PETER:
(Unlocking the door)
Don’t
worry. It’s virtuoso.
RACHEL:
Peter
is busy teasing me.
DANIEL:
He
probably has justification. You are slighting your wisdom to cater to lesser
minds.
(DANIEL comes behind RACHEL to look at
the artice)
RACHEL
I
don’t want you to read it yet. It isn’t ready. Peter and I are still editing
it.
DANIEL:
Peter
isn’t editing anything.
(PETER snores loudly.)
PETER
You
have been writing for three straight nights. You need sleep.
(Pulls her chair out, RACHEL fights
him)
Rachel!
I guarantee that your lack of REM sleep is affecting your cognitive function. I
guarantee your paper is suffering from sleep deprivation.
RACHEL:
I
want to work while I am inspired. I watched an interview with Margaret Sanger.
You should have seen her. So bitter and fierce in her old age. The Catholic
Church warned her, but they couldn’t change her stance on contraception. Their
distaste for her stance only strengthened her beliefs. Even in old age she had
fight left in her. She was a murderer until she died. How could anyone be that
terrifying? How can anyone be that diabolical?
DANIEL:
Paranoia
and anxiety. Both symptoms of sleep deprivation. You’re manic and delusional.
(Pull her chair out again)
RACHEL:
Delusional?
Margaret Sanger helped establish one of the most disturbing organizations in
women’s health. Planned Parenthood wouldn’t exist without her efforts. Her
hatred and misguided judgments. Her passion gave way to millions of deaths. Why
does America still follow her teachings? Why are we still aborting babies? I
can’t sleep while these atrocities are happening!
DANIEL:
(Smacks Peter)
Get
up! Rachel needs the couch.
PETER:
(Sits up)
Are
the pancakes here yet?
DANIEL:
No.
Rachel needs her sleep. Get off the couch.
(Moves RACHEL to the couch.)
Peter:
This
is her apartment. Why doesn’t she just go to her bedroom? I was having a good
dream about a bunny eating dandelions.
Rachel:
Danny,
I need to keep working.
Daniel:
I’ll
look at it. I will give you some feedback. Then, when you are rested, you can
work on it.
Rachel:
You
know I hate it when you edit my work. We always fight, and you never
compromise. Ever. You and I are still
fighting about the approach, so I can’t let you near it.
Daniel:
I
will give you feedback. You are free to disregard it. Now sleep!
Rachel:
I
don’t sleep on couches. (Exits upstairs)
(PETER lies back down)
Daniel:
Peter,
you need to stop encouraging her idealism. The abortion battle isn’t going to
be won in our lifetime, and Rachel needs to remain rational.
Peter:
What
did I do?
Daniel:
And
I don’t understand this new obsession with Margaret Sanger. Rachel acts like
she is the key to unlocking all the cell doors of the prison that is abortion.
Sanger is an influential woman who influenced Planned Parenthood, but nothing
beyond that. Rachel is worrying me.
Peter:
Rachel
is fine. Stop trying to control her.
Daniel:
I
am not trying to control her.
Peter:
You
have been extremely domineering this month. Telling her how to write her
article. Telling her when to sleep. She isn’t your child.
Daniel:
We
have gone to great lengths to make our organization reputable. No religious
affiliations! Purely political and scientific. Rachel is changing her tactics.
She isn’t debating anymore. She’s preaching. Haven’t you noticed the dramatic
change in her behavior?
Peter:
People
change, Danny. Rachel is more sensitive and more passionate. There isn’t
anything wrong with that.
Daniel:
I
am not opposed to passion, but when it fosters delusion, it isn’t healthy. She
is finding religion. I swear it. If she keeps following the path she is
following, she’ll start hitting us with a King James Bible. You don’t want a
dogmatic on your hands, do you?
Peter:
She
is too sensible for that.
Daniel:
It
will happen. I guarantee it. We need to keep her in check.
Peter:
You
are such a chauvinist.
Daniel:
That’s
not fair. I am being her friend.
Peter:
Well,
you need to have this conversation with her. Not me.
Daniel:
You’re
right. Unfortunately, I am convinced she won’t hear me. Maybe I can persuade
Kennedy to join the conversation. Another female might settle the atmosphere.
Women have a gentle touch.
Peter:
Like
I said—a chauvinist. (Pause) And where
is Kennedy? She said she would bring breakfast.
Daniel:
It
is still early. You probably won’t see breakfast for another two hours.
Peter:
I’m
starving.
(Daniel sits at the desk chair, looks
at computer screen. Rachel enters from stairs.)
Rachel:
I
tried to sleep, but I heard your conversation.
Daniel:
Oh
Rachel, I’m sorry. I didn’t mean for you to hear that.
Rachel:
No,
it’s fine. I’d rather know how you feel. You really think I’m irrational?
Daniel:
I
am concerned.
Rachel:
I
think you should read my article before you make that judgment.
Daniel:
Fair
enough. I can do that. (Pause) I am really sorry you heard us talking about
you.
Rachel:
Well,
I now know I can trust Peter. He will fight my battles. (To DANIEL) In
addition, I know you are officially my arch nemesis.
Daniel:
Be
serious.
Rachel:
I
know you prefer the more docile Rachel. I can understand why my recent tirades
have frightened you. However, you don’t need to worry about me. I still don’t
believe in God. 1 in 3 women in America have an abortion. What God would allow
that? No, God doesn’t exist.
ACT 1
SCENE 3
Late that evening.
Daniel is alone in the apartment, He is pacing the room, checking his watch
intermediately, waiting for RACHEL to return.
Rachel:
(Enters main door)
What
are you doing here? When did you come back?
Daniel:
Rachel!
Thank God you’re home! I finished reading the article this afternoon. It’s the
best you have ever written. It is riveting, logical, persuasive. The conclusion
will move even the most stiff-necked reader.
Rachel:
(Noticeably disheartened)
Thank
you.
Daniel:
Rachel,
did you hear me? I love your article! I was wrong.
Rachel:
It
doesn’t matter. I was kidding myself. It just one article to add to a mountain
of futile arguments.
Daniel:
I
disagree. Margaret Sanger. That’s the key. Pro-choice advocates respect her.
They will listen to you because…
Rachel:
Daniel,
I am not in the mood to talk about this right now. I have spent the last three
nights wasting my energy on this article, anticipating great things. But, you
were right. The world is cynical. (Sits on couch)
Daniel:
(Sits next to her)
What’s going on? What happened to the
idealist I had to beat down this morning?
Rachel:
Kennedy
is no longer on our side. She spoke with me after you and Peter left – stuffed
full of pancakes. She was in tears. She knew it was hurting me. Apparently, she
read an influential book.
Daniel:
What? You mean, she’s pro-choice now?
Rachel:
It
doesn’t make any sense to me either. She explained that if she were in the
situation, she would never have an abortion. But, she is now convinced that a
democratic society should never force a woman to make such a personal medical
decision.
Daniel:
Honestly,
I always questioned Kennedy’s dedication. She seemed complacent.
Rachel:
Really?
Daniel:
She
never had half your passion.
Rachel:
(Referring to the prior conversation)
Or
half my delusion.
Daniel:
Rachel.
I didn’t really think you were delusional. I was just uncomfortable with all
the “soul” talk.
Rachel:
I
will not turn into my father, Daniel.
Daniel:
I
worry that you hear his voice in your head. He preaches to his congregation
every Sunday, and he calls you every Monday. Those conversations have to weigh
on your mind.
Rachel:
I
love my father, and he has the freedom to believe whatever he chooses. He is
still very proud of the work I do.
Daniel:
Well,
Kennedy can still hang around. I mean she is still our friend. And those
pancakes are to die for.
Rachel:
I
will argue with her all the time.
Daniel:
Practice
makes perfect. She’ll be a sounding board.
Rachel:
Yeah!
Target practice.
Daniel:
Who
knows? We might convince her to change her mind again.
Rachel:
I
can be rather convincing.
Daniel:
Rachel,
about the article. I think it is ready. I don’t think it needs to be changed. I
think we need to attempt to publish it now.
Rachel:
(Laughs)
Daniel,
it is just a rough draft.
Daniel:
I
think it is raw and ready. You saw how pigheaded I was this morning. It
captivated me. Isn’t that proof enough.
Rachel:
(Goes to the computer)
I
don’t know. I wanted to work on the conclusion. I think the introduction is
more riveting than the conclusion. It should end stronger.
Daniel:
Please,
trust me on this Rachel. It is fine the way it is.
Rachel:
Well,
I am pretty exhausted. Maybe it would be nice to let it go.
Daniel:
Yes!
Let it go!
Rachel:
Thank
you for your help on this.
Daniel:
My
help? You wrote the article. (Ashamed)
I just berated you.
Rachel:
I
appreciate friction. What revolutionary didn’t have an antagonist? (Pause) Well, I am going to head upstairs
and catch up on the sleep I’ve lost. Thanks for waiting here to tell me about
the article. (Moves toward the stairs)
Daniel:
Rachel.
Rachel:
Yeah?
Daniel:
(Goes
to her)
Don’t
let Kennedy’s conversion destroy your hope. You will influence others. You were
born to. If there is a God, He has called you to that.
Rachel:
I
think that is the sweetest thing you have ever said to me.
Daniel:
It
isn’t the sweetest thing I have ever done.
(Leans into kiss her and RACHEL kisses him back and then pulls away)
RACHEL:
Wait.
Wait. Wait. Wait.
DANIEL:
Waiting.
RACHEL:
I
was convinced you hated me.
DANIEL:
Why
would you think that?
RACHEL:
Your
little gossip session with Peter. And you argue with me all the time.
DANIEL:
Political
Science was my undergraduate. I can’t help but argue and gossip. Besides, I
just told you how wrong I was. Your article has real potential.
RACHEL:
Now
that my article has potential, you want to kiss me?
DANIEL:
(Teasing)
I
was hoping for more than a kiss.
RACHEL:
You
won’t get it. Even Margaret Sanger knew that the preferred birth control was abstinence.
DANIEL:
(Continued
Teasing)
If
I were to accidently get you pregnant, at least we would both agree to keep the
baby.
RACHEL:
You
can exit the way you entered.
DANIEL:
Seriously,
Rachel. You had to know about my growing affections for you.
RACHEL:
Totally
oblivious. I thought you had a crush on yourself.
DANIEL:
Ha
Ha! (Pause) Rachel, I am not a romantic.
I don’t normally express my feelings. But I am now. I have feelings for you.
RACHEL:
(Pushing
him toward the door)
We
aren’t even compatible, Danny. We never get along. We are both stubborn as
mules. It would never work. I don’t understand why you would even consider
this. You’re rational, logical. If you follow this to its conclusion, it
doesn’t look favorable.
DANIEL:
Rachel,
please! Let’s at least talk. Don’t close the door on me!
RACHEL
(hesitates
to close the door)
We can talk.
I really didn’t know you had feelings for me. Come in.
DANIEL
(enters the room)
You
scared me there for a moment.
RACHEL
Sorry. I didn’t
mean to scare you, but this article has worn me out. I need time before I
introduce a child into the world. The world is not exactly a wonderful place.
SCENE 4
Next day, afternoon. Same apartment. RACHEL is at her computer,
editing her article. PETER enters with KATY. RACHEL doesn’t look up from her
computer, and doesn’t notice KATY. KATY is a mute. PETER ushers KATY closer to
RACHEL. RACHEL remains engrossed in her article.
PETER:
I thought
Danny told you to leave that article alone.
RACHEL:
I am only
checking for spelling errors and grammar mistakes.
PETER:
(Not convinced)
Thou shall
not bare false witness.
RACHEL:
Maybe I
changed a sentence or two. (Acknowledging
KATY) Who’s this?
PETER:
Rachel, this
is my girlfriend, Katy.
RACHEL:
Your
girlfriend?
PETER:
We made it
official today. I wanted to introduce her to everyone. Where are Danny and
Kennedy? Is our monthly meeting canceled? I haven’t checked my e-mail all day.
We’ve been out walking.
RACHEL:
Kennedy?
Didn’t Danny tell you about Kennedy? She won’t be attending our meetings
anymore.
PETER:
Why not?
RACHEL:
(Hesitantly)
She’s
pro-choice now.
Peter is visibly upset. He moves about
the room as he delivers his lines. Katy tries to calm him down.
PETER:
What the
hell! When did she decide this? And why am I only finding out about this now?
Do you know how bad this looks? Our opponents will have a field day! One of our
own converting! It delegitimizes everything we have accomplished.
RACHEL:
Well, she
isn’t going to announce it with trumpets.
PETER:
(Growing
more manic)
Of course
not. She’s going to hide her sin in the dark. Like those deceptive organizations
that manipulate women into killing their unborn children for profit. They do it
in the back rooms. Behind close doors. You don’t hear about their activities in
the news! Pictures of severed arms can’t be published in our local newspapers
because that is insensitive. Kennedy is joining their ranks. She won’t announce
it with trumpets, but she’ll still do the deed. In secret. She’ll do the deed.
RACHEL:
Peter, that
isn’t fair. You know Kennedy. This wasn’t a haphazard conversion. She
approached it with much thought and consideration. She is still very much
against murdering the unborn child. She is only changing her position on how
much power we give the government. She fears that…
PETER:
(Interrupting
her)
Rachel, don’t
insult me. I have a Masters in Political Science from Berkeley. I know all the
contentions as to why Kennedy would demand that the government not have the
power of decision! I know all the excuses.
RACHEL:
Why are you
so animated tonight? Are you going to miss Kennedy’s pancakes? Is that the real
issue here? I rarely see you like this. Someone might think you found religion.
(Mocking a preacher) Is Kennedy
“facing the fires of hell”?
Peter exchanges a look with Katy and
collects himself. He takes Katy’s hand and sits with her on
the couch.
PETER:
Sorry,
Rachel, I didn’t mean to sound judgmental. I just think Kennedy should have
spoken with the group before she made this decision.
RACHEL:
She would
have been ambushed. (Laughs) She’s smarter than that. (Long pause) So, Katy.
Where do you work?
KATY looks at RACHEL and smiles. Then
KATY looks at PETER.
PETER:
Rachel, Katy
is mute. She isn’t able to talk. I suppose I should have mentioned that when I
introduced her.
RACHEL:
No, that’s
fine. I know now. Should I get a notepad? She can write, can’t she?
KATY smiles and shakes her head in the
affirmative.
PETER:
Yes, she can
write. Quite well, in fact. I don’t want to brag, but she graduated head of her
class – from Yale.
KATY affectionately elbows PETER. Shy
about the accolade. RACHEL is impressed and then goes to retrieve a pad of
paper from her desk.
PETER cont:
As you know,
I read plenty of written material. I came across one of Katy’s essays while I
was perusing a Yale professor’s file drawer. I was doing research on
professors’ filing systems, when I saw a bizarre title.
KATY and PETER exchange an
affectionate look.
“Cats and How They Prove the Pro-Choice Stance
to be Illogical”. I
considered the title to be pure foolishness, but I was still curious. I
commandeered the essay from the professor’s file cabinet and read it that
night. I didn’t expect pure genius. I was riveted. Our group could really use
Katy’s talents. Especially now that Kennedy is no longer with us.
RACHEL:
I’m
convinced. She is a Yale graduate.
And she’s won your affections, which is not an easy task. I’ve never know you
to associate with someone unless they are exceptionally intellectual and
excessively confrontational.
Danny knocks on the door.
DANNY:
(From
behind door)
Sorry,
I’m late. I was stuck in traffic.
RACHEL
(RACHEL unlocks door)
Come in
DANNY
Thank you.
You’re looking beautiful today.
RACHEL
(touches her stomach)
Thank you.
Comments