Keep Your Pantheon (and School) Read online

  B: “How do they recycle paper,” they . . .

  A: They take it and “pulp” it, do they not?

  B: They pulp it.

  A: So that:

  B: . . . They take it and pulp it.

  A: So: even if they reused all of the old paper, there would . . .

  B: They would have to use new “energy,” yes. In the “pulping process.”

  A: . . . they would have to use new energy in the pulping process. Such energy having to have had to come from . . . from . . .

  B: . . . Uh . . .

  A: From “somewhere.”

  B: That’s right.

  A: For example, uh . . . “coal.”

  B: Yes.

  A: Or, “water flowing over a dam.”

  B: Hydroelectric . . .

  A: Yes. Or . . . yes, or burning trees themselves, which is to say, the burning of “wood.” Or . . .

  B: Or “oil.”

  A: Or “oil,” certainly, but from some nonrenewable resource. To change the new thing. It is a principle of physics. That matter may not be created or destroyed.

  B: Matter may not be destroyed?

  A: No.

  B: Why not?

  (Pause.)

  A: You’re joking.

  B: No.

  A: It is not a prohibition. It is a description.

  B: I don’t understand.

  A: I’m not suggesting “matter may not be destroyed” is a prohibition, such as, “This Washroom Is for Students Only.” Or . . .

  B: No, please, I understa . . .

  A: Or, “No Smoking on School Property.”

  B: No, please, I understand you.

  A: . . . But a “description of the physical world.” A term I would define as “the way things are.”

  B: Matter may not be destroyed.

  A: No.

  B: Then where does it go?

  (Pause.)

  A: Where does it go “when”?

  B: When we destroy it.

  A: “When we destroy it.”

  B: Yes. As when we “burn” it. As when we burn paper. You’ve “burned paper.”

  A: It becomes ash.

  B: But the ash . . .

  A: Yes.

  B: The ash. Must have less volume. Than the. The . . .

  A: . . . the?

  B: The paper.

  (Pause.)

  Mustn’t it?

  (Pause.)

  A: What about the smoke?

  B: The volume of the smoke and the ash equal the volume of the paper?

  A: Matter may not be destroyed.

  B: What about the firebombing of Dresden?

  (Pause.)

  Dresden was destroyed. Or if not, what happened to Dresden?

  A: Dresden was destroyed.

  B: Yes.

  (Pause.)

  And it wasn’t even a strategic target.

  A: Well. What difference if it was a strategic target or not. And, and . . .

  B: I just . . .

  A: AAAAND, whether or not it was a strategic target, would be a . . .

  B: You’re right.

  A: . . . question.

  B: You are correct.

  A: For the history teacher.

  (Pause.)

  B: You’re . . . WELL.

  A: Yes.

  B: But that just begs the question.

  A: How so?

  B: How so? As: the question is: what constitutes History?

  A: “History” . . .

  B: Yes.

  A: As I understand it. Is, the Study of “What Happened.”

  (Pause.)

  B: According to whom.

  A: According to whom?

  B: Yes.

  (Pause.)

  A: The Historians.

  (Pause.)

  B: And have they never made an error?

  A: The Historians. Being human.

  B: Yes. Of course.

  A: Have “erred.” The question is, absent Historians. How would we know what had occurred.

  B: I . . .

  A: Even if they were in error.

  B: If they were in error, then.

  A: . . . Yes . . .

  B: AT A MINIMUM. We would be misinformed.

  (Pause.)

  A: That is correct.

  B: With the attendant . . .

  A: . . . Yes, but, BUT. BUT. How would we know that we are misinformed?

  (Pause.)

  Which is to say, in what “way” would it affect our lives?

  B: We would be acting upon faulty information.

  A: Yes, but we would not “know” it. As if. For example: a man. Is caught in an unhappy marriage. BUT IS UNAWARE OF IT.

  B: If it were unhappy, how could he be unaware?

  A: If, for example. If:

  (Pause.)

  B: If the sex were good.

  A: Well, then, how could the marriage be unhappy.

  B: IF, for example . . .

  A: Yes . . .

  B: The fellow.

  (Pause.)

  A: “If The Sex Were Good” would that not, not “indicate,” but “establish” it was an unhappy marriage?

  B: A “happy” marriage.

  A: I beg your pardon. And, further, what “happens” to the paper. When it gets recycled?

  B: They recycle it.

  A: How?

  (Pause.)

  B: I don’t know.

  (Pause.)

  That would be custodial services.

  A: Are they the janitors?

  B: Not anymore.

  A: They used to be the janitors, yes?

  B: That’s right.

  A: And they “recycle” the paper . . . ?

  B: They take it to the recyclers.

  A: They are “tasked” with taking it to the recyclers.

  B: Yes.

  A: And we don’t “know” what the recyclers do.

  B: No.

  (Pause.)

  A: Could we inquire?

  B: Why?

  A: So . . .

  B: So we would “know” . . .

  A: Yes.

  B: Why would that be necessary?

  A: Because. It occurs to me that, perhaps. A better use of the posters. Would be to: keep them. And, for example, “Cut them up into little cards,” and use them for notepaper.

  B: No, we . . .

  A: For the secretaries.

  B: No. We couldn’t do that.

  A: Why not?

  B: You’re kidding.

  (Pause.)

  A: No.

  B: You’re not kidding?

  A: No. I’m serious.

  (Pause.)

  B: We . . .

  A: “Cut up . . .”

  B: Cut up. The work of students.

  (Pause.)

  We cut up the work of students.

  A: Yes.

  B: Based upon . . . ? Based upon what?

  (Pause.)

  Based upon what criteria?

  A: That it was hanging on the wall.

  (Pause.)

  B: Because we’d have to . . . to destroy AND USE ALL of it.

  A: For fear of . . .

  B: That’s right.

  A: No. SO THAT. To reuse the, the . . .

  B: “work”

  A: could be said, not to be a sign of . . .

  B: “disrespect . . .”

  A: . . . of disrespect. But . . .

  B: . . . Yes.

  (Pause.)

  A: “An endorsement”?

  B: No.

  A: No, it could hardly be “an endorsement” to cut the, the . . .

  B: Students’.

  A: To cut up the students’ work. ON THE OTHER HAND.

  B: This is why, this is why I . . .

  A: No, you’re right. We . . .

  B: Leave it to the custodial staff.

  A: Let them take it to the recyclers.

  B: Yes.

  A: That’s something that we can be proud of.

  B: To the extent th
ey do.

  A: Well, do they take it to the recyclers or not?

  B: When they have the time.

  A: What do they do when they don’t have the time?

  B: We do not inquire as to the specific uses of their time. As long as the tasks are accomplished.

  A: What if the tasks are not accomplished?

  B: Well. The tasks will always be accomplished.

  A: Be . . . ?

  B: . . . because they set the tasks.

  A: The janitors set the tasks?

  B: Well. To whom would you give that responsibility?

  A: They “set their own tasks.”

  B: Yes.

  A: The “unions.”

  B: The “unions,” who are made of janitors. Set the tasks for the janitors. Which is to say, for the custodians.

  A: And what is the difference? Between a strategic, and a nonstrategic target?

  (Pause.)

  As we “won” the war.

  B: Well, that’s a narrow view.

  A: A narrow view as its debatable if we won the war?

  B: No, we “won” the war. Though, while not debatable, it is ironic. That the cars we drive. Are made by the nations we obliterated. That’s ironic.

  A: And I wonder. If child molesters. Should be forced to register.

  B: How else would we know where they are?

  A: Yes, but, dragging that chain. From one community, to the next. How could they restart their lives?

  B: No one can restart his or her life.

  A: Why not? Which, you will see, is a philosophical question.

  B: Then let it be answered by philosophers.

  A: They’re using paper—to discourage waste. Eh? To shame those who use paper. And these “signs,” for example: “This Washroom IS for the Students ONLY. No Adults Allowed.”

  B: Yes. That itself uses paper.

  A: And doesn’t that “sexualize” the young?”

  (Pause.)

  I wonder about that crossing guard.

  B: Which one?

  A: You know.

  B: . . . Mmm.

  (Pause.)

  A: You see, this is the problem of command.

  B: Mm.

  A: To say nothing. Is to risk, um um . . .

  B: Yes.

  A: And become liable.

  B: . . . Not if we didn’t know.

  A: Not if we didn’t know, indeed.

  B: As we don’t know.

  A: While, on the other hand, to “act” . . .

  B: Is to risk injustice.

  A: AND legal action by the union.

  B: Not if it’s true.

  A: Well, curiously, especially if it’s true.

  B: How so?

  A: As preliminary DENIABLE discussions have led to the deniable, suggesting that, were we to proceed, they might anonymously file charges against us for dereliction for not acting to remove an ongoing known menace.

  (Pause.)

  B: But how would they know that we knew?

  A: We put up the sign.

  B (Sotto voce): But I thought they allowed the sign.

  A: The janitors.

  B: Yes.

  A: They suggested the sign.

  (Pause.)

  I believed, at the time, it was a compromise. I see now it was a tactical ploy.

  B: Those swine.

  (Pause.)

  A: Well. They’re very political.

  B: We could bar the crossing guard in question, from access to the campus.

  A: The union won’t allow it.

  B: Why?

  A: Unaccused, and unconvicted? It’s a violation of his rights.

  B: What about an “entrapment scheme”?

  A: How would it work?

  B: We take a student . . .

  A: A “gay” student? . . .

  B (Sotto voce): . . . How do we know that they’re “gay”?

  A (Sotto voce): Oh please . . .

  B (Sotto voce): Are we thinking about the same . . .

  A: Well . . .

  B: You know, I feel that many of these kids. Behave in a seductive and provocative way. Essentially, to torment the teachers.

  A: . . . Um . . .

  B: In effect, they’re “cruising.”

  (Pause.)

  Especially in the Lower School.

  (A sighs.)

  And, you turn around and “do” anything about it, and you spend the rest of your life in jail.

  A: Not if it’s not discovered.

  B: Oh, it’s all discovered. It all comes out. And, as I say, I wonder if that’s not their point. The little pigs.

  A: Well. I don’t share your tastes, but I share your perception.

  B: And I find their dress so provocative.

  A: As who does not. More to the point: if we had a regulation, against making posters, we would save the paper, and the cost, both in material, and in worker hours. D’you think the teachers would allow it?

  B: That’s all they do is make posters. That’s all they do. That’s all they do. One month to the next. What else do they do? For the love of God? These budding Einsteins.

  A: And bombing, I feel, based on no personal “knowledge,” but “intuitively,” must usually be a mistake.

  B: How so?

  A: As it must strengthen the resolve of the bombed.

  B: Well. It might certainly do so.

  A: Might? It certainly must. Imagine: crockery flying. The. The.

  B: Accumulation.

  A: The accumulation of years. Of bric-a-brac. Mementos.

  B: Yes, that’s certainly true.

  A: Plaques that one accrues.

  B: Mm-hmm.

  A: For years of service.

  B: . . . Yes.

  A: One has to dust them. But one doesn’t want some foreign swine. Raining down ordnance upon one’s treasures.

  (Pause.)

  And what about the ink?

  B: The ink?

  A: The poster ink. The ink came from somewhere. There was a cost for the ink. In energy. And resources.

  B: But: If we did not expend resources . . .

  A: Mmm . . .

  B: In the poster. In the paper. In the ink . . .

  A: Mmm-hmm . . .

  B: And even on the sign . . .

  A: . . . All right.

  B: . . . How would we transmit information?

  END OF PLAY

  David Mamet is the author of many plays, including Glengarry Glen Ross (Pulitzer Prize, 1984), American Buffalo, The Cryptogram, A Life in the Theatre, November, Boston Marriage, Speed-the-Plow, Oleanna, Race, The Anarchist and The Woods.