SCENE THREE

(Lighting change. CASEY removes the YWCA banner and exits. SNCC WORKERS enter with chairs. They move the table and chair to center stage. We are in the Atlanta SNCC headquarters. The SNCC Workers bustle in and out throughout the scene.)

SNCC WORKER:

You heard about Charles Sherrod dressing down Robert Kennedy?

SNCC WORKER:

You’re kidding.

SNCC WORKER:

Told him to his face where he could put his “cooling down period.”

SNCC WORKER:

No joke?

SNCC WORKER:

No joke. I heard he’s a wild man, Sherrod.

(ELLA enters, takes a seat. She is a black woman in her mid-30s. She is warm, authoritative, the person people look to.)

ELLA:

Careful about believing too much of what you hear, now. Let’s see. Where is everyone?

(JIM FORMAN strides in, takes a seat. CASEY follows behind, laboriously lugging a heavy cast-iron typewriter.)

JIM:

Sorry I’m late, Ella. There’s a car parked across the street, some white guy sitting there watching the office. I had to drive around the back way.

ELLA:

Probably smart, Jim. Casey? Your excuse?

CASEY:

(drops the typewriter on the table)

This is heavy.

(Ella laughs. Casey takes notes on the typewriter during the following exchange.)

ELLA:

Right! Okay. Now that we’re all here, what’s going on? What are we doing right now?

JIM:

Stokely’s in jail again.

ELLA:

Where this time?

JIM:

Parchman. With Diane Nash, Charles Sherrod, John Lewis, Ruby Smith. All picked up when their Freedom Ride arrived in Jackson.

ELLA:

Parchman, of course. How are they? Any news?

JIM:

No injuries, as far as we know. They wouldn’t stop singing, so the guards took their mattresses.

ELLA:

Well, at least they’re having a good time.

JIM:

I wish they’d act a litte more seriously.

ELLA:

Who said singing’s not serious? They’re in jail in the most racist state in the country. Something’s got to get them through.

JIM:

Either way, we’ll need to find money for bail.

ELLA:

You’re right about that. Casey, you’ve got some university connections. How would you feel about working out some kind of fundraising initiative?

CASEY:

I can make a few calls this afternoon, see if there’s anyone willing to put out some pamphlets or organize a seminar.

(SNCC WORKER enters, holding a letter.)

ELLA:

Good. Good. What’ve you got, Chuck?

SNCC WORKER:

Letter for Casey.

CASEY:

From?

SNCC WORKER:

(handing it over)

Tom Hayden. Hold on, there’s more.

(He exits.)

ELLA:

More? That’s already the third one this week! Goodness, Casey. What did you do to that poor boy?

CASEY:

Apparently he admires my passion.

(JIM coughs. SNCC WORKER returns carrying a large box, which he places on the table.)

SNCC WORKER:

Also from Tom.

(SNCC WORKER exits. CASEY opens the box – it’s full of books.)

ELLA:

(gently)

The time may have come to give the boy your personal address, Casey. There’s already enough attention on our office as it is.

CASEY:

I know, I know. I’m sorry, Ella. I’ll get these out of here.

(CASEY picks up the box of books. ELLA and JIM move the table stage left and exit. Lighting change.)

SCENE TWO

(Lighting change. PANELISTS carry off the lecterns. We are on campus at the University of Minnesota. CASEY takes a seat at a table with a sign that says “YWCA”. TOM and STUDENTS enter. The STUDENTS approach her, excited by the speech, eager to debate. They speak on top of each other. TOM hangs back.)

STUDENT:

What a debate! Have you read Emerson’s essay on Compensation?

STUDENT:

How about Civil Disobedience? But I guess you must have read Civil Disobedience.

CASEY:

Well, yes, they’re really -

STUDENT:

Do you think transcendentalism can really apply to the Negro problem?

STUDENT:

Were you afraid?

CASEY:

Afraid of what?

(STUDENTS exchange looks. Isn’t it obvious?)

STUDENT:

Going to jail!

STUDENT:

Getting beat up! Or shot at!

STUDENT:

Or worse!

CASEY:

What’s worse than going to jail, getting beat up, and being shot at?

STUDENT:

Um.

CASEY:

Listen, you’ve got to get past all that. It doesn’t matter if you’re afraid or not because if you don’t get beat up, someone else will. But maybe you can take some of those hits. Maybe your love for the mob can kill their hate. But you can’t let fear stop you because that’s their best weapon.

STUDENT:

Wow.

STUDENT:

Transcendentalism!

(They walk off, talking excitedly. TOM approaches. He is charismatic, confident, just short of cocky.)

TOM:

Do you ever get tired of it?

CASEY:

I’m sorry?

TOM:

People getting it wrong. Missing the point.

CASEY:

(pause, thoughtful)

No. They’re excited; that’s a start. If they follow through, actually start fighting for something, then eventually they’ll get the point.

TOM:

You’re generous.

CASEY:

And you are?

TOM:

Not. I’m Tom Hayden. I’m covering the conference for the Michigan Daily.

CASEY:

(shakes his hand)

Casey. I take it you get the point, then? Or were you just waiting your turn to debate philosophy?

TOM:

No, not that. I’m sorry; I didn’t mean to be coy. I really loved your speech. It said something. I could tell you really feel it. I don’t see much of that on campuses up here. These intellectual types don’t have that kind of fire.

CASEY:

(teasing)

Are you saying I’m not intellectual?

TOM:

I’m saying you’re passionate.

CASEY:

I thought I was generous. Anything else?

TOM:

Beautiful.

(beat)

When do you go back to Texas?

CASEY:

(slightly flustered)

I’m not. Not yet, at least. I’m going to Atlanta next, to work with SNCC.

TOM:

Snick?

CASEY:

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. It’s a new group starting down South, sort of a student arm of King’s group.

TOM:

When do you leave?

CASEY:

Tomorrow morning. Early.

TOM:

What do you say tonight we –

CASEY:

No.

TOM:

Can I write you?

CASEY:

Here. This is the address for the Atlanta SNCC office. I don’t know where I’ll be staying, so if you want to reach me that’s your best chance.

TOM:

I’ll write you. I think we’ve got a lot to talk about.

CASEY:

Such as?

TOM:

Freedom! Love! The infinite potential of mankind! Incidentally, do you find me attractive?

CASEY:

I certainly think you find yourself attractive.

TOM:

Ha! I’ll write you. Count on it!

(TOM exits. CASEY watches him leave.)

ACT I

SCENE ONE

(The curtain is closed. In front, stage right, are three lecterns bearing the National Student Association logo. CASEY and two PANELISTS stand behind the lecterns. CASEY is dressed fashionably, in a sun dress, pumps. When she speaks, she speaks passionately. The house lights remain up as they debate. We are at a panel discussion.)

PANELIST

To sum up, what I’m saying is that we’ve got otherwise successful students from respectable universities making fools of themselves in public and getting thrown into jail. How does that make us look? This sit-in movement isn’t progressive, it’s absolutely regressive. We must pass a resolution condemning these anarchists before they throw away whatever progress has been made by the success of the bus boycotts in Montgomery and other cities across the South. We must not allow our emotions to rule our judgment on this matter.

(The curtain opens. BLACKS at a lunch counter, sitting quietly stage left. Lights indicate this is not happening here, in this moment.)

PANELIST

I believe my colleague’s argument echoes my earlier remarks. I certainly agree that we should pass a resolution condemning the sit-ins, though perhaps for different reasons. I believe I speak for many of us when I say that a democracy relies upon the strength and fairness of its laws to prosper, and therein should lie the foundation of our position as regards the Negro question. Are the Jim Crow laws inherently unconstitutional? Of that there can be no doubt. However, and I cannot emphasize this enough, they are still laws. Encouraging students to break laws, no matter how unfair they may be, presents a slippery slope. Which laws, then, are worthy of breaking? Who shall decide? We must trust the courts to strike down these laws. We, as a country, have vested in them the authority to do so. Let us put our trust in the strength of our Judiciary, not in the whims of a few radical students.

(WHITES appear stage-right. Their attention is clearly on the lunch counter.)

CASEY

While I may fall within a certain shade of opinion, I speak neither for the sit-inners nor the Southern white, but only for myself. I find the sit-in question to be essentially an ethical one, not a question of expediency or emotion. I do not mean this to be abstract: an ethical question means a personal decision. None of you can make this decision for me, nor would I attempt to make it for any of you.

An ethical question is both utterly simple and confusingly complex. On this particular question, I hope we do not lose its essential simplicity in its complexity. When an individual human being is forbidden by the legal system and the social mores of his community to be a human being, does he have the right to peaceably protest? Yes. No “buts,” simply “Yes.” Perhaps in this situation protest is the only way to maintain his humanity.

PANELIST

Ms. Cason, though your rhetoric is compelling, I believe this situation is more complex than simply a question of abstract humanity.

CASEY

Then let’s address the complexities.

(WHITES approach the lunch counter, taunting, shoving. BLACKS remain seated quietly, facing forward.)

There is the fear of violence. But should a person who does not strike back be blamed because he was struck? If the presence of Negro students sitting quietly is so infuriating to a mob that they resort to violence, should the students be blamed for the sickness of the mob?

Maybe you simply do not think the sit-ins are wise. Well, wise in terms of what? The amount of discomfort caused? I do not choose to live my life in terms of comfort. I am not free as long as the segregationist keeps me from going where I please with whom I please, and I do not think that fear of him should keep me and others from trying to right the wrong for which he stands.

(WHITES empty ketchup bottles on the BLACK students. They grab them, shake them, but BLACKS remain stoic.)

PANELIST

I don’t think anyone disagrees that the accounts of Southern White violence are abhorrent, but that is a question for the law to decide, as is the question of reversing Jim Crow and the unfair –

CASEY

What about the law? As I see it, a person suffering under an unjust law has several choices. He can do nothing, which we have never advocated in a democracy. He can use legal means, but legal means move slowly. He is a human being now, and the law is unjust now. Should he revolt? I think we should all be proud and glad that this has not been the course of the Southern Negro. Or he can protest actively, as Southern students have chosen to do, and he must take the consequences. The law is not immutable, but rather an agreed-upon pattern for relations between people. If the pattern is unjust or a person doesn’t agree with the relations, a person must choose to do the right rather than the legal. I do not consider this anarchy, but responsibility.

(WHITES pull the BLACKS off their chairs, brutally kicking and punching. BLACKS try to protect each other with their bodies, but they do not strike back.)

PANELIST

But who are we to make that decision? The processes are in motion, the bus boycotts have been relatively successful. Why throw it all away for a dramatic scene at a Woolworth’s?

(House lights begin to fade.)

CASEY

I cannot say to a person who suffers injustice, “Wait.” Perhaps you can. I can’t. And having decided that I cannot urge caution, I must stand with him. If I had known that not a single lunch counter would open as a result of my action, I still could not have done differently. I am thankful for the sit-ins for providing me an opportunity to turn an ideal into action. It seems to me that this is what life is all about. While I hope that the NSA Congress will pass a strong sit-in resolution, I am more concerned that all of us, Negro and white, realize the possibility of becoming less inhuman humans through commitment and action, with all their frightening complexities.

(WHITES drag BLACK protestors off stage right.)

When Thoreau was jailed for refusing to pay taxes to a government which supported slavery, Emerson went to visit him. “Henry David,” said Emerson, “what are you doing in there?” Thoreau looked at him and replied, “Ralph Waldo, what are you doing out there?”

Well? What are you doing out there?

The limestone has eroded away to make a tiny cave, like a sunken shrine.

You can hear it from about a half mile away, and beneath the oak there’s a continuous patter of gently falling water.

The base of the limestone is deep green and luminous, giving way to dry white shadows in the cave ceiling. The ooze creeping up the root glows and flashes as little orbs of water accumulate and drop into the forest pond. Some ferns and creepers have begun the climb up the back of the cave.

Almost twenty feet above the surface of the pool the body of the tree juts out of the forest like the keel of a ship, and the creek winds slowly away into the woods.

I hiked ten miles with the one I love today, saw a deer, two copperheads, and an unreasonable number of spiders. Soon we’re having campfire chili. All in all things are looking good.

Today I made a diorama! It’s an assignment for my playwriting class - to visually represent the thesis of my play. Here it is! It was lots of fun to make. More on the play…in the future!

Clockwise from right: Casey Hayden, Ella Baker, Bob Moses

Closeup of the background.