Perry & the Innocent

Recreating (and advancing) pk’s censored domains: & / Personal / Writing / Journal /

Sample of how I scribbled early on in my days of word processing: slightly modified in the direction of Standard Written English:

Perry Mason: how could I never have thought of this before this week? [mid-1980s, @ K. 1997 02 13]
I’ve long gotten a kick out of how Hamilton Berger remained the public prosecutor despite his never visibly winning a case, despite his always attacking the wrong person, despite his always being the last one to see that he’s done it again: harassed an honest citizen. And then, we never hear an apology from him. No, he and that cop look at Perry as though it’s Perry’s fault that they’re perennially wrong, as though the truth were a trick. I’ve long gotten a kick out of how everyone in the courtroom always turns out to be guilty of a host of crimes: everyone except the accused that is. Not counting Perry and the regular cast, everyone is guilty of something.

Nothing new to my thinking about any of this. But now it strikes me: what about the jury? How come they’re never exposed? For being tampered with? for seeking publishing deals? for lying during the jury-selection process? and never ever, for being the actual murderer? (Remember: the actual murder is always in the courtroom, day after day, watching his scapegoat suffer.)

But of course. The jury is like the chorus in a Greek tragedy: always the innocent, helpless victims in a drama in which they participate only as victims of the actions of the
note And the protagonists are always kings and gods and prophets; never the public. No, the public is never guilty.

(Ooo 2012 09 23 I like that:)

The public is never guilty.

Oedipus moves us because, like any H.Sap., he looks outward; but, unlike the majority, he winds up seeing inward. (It’s others that we judge by their deeds; we judge ourselves by our intentions.) Oedipus has finally an honesty not shared by the group.

It was Nixon who was exposed, not the American public.

Hey: and what about the judge?


There’s a school that maintains that the noun “protagonist” cannot be plural, that there’s only one principal character in a drama. I am obviously not following that school in this case.


About pk

Seems to me that some modicum of honesty is requisite to intelligence. If we look in the mirror and see not kleptocrats but Christians, we’re still in the same old trouble.
This entry was posted in journal, pk Personal, writing and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s