Twilight Los Angeles 1992

Twilight Los Angeles attempts to demonstrate the public reactions to Rodney King through a series of interviews translated into monologues by the author.  The monologues are hyper-realistic, with little abridgment to make them more palatable to read or act out. Verbal ticks, such as “ums” and hesitations, remain imbedded amongst profound thoughts on social equality, creating for the reader a surreal stream of consciousness enveloping an entire community. For me, the play created a wide angle snapshot of reactions in Los Angeles during 1992, artificially constructing a universal conscience that shows the wide range of emotions elicited by the Rodney King trials.

Smith spends most of her time focusing on the racial issues at hand, and does so by examining as many perspectives as she can. From the lawyers defending to the police and government officials to black community leaders and riot participants, she truly attempts to examine every angle she can, but always with the goal of highlighting the racial issues at stake.

 From the point of view of the LA gang member, the riots “Show how a black person gets treated in this [South Central] community” (p100).  Blacks’ perceptions of the police force become clear through throughout the monologues. Police are seen as the “enemy” sending the black community to jail or “the cemetery” (p32). They describe the city as “being at war with its own children.” (p29) It becomes clear that tolerance for the loose ethical standards of the police department was an ineffective method for change, akin even to complacency. Stories are told throughout the play of previous encounters with the brutal LAPD, whom are accepted as racist ruffians without much thought considering their history amongst South Central residents. I found this to

While many blacks did not approve of the riots, their sentiments are made clear by scholar Cornel West, stating “The best we can do is hold up a bloodstained banner of a black struggle that is rooted in moral vision and yet acknowledging the fact that a power struggle will be fundamental for any change.” (p45) This begins the internal debate between morality and meaningful action for the black community, and whether both can be achieved in tandem under the circumstances present in LA.

When a community is systematically beaten and broken, what place does that leave for morality? Frustration overflows in absurd demonstrations of rage, massive anarchical riots with no purpose other than to demonstrate the anger of the disenfranchised. For the so-called-powerless, the simple act of defying authority can inspire the illusion of social power, even though its ultimate consequences are further social marginalization. As a US congresswoman from California said, “The fact of the matter is, whether we like it or not, riot is the voice of the unheard.” (p162)

The voice speaking for the rioters in LA didn’t seem to make sense to a lot of people. Perhaps it was the fact that this view of the world had been so suppressed that its entry into the public sphere of thought had to be rammed into people’s minds with constant scenes of violence. As bystanders, we lament the victimization of innocent people like Reginald Denny, who was senselessly beaten into a coma when pulled from his truck by rioters for an offence that “didn’t have anything to do with [him]” (p104). The riots might have made a strong impression on Americans about the unforeseen power of those we considered toothless, but it deepened the cultural rift that is the root cause for inequality to begin with.

“This is not my united states anymore. This is sicko.” (p93) This comes from a reporter for the LA Times who was reviewing media from the riots. Riots are not how decent, civilized people react to things that did not go as they expected. Moreover, the mass hysteria captured by footage of the riots portrays faceless black aggressors as animal predators preying senselessly on whites. They seem devoid of regular human reactions. “If you saw an animal being beaten, you would go over and help an animal.” (p95) Without fully understanding the years of frustration being vented in physical antagonism, rioters are easily viewed by the public as irrational and dangerous.

The truth behind the situation is harder to discern then initially thought. The attorney who defended Officer Briseno, one of the officers who beat Rodney King, found the public reaction to the second trial’s verdicts almost as troubling as the riots. When President Clinton publically announced that “Justice had finally been served” to the police officers responsible, all he could think was “What does he know?... Is it the truth of Koon and Powell being guilty, or is it the truth of the society that has to find them guilty in order to protect itself?” (p243).