The Paper Dragon (46 page)

"But you did cut it."

"Yes, for the sake of the narrative flow."

"Were there any changes made in Colman's character aside from the deletion of these scenes?"

"No. Once I hit upon the concept of him as a homosexual, the character remained more or less constant. And even after I cut those two flashbacks, his motivation was clearly understood by me, because the scenes were still there at the back of my mind."

"In other words, the flashbacks that were cut remained as a sort of underpainting?"

"Exactly."

"Referring again to Plaintiff's Exhibit 6, there is said to be a similarity between Sergeant Morley in your novel and Sergeant D'Agostino in
Catchpole
. Is Morley, in fact, based upon D'Agostino?"

"No, sir. Morley is an original creation."

"Is he based upon any real person?"

"Yes, he is based on a boy I knew at school."

"What was his name?"

"Andrew Christopher."

"Does this real name in any way account for the fictitious name you used?"

"Yes. Christopher Morley was a favorite author of mine.

The name Christopher automatically suggested Morley, and so I named the sergeant in my book Morley."

"Is Andrew Christopher still alive?"

"I don't know. I haven't seen him since we were in school together."

"Is Andrew Christopher a Negro?"

"Yes."

"Is the character Morley a Negro?"

"Yes."

"And a sergeant?"

"Yes."

"D'Agostino is also a sergeant, and a member of a minority group. How do you explain this similarity?"

"Sergeant D'Agostino is only
accidentally
a member of a minority group. Sergeant Morely is
deliberately
a Negro, for valid plot and character purposes."

"What are these valid plot and character purposes?"

"To further the conflict between the squad and the lieutenant."

"In what way?"

"By having Morley suspect the lieutenant of bigotry."

"Mr. Constantine has testified that there is a recurring thread of suspected prejudice in his play as well. Did you find this so?"

"No, sir."

"You did
not
find a recurring thread of suspected prejudice?"

"I did not."

"But there are references to D'Agostino being Italian, the lieutenant being white Protestant?"

"Yes, there are. But these are oblique and tangential and could not have been intended as development in a—"

"Objection, your Honor."

"Mr. Brackman?"

"We are getting into intent here, are we not?"

"Well, I won't know until I've heard the rest of his sentence," McIntyre said.

"If your Honor please, the witness has
already
used the word 'intended.' "

"Well, let's hear the rest of the sentence."

"I was only going to say that Mr. Constantine knows how to write a play, and there is ample evidence throughout that he knows how to sustain a thought and build it to a dramatic payoff. But he has not done this with D'Agostino's Italian background. The oblique references there seem intended only as incidental information."

"That's what I mean, your Honor," Brackman said. "I do not see how Mr. Driscoll can possibly know or even surmise what Mr. Constantine's intentions were."

"Yes," McIntyre said. "Well." He was silent for a moment. Then he said, "I think we will have to strike both the question and the answer, Mr. Willow."

Willow sighed and then said, "Mr. Driscoll, it has been alleged that the character called Kenworthy in your novel is based upon the character called Franklin in
Catchpole
? Is this in fact so?"

"No, sir."

"Both these men are addicted to the use of obscene language, are they not?"

"No. Again, we come to intent." Driscoll paused. "I really don't know how I can explain this without talking about
why
these characters are in the separate works."

"Your Honor?"

"Yes, Mr. Willow."

"May the witness proceed?"

"I have heard no objection."

"I most strenuously
will
object, your Honor, if he plans to analyze the thought processes of another man."

"He only plans to compare the characters, your Honor."

"That's not what he said."

"Mr. Driscoll?"

"I would have to go into intent."

"In that case, I would object," Brackman said.

"Well now," McIntyre said, and again was silent. "Will this take the same form as the testimony you just gave concerning bigotry and so on?"

"I would imagine so."

"It does seem to me, Mr. Brackman, that we allowed your witness a similar latitude in his testimony."

"We did not permit him to testify as to intent, your Honor."

"Not in the strictest meaning of the word, perhaps. But was he not, for example, when discussing the reversal of Colonel Peterson's name to form Peter Colman's name, was he not then
really
analyzing Mr. Driscoll's intent?"

"He was basing his analysis on the actual works, your Honor, and not on what was intended."

"He may not have used the word 'intent,' but surely he was telling us that Mr. Driscoll
intended
an anagram."

"If your Honor please, I feel we are beginning to confuse execution with intent. We are here to compare the two works. In that manner alone can we determine whether or not an act of piracy was committed."

"But wouldn't it be helpful if we knew the intent as well?"

"Your Honor, it seems to me that a man can state in print that white is white, and then later claim he really intended to state that
black
is white, and the intent and the execution would be in direct contradiction."

"But isn't it important for us to know what both these men were
trying
to accomplish?"

"Not in a court of law, if your Honor please. We are not, after all, professional book or play reviewers."

"I think we
are
reviewing these works, nonetheless, Mr. Brackman."

"Only in an attempt to prove or disprove similarities. I know your Honor recognizes the gravity of this contest, and I'm certain the Court would not wish to compare these proceedings to something as trivial as the reviewing of books and plays."

"On the contrary, Mr. Brackman, we may be getting very close to the heart of the matter here."

"Which is what, if your Honor please?"

"What both these men were
trying
to do."

"It is our contention, your Honor, that James Driscoll was trying to do nothing more nor less than steal Mr. Constantine's play."

"And what was Mr. Constantine trying to do?"

"He was trying to write a wholly original work. Your Honor, in all frankness, I must say that anyone's comments — mine included — concerning this matter can only confuse the issue beyond understanding."

"You mean the matter of author's intent?"

"Yes, your Honor. It seems to me that it is the author's burden to make his intent clear in the execution."

"And it is the
judge's
burden to try for an understanding of both execution
and
intent."

"If that is your ruling…"

"That is my ruling."

"Will the record note my exception?"

"It will be noted. Proceed, Mr. Driscoll."

"I've forgotten the question," Driscoll said.

"Are both Franklin in the play and Kenworthy in your novel addicted to the use of obscene language?"

"No, sir, they are not."

"Do you accept the use of the word
bug
or its variations as a substitute for an obscenity?"

"I do."

"And you still maintain that Franklin in the play does not use obscenity?"

"He
does
use obscenity, but not excessively."

"On what do you base this?"

"On an actual count of the number of times the words
bug
or
bugging
are used in the play."

"How many times are they used?"

"The play runs one hundred and twenty pages, and is divided into three acts. Throughout the length of the play, Private Franklin uses this word a total of seven times. Compare this to
The Eve of Saint Mark
, where the word
ruttin'
is used a total of twenty-eight times during the course of the play…"

"Objection, your Honor," Brackman said. "We are not here to compare
Catchpole
with
The Eve of Saint Mark
."

"Overruled, Mr. Brackman. The comparison is being made only to clarify this matter of excessive obscenity."

"How often does your character Kenworthy use obscene language in
The Paper Dragon
?"

"Every time he speaks."

"Did you count the times?"

"No."

"Moving to Plaintiff's Exhibit 5, Plot Similarities, it is alleged that in both your novel and the play the lieutenant falls in love with an Army nurse. Is this so?"

"Yes, it is."

"How do you explain the similarity?"

"I wanted to tell a love story. In order to tell a love story, I needed a woman. In a combat situation, the only possible female characters would be either a native woman or a woman connected with the services. I chose a nurse."

"Why couldn't you just as naturally have chosen a Korean girl?"

"Because this would have brought up the racial matter again, and I wanted to explore that in terms of Sergeant Morley."

"Does the nurse in
Catchpole
outrank the lieutenant?"

"Yes."

"Does the nurse in your book outrank Lieutenant Cooper?"

"Yes."

"How do you explain this?"

"The nurses in Korea were in a combat situation, and most of them were experienced officers."

"Did you meet any nurses in Korea who had been recently commissioned?"

"No."

"What was the lowest rank you came across?"

"A nurse's rank, do you mean? In Korea?"

"Yes."

"First lieutenant."

"What rank does Jan Reardon in your novel hold?"

"First lieutenant."

"Has she been in the service longer than Lieutenant Cooper?"

"Yes, a full year longer."

"And does this explain her higher rank?"

"Yes."

"It has been alleged in this same Exhibit 5 that the men in the respective squads hate their new commanding officer because someone they liked and respected had been killed by a sniper. Is this so?"

"Yes, but the sniper wasn't my idea. It was Chester Danton's."

"What was the plot development in your original version?"

"The struggle originated with Private Colman. It was strictly a personal struggle between Colman and the lieutenant. Only later did it assume larger proportions that led to the lieutenant's death."

"There had been no previous commanding officer killed by a sniper?"

"No. Besides, in the play the lieutenant is
really
responsible for the death of one of his men, and the squad's resentment is somewhat justified. In my novel, the major is killed a full month before Cooper even arrives in Korea. The resentment is solely Colman's, the struggle is strictly between the two."

"A struggle for what?"

"For…" Driscoll hesitated. "Survival," he said.

"Which the lieutenant loses?"

"Yes. The lieutenant is killed. What Colman finally does is to kill the lieutenant."

"Is this his plan?"

"Unconsciously, yes."

"Is this not also the plan of Corporal Janus in the play?"

"Yes."

"To murder the lieutenant?"

"Yes."

"How do they differ?"

"One is a melodrama."

"Which one?"

"The play. It is really a play about a murder conspiracy, and the events leading up to that murder and the eventual foiling of it through a series of further related events."

"Do you agree that the theme of
Catchpole
is 'The Idiocy and Foolish Waste of War'?"

"No, sir."

"What
is
the theme of
Catchpole
?"

" 'Crime Does Not Pay.' "

"And what is the theme of
The Paper Dragon
?"

"It would be difficult to express simply."

"How
would
you express it?"

"I suppose the theme is that people are capable of… of hurting each other beyond endurance by… by thoughtless and… ill-conceived actions."

"Like war, do you mean?"

"The war is inconsequential, it's only the background. I tried to… you see… the lieutenant knows a deep and very real love for this woman… the nurse… and this is wrecked… their love is destroyed by a single thoughtless act."

"But isn't it true that more than just their love is destroyed?"

"Yes, the… the future they might have had together."

"I'm referring, though, to the actual death of the lieutenant."

"Oh. Yes. But I saw that as symbolic."

"You did not see the nurse's deprivation as symbolic, did you?"

"No, that's real enough. She's lost him."

"Forever," Willow said.

"Yes." Driscoll paused. "Forever."

"But then, there
are
no winners in your novel, Mr. Driscoll, isn't that so?"

"Yes."

"The whole series of events, in fact, seem pointless by the end of the book."

"Yes."

"Everyone has been involved in a bitter struggle that solves nothing, a paper dragon. Moving on to Plaintiff's Exhibit 7, we are told that the 'female rifle' scene in your novel is based on the pig scene in Mr. Constantine's play.
Is
it?"

"No, it's not."

"It is alleged that these scenes are similar."

"I don't see how."

"They are both said to be sexual."

"Mr. Constantine's scene is about capturing a pig. My scene is about a woman."

"It's about stripping a rifle, isn't it?"

"No, it's about stripping a woman and taking her to bed."

"It purports to be about a rifle."

"The scene is transparently about a woman, whereas Mr. Constantine's pig scene is clearly a scene about
food
. There are no sexual allusions in it at all."

"Thank you, Mr. Driscoll," Willow said. "That is all for this witness, your Honor."