Courtroom Drama, Ayn Rand, and Your Local Theatre - Page 2

Articles in this Topic Discussions in this Topic

Page 2

Nov 5, 1999

I don't believe this lack of ultimate truth in court cases causes us to appreciate them as much as the idea that in most court cases, a decision, regardless of how just, will finally be achieved. In other words, for the same reason people want a college football playoff, we like for courts and juries to pick an absolute winner. We have so many on television because, even though there is no divine providence of truth, there is an ultimate outcome. So much of life is gray-area that any decision, any scientific conclusion is more settling to our systems than the constant controversial and questionable humanities theories.

In Night of January Sixteen, the jury is picked from the audience. I would imagine that the jury is usually placed on stage with the actors and set, as was the case with the production I saw. I want you to imagine being selected for this jury. Imagine also that you are neither an actor nor a lawyer. Here you are on the stage trying to weigh the evidence being presented. At the same time, you are immediately confronted with the audience members who, if they desire, could watch just you for much of the show. You're sitting on the same stage with these costumed, well-rehearsed lawyers, and maybe the audience is wondering why you're wearing that strange combination of orange and purple. These audience members heard your name called when you took your seat, and no matter what outcome you help decide, the audience will want to know why you decided this, and roughly half will believe you made the wrong decision. Ayn Rand says that she wants to place her characters in absolutely real situations (see "Esthetics" at the bottom of this page), and in this case, with the obvious parallel we can draw between real courts and juries and a good courtroom drama like the one she wrote, Night of January Sixteen certainly finds success in meeting her objective.

Part 2-Objectivism and Night of January Sixteen

When the play opens, Karen Andre is being tried for Mr. Faulkner's murder. At first, the case seems to be a matter of suicide versus murder. The testimony of the wife, father-in-law and the mistress (Andre) make the situation only more debatable. Then, the gangster Larry Regan rushes in, further complicating matters by claiming that he faked the death of Mr. Faulkner at Faulkner's request. Andre denies this at first, but affirms the claim when the next act begins. According to Regan, a body was thrown from the balcony so Faulkner could get away with money and mistress, but the faked deceased is now really dead in an airplane, owned by the father-in-law John Graham Whitfield. Other matters, such as a forged check and the obvious out-to-get-you motivations of the witnesses, further complicate the case, making the decision difficult for the jury. The only easy decision for the audience is that, no matter who may be found guilty or not guilty, no one-not even the victim-is innocent.

Go To Page: 1 2 3 4

The copyright of the article Courtroom Drama, Ayn Rand, and Your Local Theatre - Page 2 in Teaching Theatre is owned by Jon Blackstock. Permission to republish Courtroom Drama, Ayn Rand, and Your Local Theatre - Page 2 in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.