Thursday, April 23, 2009

I'm at the precipice.

I suppose I should write a new post. It's been awhile.

In my directing class, I'm directing a scene called Precipice. It's about a boy and a girl hiking on a mountain. It is getting to be the end of the day and a storm is on its way. They need to hurry down the mountain because storms on this mountain are deadly. They come to a precipice and need to jump across to the other side in order to proceed down the rest of the mountain. When they were hiking up the mountain earlier that day, they jumped across a precipice and the girl is convinced that this is the same precipice that they jumped across that morning. The boy is not convinced. It's a simple jump; only a couple of feet. The problem is that the storm has brought with it some terrible fog, therefore the boy and the girl can't see across the precipice. They can't see where to jump.

The girl has faith. She has been hiking on this trail all of her life and "knows in her heart" that she can jump across and be fine. Plus, she's willing to jump because after all, there is a terrible storm on the way and doesn't want to get caught in it.

The boy needs proof. He repeatedly asks her for proof that they can jump across and that this is the same precipice. He asks her how she knows that the other side is really only a couple of feet away. She says she "just knows." She then throws a rock to the other side and it hits stone, thus proving that the other side is there and it's not very far away. She then gets ready to jump across.

He: Unbelievable.
She: What?
He: You're really going to run and leap into the fog not knowing what's over there?
She: I know what's over there.
He: You don't know. You believe. You hope. You wish. You pray. You don't know the difference between what you know and what you hope.
She: You heard the stone land on that ledge.
He: Stone hit stone. Period. That's a typical you-ism. You hope a ledge is there, therefore a ledge's over there. No! There's rock over there. It may be flat. Or it may be round. It may be vertical. It may be horizontal. It's not a fact because you said it. It's only a fact when I can see it.

At the end of the scene, the girl decides that it is too much risk to try to jump where she can't see and that it may not be the same precipice they jumped over that morning. They decide to build a fire and take refuge in a fallen tree.

Before I began working on this scene with my actors, it was important for us to decide if this was really the precipice they jumped over that morning. We had to decide if the girl was right or if the boy was right.

We decided that the boy was right.

There is a popular TV series called Lost that my roommates LOVE. They watch it every Wednesday. I don't watch it so I'm not entirely sure what the plot is or the characters involved. But, a number of times, I've heard it said that Lost is about "men of science" and "men of faith." I've totally taken that theme and applied it to my directing scene, because, well, that's what it's about.

I think it's interesting that I decided to choose for the boy to be right.

I can't jump where I can't see.

Are you the boy or the girl?

5 comments:

  1. Okay, so they spend the night on the mountain, and the storm kills them, or are they safe? If they are safe spending the night on the mountain, then why attempt the climb down in the first place? Is there really a storm coming - how do they know? Do they have faith in their predictions that a storm is coming? Why bother going down at all?
    I would be the girl. If she's right, then she gets down safely. If she's wrong, she's dead and she doesn't have to worry about storms anymore. LOL I think it's a silly story. Why did she decide to stay with the boy on the mountain? Why would she allow someone who is obviously wrong to make her doubt herself? She knew the truth.
    Luvs,
    Donna G.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Let's see...I guess that in general I am a person who follows her heart. In your analogy that makes me a "man of faith". I think it's kinda silly to base all your facts only on what you can see. I mean, I've extracted DNA from wheat protein in a lab but I still had "faith" that it contained the genetic code for wheat. I saw the strands of DNA but I didn't actually see the code. I have faith that science is right when it comes to DNA and genes. I don't have to see everything to believe it. I believe lots of things that are unseen but true. That is the definition of faith. I don't have to see God to believe he's exists just like I don't have to see a rhinovirus to believe I have one.
    What if the girl had jumped the precipice and then called out through the fog for the boy to follow her? He still wouldn't be able to see the other side. Would he then have enough faith to jump? What if the next morning the fog cleared and revealed that it had indeed been an easy jump? It wouldn't have become a fact only after he could see it - it would have been fact all along.
    Being a person of faith doesn't mean I always have the nerve to jump. Sometimes, like the boy in your story, I am too afraid to take a leap into the unknown. Sometimes, like the girl in your story, I listen to the people around me who are convinced I don't know enough.
    In real life there's always another chance, another precipice to navigate. Eventually I get tired of hanging on to the ledge in the storm and I make that leap of faith.
    I love you, Karie.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am the boy because I live by "verified faith." I believe in what I know to be true because it has been verified, proven or at the very least, held to a standard of proof.

    Although it is true that things exist that can't be seen, those things can also be proven to exist. We can't see DNA with our naked eye, but we know it's there because it's been proven that it's there and its proof exists in our lives every moment.

    We can't see a virus, but we know we have it because there are scientific tests that we can take to prove that it exists in us.

    You are a thinker, Karie, and that is good. "Question everything" as the Dalai Lama has said. Ask questions and seek truth. It sets you free, you know.

    I don't believe for an instant that life always gives us another chance to cross a precipice. Sometimes one chance is all we get. Do we simply take leaps of faith and risk our only chance, or do we ask for a little empirical evidence that crossing the precipice will not result in our ultimate demise?

    For what it's worth, I'm proud of you and I love you.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll forgo the question and provide my practical solution.

    I'd take off my pants (bear with me) and, holding one leg of the pants, swing the pants and listen/feel if I had struck the other ledge. I can check what it sounds and feels like when pants hit flat-enough-to-stand-on land because I am standing on FETSO land. I'll also know how much leg is hitting the land across the precipice and if I can make that jump. After putting my pants back on, I'd act based on the knowledge that I had.

    As for being in a situtation where your question is applicable, I'd probably go with my gut decision unless I could be convinced otherwise. If I'm sure enough that I can jump safely across without testing, I'll jump. If I can test the gap and reason that I can jump, I'll jump, but that was probably my gut feeling anyway. The subconcsious (some people call it their gut) is great at deciding quickly based on the data it has.

    If I didn't think that I could jump across safely, I probably wouldn't. The boy probably thought that he was more likely to survive a storm than to survive that jump. He doesn't decide whether he's right or not, but he does decide how he acts. He decided to act as if he couldn't make that jump, he didn't _know_ if he could or not, he just knew that he didn't know. By taking this course of action, he also decided to act as if he could survive a night on a mountain through a "deadly storm," another thing he knew he did not know.

    Had he known he could make the jump (or couldn't survive the storm), he would have made the jump (despite his fear). Had he known that he could survive the storm on the mountain (or that he couldn't make the jump), he would not have wasted time wondering if he could or should jump, but would have made preparations to stay on the mountain (even though it's harder than making that jump would be, if he could do it).

    If he was sure that he couldn't make the jump _and_ that he couldn't survive the night, he'd find another way down or he'd die trying to live (just like the rest of us).

    Important: It is good that you pulled this question from the play. Pulling meanings and questions are the point of reading literature.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, I'm proud of all of you, and I love you all.

    Such thinkers in our family!

    While it is true that sometimes we only get one chance to do a particular thing, what we cannot know is that there may be a better thing waiting for us elsewhere. It seems that you truly are questioning everything. If you don't you will never be satisfied that you are on your own right path--there could have been a better way maybe...

    ...or not.

    I will ALWAYS believe in another chance. I am in my second chance as I write. I will not end in exactly the way I thought I would, but I have found a very happy path.

    Karie, I believe we have all the chances we are willing to take. I wonder what I would have done on that precipice...

    I think you're braver than I was. I think all my children/grandchildren are braver than I.

    In fact, I'm counting on it.

    ReplyDelete