TV Hearings have become the new Broadway if you consider the high drama that has played out on two particular network programs over the last month. Sure, this observation seems like a rather exaggerated notion to ponder, but maybe not. First was the recent series broadcasting the January 6Hearings with Liz Cheney at the helm. Second was PBS' Frontline: "Supreme Revenge: Battle For the Court," an investigative documentary on August 23 showing how Mitch McConnell guided the last three confirmations of Supreme Court judges. While footage of these hearings was well documented, the most dramatic was the one offering Clarence Thomas as a "victim." And everyone knew it, including Judicial Committee members ( with Joe Biden as Chairperson ) and the TV viewers. The Hearings made this clear as Andrea Mitchell stated in a voice over, " The stage is set for a ... brutal hearing. "
Or as Tom Brokaw commented, " This is high drama, and we all have a stake in it." " High drama" continued throughout the Hearings.
Let's take, for example, drama's plot structure as developed by the Thomas Hearings: First, establishment of the characters and their place in the drama. Regarding this case, it was the Judge (Thomas ) and the Professor (Anita Hill ), both intelligent, committed adversaries, vying for support. Depending on a viewer's point of view, one character was "good," the other one "bad."
Next, the problem: the Judge was accused of sexual harassment by the Professor which would likely not lead to a Supreme Court confirmation. Third, primary obstacles to solving the problem: lack of hard evidence that impeded finding the truth ( other than "She said, He said" and the fact that this hearing was a political one meaning Democrats vs. Republicans ).
Last, the conclusion: a Mexican stand-off building suspense for two days and then the Senate vote to confirm Thomas.
Both the highbrow, Willian Shakespear, and the low brow, William Blatty, couldn't have concocted a better plot. Yet these disparate writers figured heavily in the ensuing drama. Alan Simpson, a Judicial Committe member, said that Shakespeare would have loved the proceedings and quoted from "Othello," stating afterwards, "What a tragedy. What a disgusting tragedy," ( referring to the Hearings). The famous line, "Et tu, Brute?" from the Bard's "Julius Caesar," was changed to "Et tu, Anita?" in an accusatory statement aimed at Hill. Joe Biden even quoted, " Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn," ascribing it incorrectly to Shakespeare.
References to theatrical "performances" by Hill's supporters also stood out with remarks coming from Committee member, Orin Hatch: " You can't find better witnesses from central casting." ( President George W. Bush even commented on a TV news program about a particular emotional answer from Thomas, saying that there wasn't a "dry eye in the house" ). At times during the Hearings, Committee members, like Arlen Specter and Joe Biden, gave heated impromptu speeches while "playing to the House" ( audience) as well.
However, the most stirring speeches were made by Thomas himself. In fact, it would be safe to say that he should have won a Broadway Tony Award for his acting ability.
Comments
Post a Comment