Lust: Sarah Beth May is a Christian who advocates for abstinence until marriage. She has been in a three year relationship with Jack Mayhoff, who doesn’t exactly agree with her abstinence only view. As a result of his frustrations with Sarah he peruses a fairly sexual relationship with Anita Wang, who is most definitely not pure. Sarah bumps into Anita.
Setting: High School hallway, after last bell.
Sarah- (talking to Jack on her cell) I was thinking that after bible group we can maybe get together and scrap book and then make brownies with Cynthia Maybell, I invited her over. I hope that’s okay sweetie... Yeah?... I thought you got her groceries last night----- Well I would like to be in bed by 9 tonight, last night mom was upset that you stayed after 7:30.
(She accidentally bumps into Anita and drops her books and her cell phone. She picks the phone back up)
Sarah- Jack, are you there?(no answer) Sugar muffins!
Anita- Watch where you’re going Sister Mary Pure.
Sarah- (collecting her books, not noticing who she ran into) Oh, I’m sorry I didn’t mean to…
Anita- of course you didn’t, you never do anything wrong, daddy’s little angel, right?
Sarah- ummm, actually to say I’m an Angel is to lie because, umm, angels are guides assigned to people by god to help guide them to find spiritual redemption and I myself have…
Anita- do you make everyone you run into listen to this holier-than-though bullshit? (Pushes past her and starts walking away)
Sarah- Umm.. I can help you; my bible group meets every day at fou…..
Anita-(turns around and storms back to Sarah) listen Virgin Mary; I don’t need your help. I get by just fine.
Sarah- you know God can give you a better outlook on life, help you get your life together.
Anita- I’d say you’re the one that needs help getting your life together, may not be as perfect as you think.
Sarah- I think I have a pretty good life, I have God, and I have Jack. He is so perfect and wonderful.
Anita- (with a devilish smile) oh, he’s wonderful alright, sure was wonderful last night.
Sarah- What do you mean, did you run into him at the Kum’ N Go? He was helping his Nan get milk, he’s so sweet.
Anita- Oh, ha, well, I would say he ran into me.(Jack walks over to Sarah with his eyes locked on Anita)
Sarah- Hi sweetheart. (His eyes still locked on Anita as she shoots him a flirtatious smile) Jack. (Jack still not paying Sarah any mind. Sarah finally puts two and two together and starts to get flustered and increasingly upset) Jack, you’re not…. This isn’t... You told me you valued purity; that the purity rings we gave each other meant everything to you. (She tries to take off her ring to throw it at him but it doesn’t want to slide off, she starts to cry in embarrassment and runs off)
After reading the last few lines, I can honestly say that I haven't read a piece of literature as dark and harrowing as this since I finished The Jungle. It is very well written and should really send the audience a message, which I'm sure you were aiming for.
One problem, though...it might be awkward to just have a narrator or someone go out onto the stage and explain that opening "blurb" to the audience as the scene's only exposition. You might want to try to work the characters' background in through the dialogue instead of pouring it on the audience before the play starts.
I liked it I just think it could be expanded to deepen the characters. I think without a little more character development it runs the risk of alienating some audience members. Then again it is just a three minute piece.
Darkja wrote: I liked it I just think it could be expanded to deepen the characters. I think without a little more character development it runs the risk of alienating some audience members. Then again it is just a three minute piece.
How exactly would they be alienated? Only because I'm writing a piece about somewhat similar issues and I certainly don't want my audience alienated.
I feel that it could be viewed that way because you are dealing with a moral question. Without proper character development giving the characters motivation for their views you risk coming across as simply judging someone's moral standpoint as invalid. In this particular case I could see how someone could easily interpret it as having a moral standpoint against premarital relations as naive. This may be the author's intent but if it is the intent for people who do not understand a point of view to understand it they need more information. Again this is just the opinion of a novice.