Dialogue: In Brief

Characters
Hayes Westbrook
Ambrose Bierce

Scene
An average bar in an average town in Carrion.  

Caveat
There is nothing special about this.   It isn’t a story, but a (very) short dialogue.   The acts are separate at appropriate points in the dialogue.

BIERCE: I don`t have any regrets.   Regret is for... not the weak minded, but the overly compassionate.

WESTBROOK: You have a problem with compassion?

BIERCE: Not compassion in and of itself -- but there`s a difference between being a caring person and caring too deeply for any one thing.

WESTBROOK: Give me an example.

BIERCE: Well...

WESTBROOK: Of something you shouldn`t care too deeply for.   Don`t tell me you haven`t thought this through.

BIERCE: I asked you to come get a drink with me.   I didn`t ask for a counselor.

WESTBROOK: That`s what a friend is...

BIERCE: My friend right now is this pint glass.

WESTBROOK: Fair enough.   But I know you can...

BIERCE: Fine, fine, fine.   It`s one things to be a caring person.   To care about things.   Rules.   Law.   Order.   Justice.

WESTBROOK: Our fellow man?

BIERCE: Absolutely -- your fellow man.   Women.   Family.   Friends.

WESTBROOK: Like the pint glass.

BIERCE: You don`t care for a pint glass -- you lust for it, and regret it in the morning.

WESTBROOK: I thought you didn`t regret?

BIERCE: I don`t have regrets about what I did.

WESTBROOK: I know, I know, I`m kidding.

BIERCE: It`s not funny.

WESTBROOK: I know.   Go on, go on...

BIERCE: You can care, and you can be a caring person.   But there`s something disingenuous in claiming compassion when your compassion is limited to various things, immaterial, material, or otherwise.

WESTBROOK: Otherwise?

BIERCE: I`m just thinking out loud here.   You know what I mean.

WESTBROOK: So it`s fine - and important, if I understand you - to care about life and things in life.   But it`s wrong to care about some things more than others?

BIERCE: No, no... maybe I`m misspoke.

WESTBROOK: Maybe the beer`s started talking.

BIERCE: Not yet.   (laughs) No, I`m saying that it`s wrong to care about some things at the expense of others.

WESTBROOK: Isn`t that what I just said?

BIERCE: No.   I inferred from what you said that you thought I said it was wrong to care about, say, family more than friends, and such.

WESTBROOK: Right.

BIERCE: That`s not what I`m saying.

WESTBROOK: What are you saying then?   Maybe you should be a little more specific?

BIERCE: I ask you to get a drink with me and you`re demanding specifics? (laughs)

WESTBROOK: How about you bear with me for a second?

BIERCE: Alright sir.

WESTBROOK: I think we`re getting tripped up on the word "things." What are you defining as "things" that we can or can`t, should or shouldn`t care about the same?   Or differently?   Or whatever?

BIERCE: Take that kid tonight.

WESTBROOK: Okay.

BIERCE: He was out there, waving a sign around, screaming at the top of his lungs that he`s being oppressed, and so forth so on.   As the visible embodiment of the law out there...

WESTBROOK: ...interesting phrasing...

BIERCE: ...thank you... he was directing his anger at me.   At us.   He was so passionate about what he believed.   His words dripped with compassion for...

WESTBROOK: ...compassion?   Simple rhymes and crude drawings of political figures demonstrate compassion?

BIERCE: He cared.   He cared so much about what he thought was right that he neglected everything else.

WESTBROOK: Are you talking about context?

BIERCE: I guess so.   The kid lacked a proper perspective.

WESTBROOK: Whoa, is it perspective or context we`re after?

BIERCE: "Perspective" might have too many implications.   Let`s stick with context.   The kid hated me as an embodiment of what he believed to be his oppressors.   He hated all of us standing guard out there.   To him the law is illegitimate, the government is wrong, the power used is improper, and so forth.   He disregards the idea of democracy.

WESTBROOK: Maybe he hasn`t disregarded it.   Maybe he thinks it too is illegitimate.   Or maybe he cares about democracy and cares to see it through.   Maybe his presence out there isn`t so contradictory...

BIERCE: Maybe.   But still, the context is wrong.   If he`s passionate about people he should be willing to accept that not everyone fits into his 2-D stereotype.   I`m a person.

WESTBROOK: (laughs) "I`m a person, too." Come on.   Sound like a soldier.

BIERCE: Hah.   But no, I am a person.   I believe in many things.   I do my job and I do it well.   Put my pants go on one leg at a time; I take orders not because I`m forced to, necessarily, but because I believe in the system from which they`re derived.

WESTBROOK: The orders or the power that does the ordering?

BIERCE: I believe my job is to stand on the dividing line between chaos and order, and to do my best to hold back the forces of chaos.   That order that I defend is legitimate, and the power that guides it, the power from which I receive I orders, the power from which all of this is derived, is legitimate.

WESTBROOK: And he didn`t.   Didn`t he just have a different perspective than you?

BIERCE: Maybe.

WESTBROOK: All of those things you just mentioned... he saw you representing oppression, not order.   He saw you standing not on the dividing line between chaos and order, but between freedom and tyranny.   Your presence - and not just you, but the very presence of us all and of the government - is tyrannical.   That`s his perspective.   That was his context.   Everything else fit into that.

BIERCE: And that`s the problem.

WESTBROOK: That`s the problem?

BIERCE: That`s the problem.

WESTBROOK: How?

BIERCE: Because he could be wrong.

WESTBROOK: So could you!

BIERCE: No.

WESTBROOK: Yes!   Of course you could be wrong!   You said it yourself: you`re a person too, and not some being endowed with special powers or foresight.   You`re a soldier.   A damned fine one, but a soldier nonetheless.   You`re a warrior.   Is it not possible that the order that derives from the power you find legitimate is in fact illegitimate?

BIERCE: Maybe.  

WESTBROOK: So then what`s the point of this conversation?

BIERCE: You can care too much about one thing.

WESTBROOK: What thing?   What things are you talking about?

BIERCE: You need to have a proper respect for everyone else.

WESTBROOK: How was this kid not having the proper respect for everyone else?   What is the appropriate level of respect for everyone else?

BIERCE: He drew a gun.

WESTBROOK: Right.

BIERCE: He drew a gun and aimed it at you.

WESTBROOK: Right.

BIERCE: Where was his level of respect for you?   For your family?   For the fact that you are, in fact, a human being?   He saw the world as a place that doesn`t exist, as this black and white sort of...

WESTBROOK: ...wait wait, this from the guy standing on the "dividing line?"

BIERCE: He saw the world as black and white.   He saw his beliefs as preeminent -- the things he cared about were more important than things other people cared about.

WESTBROOK: What things?!?

BIERCE: ...

WESTBROOK: Freedom?

BIERCE: No.   He was passionate about being against something.   He claimed to be passionate about loving other people, but he drew a gun on someone.

WESTBROOK: So his crime was being a hypocrite?

BIERCE: He wasn`t a hypocrite.   He didn`t see you as a person.   He didn`t see me as a person.   He - again - lacked perspective.

WESTBROOK: Perspective?

BIERCE: Context.   He lacked the appropriate context.   No... not the "appropriate" context, but any at all.   He was just a kid.   I`m sure he had parents who loved him.   He might have had a girlfriend.   He cared about one issue too much.

WESTBROOK: So "issues" are the "things?"

BIERCE: That might work.   He cared too much about what he thought was his oppression.

WESTBROOK: Is there something more noble than fighting for freedom?

BIERCE: But he wasn`t... not... free... who was he fighting against?

WESTBROOK: Us?

BIERCE: He cared too much.   He should have had a more balanced view of things.   He should have acknowledged that maybe he was wrong.

WESTBROOK: Do you acknowledge that you could be wrong?

BIERCE: Yes.   But I have no regrets.

WESTBROOK: You shot a child.   Okay, a young adult.   You shot him and he`s dead.   And you have no regrets?

BIERCE: None.

WESTBROOK: And you think that`s the proper perspective?

BIERCE: Context?

WESTBROOK: You think you have a better beat on things because you don`t regret shooting somebody?

BIERCE: Yes.

WESTBROOK: Yes?

BIERCE: I`m a soldier.

WESTBROOK: And that makes it okay?

BIERCE: The fact that he raised a gun towards you makes it okay.

WESTBROOK: Wouldn`t that indicate a compassion problem on your part?   You cared more about saving me than saving the life of a "fellow man?"

BIERCE: You`ve completely misunderstood me.

WESTBROOK: Enlighten me.   Please.

BIERCE: Compassion in and of itself is fine.   That kid cared more about his cause - about one thing, one issue - than everything else in totality.   I`m compassionate.   But I wouldn`t take another person`s life in the name of a cause.

WESTBROOK: Isn`t that the entire basis of your life?   Of your job?   You protect and defend a cause.   An ideal.   You and that kid were no different, save for your station in life -- your record of accomplishments.   He was willing to kill me to advance his cause, and you were willing to kill him to defend yours.   That`s all there is to it.   All of this talk about context and the proper role of whatever -- it`s nonsense.   The dividing line at that moment wasn`t between freedom and tyranny or chaos and order, but between two different camps.   The protestors like that kid who all believe whatever it is they believe for whatever their reasons are, and then us with our job.

BIERCE: I didn`t shoot that kid because of my job.

WESTBROOK: I know you didn`t.   You were protecting an idea when you shot him.   You killed that kid before he had a chance to kill me.  

BIERCE: What idea was I defending?

WESTBROOK: Friendship.

BIERCE: Maybe.   But I don`t have any regrets.