By Imam Mehmet, SCI Dallas Chaplain
On Jan. 22, a very select group of inmates at SCI Dallas presented original dramatic work for an audience of their fellow prisoners. This was the premier presentation of the first performance created by the character council program (CCP). The CCP is supervised by Imam Mehmet Arvas, the Islamic Chaplain at the prison, but the CCP is a non-religious program, intended to provide a means of creatively addressing real world issues of character.
The play involved about a dozen actors, who performed characters and dialogue which the inmates in the program wrote. Many of the actors were among the writers, and a fellow inmate held the role of Director. Due to prison regulations that limit the use of inmates' identities in press releases, the participants will not be named here.
The play involved a hypothetical situation in which Stan, an inmate, was accused by another inmate of being a snitch. There was very little backstory offered, but it was not necessary to the production. The revelation was made in the form of a rumor, passed among a small group of men. Those hearing the rumor questioned the man offering it, but of course he had little supporting evidence. He was simply repeating a story he had heard. Some of the listeners accepted the rumor, while others challenged it.
Through a progression of scene changes (involving changing groups of actors, speaking in different locations on the Chapel stage), various characters discussed their opinions on the rumor's credibility. At times, "Stan" was involved, and he denied being a snitch, but of course he had no more proof than the rumormonger. At one point, the rumormonger told his interrogators that it was "Stan's" duty to provide documentation to show his innocence, not his obligation to document guilt. "Stan" generally held the position that he was about to come up for parole, so even though he felt threatened (presumably for being a snitch), he did not want to take any action in his own defense which would jeopardize his release.
The play was presented in the everyday language of the urban culture, which was the targeted audience. Many aspects of the street and prison culture were not discussed by the actors, because they were well known to the entire audience. For example, in many different cultures snitches are held very low in the social order, and in their position they are often victimized by others. They may find themselves beaten, stabbed, or even killed, simply so another can count coup to build up his own reputation as a tough and ferocious person. Sometimes, the attack of a snitch can even be the initiation ritual for a new member of a gang. Because the reputation of being a snitch can literally be lethal for a person. He is expected by others to prove his innocence by attacking his accuser(s) in self-defense. Facts matter very little. What people care about is the appearance presented by either party, and the toughest man will prevail. "Stan's" reported verbal assault implied that he had not been accused, but also was cast out for having been labeled a snitch. Among certain social structures, his failure to respond with similar violence would be taken as proof of the accusation itself, as well as a mark of "Stan's" relative cowardice. It was not necessary to tell the audience any of this. It is known and understood among inmates as cultural background.
When the actors were finished performing, they had never made any particular judgment call on the actions of any character. Instead, several inmates took seats in a semi-circle and began a group discussion with the audience, seeking either question and answer, or comment on the subject. Several men from the audience had strong opinions to share, and several of the participants offered personal facts that related to their own experiences in such matters. The most prominent message, it seemed, was that all men should present themselves in their own true image. This non-judgmental message was accepted by most of the audience of 50 or 60 fellow inmates, which included the guilty and the innocent, men nearing release and lifers ineligible for parole, and the religious and the non-religious.
As a first time event, the production had understandable glitches. There was some difficulty managing the sound system, with a few mics not working well at all. At one point, there was an outburst of unrelated loud laughter heard from backstage, which disrupted the performance going on. The scene changes, announced inconsistently by an unseen narrator, were seldom clear, and the characters of the play were poorly introduced by the dialogue. However, the writing and performances were authentic, and clearly included the heart-felt ideas of the inmates who wrote the play. The scenario was one that could be easily imagined by any audience member. Overall, the performance was well received, and the play has been widely discussed in the prison.
At the end of the event, Imam Arvas took the stage and described his Character Council Program. He intends the program to address the following aspects of character in some depth: Trustworthiness, Respect, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring, and Citizenship. This particular event had intended to address Responsibility in particular. The Imam intends to hold 5 panel discussions among inmates in the near future, addressing character overall. He also hopes to extend his CCP to the outside community, including afterschool outreach for children in the region (particularly those at risk of falling into criminal patterns of behavior due to drugs, poverty, and poor education). This initial presentation was generally considered a success, and the inmate population looks forward to the programs future efforts.