This week is civil court week. Taken alone, this information is never very exciting. Before you’ve done one complete docket circuit, you might even cling to the flawed notion that criminal court is colorful and civil court is genteel. Wrong you would be. Some of the worst behaved and most deluded people on the planet haunt the halls of civil courts. As an example:
On Monday a jury trial was cancelled on account of the plaintiff’s decision to communicate via hieroglyphics and only with aliens. Sounds weird right? Try this one: Also on Monday a different plaintiff told the court that he was in contact with the United Nations regarding the slavery that he was forced to endure when he wasn’t paid for his labor and materials on a job. He digressed into a speech about torture and inhuman treatment – as if Darfur didn’t exist and life as an American carpenter is as bad as it will ever get. But for me, the icing on the civil cake was far more subtle and more troubling.
Monday also saw the beginnings of a bench trial. There was a computer snafu, which prompted an aged, crusty and generally grumpy old plaintiff’s counsel to declare, “this is why I hate computers. We rely on them too much instead of relying on human beings.” Sounds pretty germane right? It wasn’t. The old goat then scanned the row of court staff (myself included) scrutinizing us as if to determine whether we were indeed more efficient machines. By the time my brain processed the man’ s true meaning, he had moved on to some other complaint.
I however, was stuck. I couldn’t get my mind off of what I had just heard. I see it implied often enough. Attorneys do everything but kick my tires before testing me with some useless piece of information to see how I perform. I am constantly assessed in a detached and uniform way. Am I a new-model clerk or one of those lurchy old jobs? Like the old bat in court, they make it clear that they are relying on me because I am simply a more advanced bit of machinery than the computer – for the time being. They can upload all sorts of implications and expect me to process them. They can stress significance, urgency and sincerity. They can try to move to the top of the judge’s stack through his neat little machine.
The result of being treated like a machine and prodded like a machine is that I’ve learned to respond in a very machine-ish way. I do not make my emotions available. I do not offer my thoughts or opinions. I don’t empathize. I take information and I deposit it. I sabotage the system – the system of utilizing the human device. I don’t do this to be vindictive or ugly – I do it because my humanity is something so precious to me that I will never allow it to become a commodity. But am I standing along some fringe? Is it becoming the norm to think of yourself as “human” and others as processing equipment? It is a sign that exploitation is at an all-time weird.
After watching Tsotsi the other night, I’ve been thinking a lot about adoption… again. I think about it in an abstract way – not some immediate plan. I think, I either don’t have the courage or the obtuseness required to conceive a child in this environment. I couldn’t bring life here but I could certainly shelter one. In the movie, a crippled man asks Tsotsi, “what kind of man kicks a dog?” I think the answer lies in the man who has disengaged from everything – even his fellow man. Teacher tells Tsotsi that this is about “decency.” So you can spell it, but do you understand, he wants to know. Teacher knows that decency is about respect – for yourself and for others.