Printer Friendly

Further Ruminations From The Kaiser Bunker.

(in six acts)

Editor's Note: Porterhouse LaFong was born in Cleveland in 1901. The manuscript of his second greatest work for the stage, Further Ruminations From The KaiserBunker, was discovered among his personal effects shortly after his death in 1984. LaFong's colorful dialect appears to be endemic to a remote region of Southwestern Springfield Ohio. (1)

Act 1

(The Kaiser chaotically organizes, in no particular manner, his personal affairs of State.)

Kaiser: Axel, have you paid der taxes yet?

Axel Oxenstierna: Nein Mein Kaiser.

Kaiser: But all goot citizens must pay taxes.

Axel Oxenstierna: Ya, but ve are not goot citizens und derefore pay no taxes. Dat is wot ve call der Hempel Paradox.

Kaiser: Ya, und dis is wot ve call der sarrusophone paradox! (with that, The Kaiser strikes Axel over the head with a sarrusophone)

Axel Oxenstierna: Oy gudunklinger!

Act 2

(With his economic excursion exonerated, The Kaiser addresses his confederate in consummate confusion, Quinella Cantrell.)

Axel Oxenstierna: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Kaiser: Quinella, can you tell me how Axel can repose in such resigned rumination when he has not yet paid der taxes?

Quinella Cantrell: He is having a mystical moment Mein Kaiser. He is beyond der realm of logical articulation. Remember wot Uncle Ludwig said, "wot ve cannot talk about, ve must pass over in silence."

Kaiser: Ya, but how could Uncle Ludwig make such a statement without being silent? (2)

Quinella Cantrell: Oy gudunklinger, you are correct Mein Kaiser. Can such a perfidious paradox be resolved?

Kaiser: Ya, I vill resolve it right here vit dis silent sarrusophone! (with that, The Kaiser strikes Axel over the head with the sarrusophone)

Axel Oxenstierna: Oy gudunklinger, dat vas some mystical martini!

Act 3

(The Kaiser accuses his ardent associate of felonious fraud and devious deception.)

Kaiser: Tell me Quinella, how much money do ve have in der Springfield Boobalinks Savings bank?

Quinella Cantrell: Dere is nothing dat is written in der bank book, und everyting dat is not.

Kaiser: Wot! Dat is outrageous. I tink you are a liar.

Quinella Cantrell: You are correct Mein Kaiser, I am a liar.

Kaiser: Ah, zo now you tell der truth.

Quinella Cantrell: Nein Mein Kaiser, I am a liar.

Kaiser: Oy gudunklinger! (3)

Act 4

(Rife with certain doubt and singular ambiguity, Quinella Cantrell enters the laboratory of The Kaiser's cohort in chronological crime, DeeDee DeFalcone.)

Quinella Cantrell: Dee-Dee, wot is der madder?

Dee-Dee DeFalcon: Oy gudunklinger! I am trying to divide dis zecond of time. I have cut it in halve zeventy-zeven touzand und eleven times und still zee no end.

Quinella Cantrell: Zo?

Dee-Dee DeFalcom: Zo, if I halven it to infinity, how can time ever pass? (4)

Quinella Cantrell: Ah, I zee. Zo everyting is deluzion. No hiztory to reflect on. No vuture to antizapate. Our very exiztence is brought into qvestion, ya?

Dee-Dee DeFalcone: Ya.

Quinella Cantrell: Goot, den qvestion dis! (with that, Quinella strikes Dee-Dee over the head with the sarrusophone) Now bringem Der Kaiser der bank book or you vill be hiztory! Dee-Dee DeFalcone: Oy gudunklinger!

Act 5

(Time has somehow attained an advanced proficiency.)

Kaiser: Dee-Dee, wot is der madder now?

Dee-Dee DeFalcone: I perzeive der bank book vit my brain, but fear my brain only exizts in my mind.

Case #289367678cc.l2: LaFong vs Wallenstein. (5)

Mr. Oxenstierna: Mr. Wallenstein, did you strike Mr. LaFong over the head with a musical instrument on the night of June 16, 1984 while watching the big fight on the television?

Mr. Wallenstein: Are you asking if we were on top of the television set while watching the big fight on June 16, 1984?

Mr. Oxenstierna: No Mr. Wallenstein. Did you. in fact, strike Mr. LaFong over the head with a musical instrument on June 16, 1984?

Mr. Wallenstein: The fact is debatable.

Mr. Oxenstierna: Why is that?

Mr. Wallenstein: I was attempting to prove to Mr. LaFong that a lump on the head is empirically verifiable.

Mr. Oxenstierna: And did you?

Mr. Wallenstein: No.

Mr. Oxenstierna: Why not?

Mr. Wallenstein: He said he did not see the object that struck him, and therefore could only rely on the image of something striking him to account for his injury.

Mr. Oxenstierna: Mr. Wallenstein, did you not lunge at Mr. LaFong with a 9th century Norwegian battle ax on that same night?

Mr. Wallenstein: Correct, I did not lunge at Mr. LaFong with a 9th eenden der self of solipsism shrinks to a point without extension, und dere remains only der reality coordinated vit it. At dat moment, ve scramadoodle vit der loot from der Springfield Bobolinks Savings Bank, und dot's dat. (6)

Act 6

(The laconic last laugh of The Kaiser's tax amnesty proposal) (7)

Count Maximilian Von Moor:

Amalia Von Edelreich:

Tom Gundersen (USA)

(1) Wilhelm "Pepe" Stroeheim, Ohi-Jinx (Parsipanny: New Amsterdam Press, 1959), p. 247-48.

(2) In his controversial book Why LaFong Matters (Edgewater: Regency Press, 2002), Spoon Wilson Jr. lends supporting evidence to LaFong's sensational assertion that he lost his doctoral dissertation, the famous Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, to Ludwig Wittgenstein in a Trinity Colllege poker game filled with logical positivist ringers.

(3) LaFong was harshly criticized for his repeated use of this phrase by D. Bogus-Roberts in her 3 volume opus Porterhouse LaFong: Theatrical Genius or Creep (Bayside: Bogus-Roberts Vanity Press, 1983, vol, HI, p. 1299-1381;). Spoon Wilson Jr. notes that LaFong confidant and legal executor, Quinella Cantrell, in a rare exhibition of public erudition, responded to the Bogus-Roberts publication with a full page letter published in The Springfield Times (September 5, 1984). The body of the letter was blank.

(4) See Borgess Herrimen's commentary to "Mumble in the Jungle, Ten Rounds of Metaphysical Meyham: Hume vs. Schopenhauer" on PBS Friday Night at the Fights, Staples Center, June 16, 1984 (with special guest referee Jose "indiscemibles "Leibniz).

(5) It appears that a courtroom transcript has been pasted over the original manuscript. Controversial actor Pascal Krump believes that the author intended the part to be played as it appears. Most theatrical critic's maintain that Krump's interpretation, playing both parts as a Dickensian street urchin, replete with pith helmet and jackboots, has never gone over well with the more fashionable epistemological crowd. See Krump's Thirty-eight Years on the Silesian Boards (Breman: Weiner Socialist Press, 1963).

(6) Ewen McTeagle quips in his 11 volume memoir Can You Lend Me 4 Fiver Till Thursday: "Pithy and to the Point! The Kaiser delivers a thorough analysis of regressus in infinitum, a comprehensive answer to the Sheswig-Holstein question, and a detailed biography of world renown sarrusophonist, Dr. Lien Chi Slop, all in less than three sentences!"

(7) Scholars are in disagreement as to whether the dialog to the sixth act is merely missing, or was deliberately expunged by LaFong. The fact that the characters of Count Maximilian Von Moor and Amalia Von Edelreich have made it into the LaFong canon can only be attributed to actor Pascal Krump's insistence on miming the entire act dressed as characters from Schiller's famous play The Robbers.
COPYRIGHT 2013 Paradoxist Literary Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Gundersen, Tom
Publication:Paradoxism
Article Type:Play
Date:Jan 1, 2013
Words:1171
Previous Article:Cagule.
Next Article:Parapixuri.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters