The post's title isn't a zombie-flick version of Oliver Twist's request for more food: it's a line from a student skit performed in my class on Thursday afternoon.
Over the past week, I'd given the students in both my intensive classes the assignment of teaching the textbook lessons. The Wednesday lesson in my advanced class was well-planned and well-executed. The Thursday lesson, however, was memorable because it began with a hilarious skit, followed by a discussion.
The skit and discussion were based on some sort of Korean TV show in which a panel of lawyers discusses a controversial scenario that is reenacted for the TV viewer's benefit. My group performed the case of a photographer who was luring restaurants into selling him raw meat. The photographer would take a clandestine picture of the sale, then tell the local authorities, who would swoop down on the restaurant and charge a steep fine. The question: was the photographer guilty of defrauding the restaurants?
Two students played unwitting restaurateurs, and Kyong-sang, one of only three guys in the class, played the photog. This was done to hilarious effect, though: instead of sneaking pics with a tiny cell phone camera, Kyong-sang dragged out an enormous Polaroid-style monster and clicked his photos with that. The victims, true to the skit, had to pretend not to have noticed the gigantic camera in their midst.
Before Kyong-sang whipped out the camera, though, he had to persuade his marks to give him the incriminating raw meat. This was accomplished in the following subtle manner:
KYONG-SANG: Excuse me. Do you have... raw meat?
RESTAURANT OWNER: What?
KS: Please... I need... raw meat.
RO: Why?
KS: It's for my wife. She's pregnant.
At this point I was on the floor. I don't know of any special connection between raw meat and pregnancy. This wasn't so much a skit about controversial legal cases as it was a Monty Python number.
Kyong-sang next broke into tears.
KS: Please! PLEASE! It's for my wife! She neeeeeeeds it!
RO: But it's illegal to give it to you. Oh, well... let me see what I have in the back.
I thoroughly enjoyed this production. Thinking about it makes me hungry for some steak tartare.
_
2 comments:
Yes; the skit contained a few, shall we say, unexplained elements.
Kevin
Actually, it makes perfect sense, and I don't think the skit is too far from the truth. The photographer didn't need raw meat. The idea is to trick someone into doing something illegal, catch them on film (or video), and then get a reward when police make the bust.
I'm not sure if they still do it (they probably do, it just hasn't been on the news lately), but people used to run around with digital cameras and catch people breaking traffic laws. They did this for the reward money.
I can kind of see offering rewards for "information leading to the arrest of a criminal" (or capture of a spy, whatever), but I can also see how this could (and does) very easily lead to vigilanteism.
Anyway, the skit sounds like it was hysterical.
Post a Comment