Saturday in LA: “Should we bomb the LA Times?”

Should we bomb the LA Times?
Beyond Baroque Gallery, LA — 8PM on Sat, May 11

In 1910, labor union militants dynamited the LA Times building. Their lawyer, Clarence Darrow, saved the bombers from hanging.
On Saturday, May 11, Darrow will return from the dead to ask the question, “Is it time we bombed the LA Times again?”

Portrayed by investigative reporter Greg Palast, Darrow makes the case to the jury — the audience — who will, at the end of his argument, vote to light the dynamite or not.

Palast is co-author of this short verse play, “The LA Times Bomb,” along with members of California Poets for Resistance, Matt Sedillo (also director), Irene Sanchez, Lee Boek and Cary Harrison, bringing to life the characters of the time when LA was the epicenter of a bloody revolution for worker and racial rights.

Premiering for one night only at:
Beyond Baroque Gallery
681 Venice Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90291
8pm, Tickets $10
Limited seating, so get your tickets NOW via Eventbrite!

SHARE THIS!

This entry was posted in Blog on by .

About Ted Rall

Ted Rall is the political cartoonist at ANewDomain.net, editor-in-chief of SkewedNews.net, a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is the author of the biography "Trump," to be published in July 2016.

2 thoughts on “Saturday in LA: “Should we bomb the LA Times?”

  1. May be the devil, and the devil hath power
    T’ assume a pleasing shape.

    Yea, and perhaps
    Out of my weakness and my melancholy,
    As he is very potent with such spirits,
    Abuses me to damn me. I’ll have grounds
    More relative than this.

    The play’s the thing
    Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the LA Times.

  2. Man, I’d love to see that. Please let us know how the audience votes.

    (I’m gonna assume I already know how Ted would vote…)

    I don’t like violence, even as I admit it’s sometimes necessary. We pulled the country away from the robber barons in the early 20th century, but somehow they’ve gotten control back.

    The question is what bombing the LAT would accomplish. It’s an expression of rage, okay. It’s a ‘message’ that the proletariat is tired of being trickled down upon, but what does it do besides that? They aren’t the problem, they are a symptom.

    Ye olde Reign o’ Terror did accomplish something. It was not only a ‘message’ but it went directly to the head of the matter. :: cough:: The American Revolution did accomplish something … but the Boston Tea Party really didn’t accomplish much in and of itself. It was an expression of rage and trickling, but nobody died.

    People did die in the original LA Times bombing, but they weren’t the actual bad guys.

    So, okay, if – strictly hypothetically speaking, and in a purely fantasy universe – if the Koch brothers, Trumps, and a few choice others were in the building, and no proles were in the building, then yeah, I just might vote for it. In a play.

    Hypothetically speaking…

Leave a Reply