For Your Enjoyment

While trawling for stuff to enter into yet more competitions from which I shall hear nothing, I came across this, from last year's Soho Script Slam. As it's already been in the slam and as such is a "previously produced" work and thus ineligible for pretty much everything else for evermore, here it is, for your eyes only... (Incidentally, I'm not sure, looking back, why I chose those particular names for the lecturers. I think I found it mildly amusing at the time, though it's irrelevent as they never address each other by name, so I could simply have called them A and B.)

A university lecturer's office. Two university professors are seated on chairs looking through some papers. Both are male. They are discussing candidates for the Theology course at their university.

PROFESSOR POPE: So, that’s all the interviews done. Let’s have a look. Now this one we said no, didn’t we? (puts one piece of paper aside) Right, and this one we said…yes..
PROFESSOR CHALICE: Who was that? Was that the dyke or the psycho?
PROFESSOR POPE: I think she was a woman of homosexual persuasion who has experienced emotional problems.
CHALICE: Ah. Yes. I know who you mean.
POPE: now, this one…I wasn’t sure. A Mr…er… Jesus of Nazareth.
CHALICE: Chap in the loin cloth and sandals?
POPE: That’s the one
CHALICE: I wasn’t impressed. Strange chap, I thought.
POPE: Well, I thought he had some potential. I mean, he is Jewish, and we are trying to widen participation on this course to encompass students from a variety of backgrounds.
CHALICE: Hmm. True. Well, what impressed you?
POPE: Well, I think it’s impressive that he’s fluent in Aramaic, and I thought his arguments were quite interesting. I liked the way he used examples to illustrate his points. And some of what he was saying – questioning the status quo et cetera – quite bold.
CHALICE: you see, I didn’t get that. I felt he was a bit confused. He did tend to contradict himself. And he did come across as a bit of a know-it-all.
POPE: That example he gave about the lost sheep, for example. Very imaginative, I thought. Really helped to get his point across.
CHALICE: I suppose.
POPE: Well, what was it you didn’t like about him?
CHALICE: I just feel…. I feel that perhaps he’s only applying to study Theology because of parental pressure. Towing the family line. I mean, he’s the son of God. He’ll’ve been trained up to do Theology since he was so high. I think we want a student who has shown true commitment by getting there off his own back.
POPE: Well, true. But I do feel he’s not had an easy ride of it. I mean, he’s from a broken home.
CHALICE: Is he?
POPE: Well, he mentions his stepfather on the form. And he’s from a decidedly non-traditional background. His stepfather is a carpenter.
CHALICE: And his mother?
POPE: I think he might have misunderstood the question. Under “mother’s occupation” he’s put “Virgin”.
CHALICE: Hmm. Not helpful.
POPE: Well, like I said, he has potential. We only have one place left to award. What did you think of the other candidate?
CHALICE: that was… Judas Iscariot? Interesting chap. Also fluent in Aramaic. Quiet sort of chap, I thought. Bit creepy, perhaps, but I get the feeling he had a lot of doubt about the concept of Christianity. Might lead to some thought-provoking essays. And he doesn’t come from the sort of background one might expect of a Theology student. It’s a toss-up between the two, really.
POPE: well, which would you go for?
CHALICE: Judas, I think. I don’t know why, I just have a hunch.
POPE: Judas it is, then.