LOOT: Truscott

Question 1

TRUSCOTT as PERFORMATIVE:
1. “(He takes out his pipe and chews on it)”/”elementary detection”

Answer 1

1. Sherlock Homes - deceptive, only interested in playing a role, despite coming supposedly from the Water Board:
   -> façades of competence exposed by his true
   ignorance, due to his ego/boastful arrogance (eg. with
   his constant questioning - desperate to withhold
   sense of authority/play this detective role, even
   though it blows his cover -> IDIOTIC, literally the worst
   disguise ever…) -> “I’ve no power to prevent you…I
   can’t allow you to do that” (McL asks for a lawyer).
   -> Therefore, any mocking/undermining of his
   authority/show of knowledge leads him to lose all
   professionalism - “None of your piss-taking.”.

Question 2

TRUSCOTT as CORRUPT:
1. VIOLENCE:
“If I ever hear you accuse the police of using violence…beat the eyes out of your head”
2. BRIBERY:
“Twenty-five per cent”
3. OMNIPRESENT:
Meadows outside the house - referenced/ever present, despite us never leaving the domestic setting.

YET! McLeavy always still holds police in the highest regard: “Oh, what a terrible thing I’ve done. I’ve obstructed an officer in the course of his duty” -> 60’s ridiculous blind faith in a corrupt establishment.

Answer 2

1. Unbelievable irony through this juxtaposition:
   -> Harold Challoner, a policeman who had just been convicted of using violence on suspects, sometimes innocent, to get a confession -> quoted later with “you’re f-ing nicked”.
   -> (T) “What evidence have you?” / (D) “My bruises.”.
   
   • Mocking bureaucracy.
     -> There is often an “incongruity between violence, and the language used to describe it” (Andrew Mayne).
   • Ortonesque farce - described as “macabre
     outrageousness”.
2. Specificity shows the ease/adeptness with which he bargains - practiced corruption.
3. Controlling all aspects of life - nothing is safe/private:
   -> Personal questions about Hal’s sex life.
   
   • Police surveillance? -> an “interplanetary rag” -
     power over British society that we never see.
   • Confusion highlighted by juxtaposition of the high-
     tech with “rag”.

Question 3

TRUSCOTT as IGNORANT:
a) “You see - a complete transformation!”
b) “You know nothing of the law. I know nothing of the law. That makes us equal in the sight of the law”.

Answer 3

a) -> Cartoonishly ridiculous ignorance - Police not deserving of the high level of respect/power they have over public.
b) -> Rambling speech - constant repetition of “law” -> it begins to lose meaning, highlighting Truscott’s pure incompetence and ignorance of what he is supposed to represent.
-> Unbelievable stupidity exposed - confident affirmation “I know nothing of the law” demonstrates internalised corruption in the police force, in that Orton, through Truscott, shows how one does not need to be intelligent to wield such an immense power.
-> Knows everything about Fay - her name, her crimes, but still hasn’t arrested her/lets her off because of the destroyed organs (SHE EVEN ADMITS IT! -> (T) “…another twelfth-hour escape? / (F) “Yes…”)
- Incompetence? Inability/not wanting to do his job?
- Corruption (+ stupidity) highlighted through
blackmail: “It could prejudice your case if I have to
forge [a confession]”