1992 Los Angeles Riots Through The Eyes Of Many

By: Leslie Tartt

Events that occurred in the past are perceived differently depending on whose eyes witness them. The play Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992 by Anna Deveare Smith is a collection of monologues centered around the events that occurred in Los Angeles, California in 1992 developed from interviews Smith conducted and then performed as a one-woman show. She interviewed upwards of 50 people who had first-hand experiences with the riots or the consequences of the riots. Each person she interviewed had varying levels of exposure to the riots resulting in a multitude of different perspectives. The topics of most of the monologues describe how that person views the riots and how the riots affected them. Attributable to the numerous points of view of the riots within the drama, the reader or viewer is presented with the opportunity to see how different cultural groups, racial groups, and individuals reacted to the many incidents that lead to and occurred during the 1992 riots in Los Angeles.

“On March 3, 1991, a bystander videotaped Rodney King, an African American resident of Los Angeles, being beaten by four white officers of the Los Angeles Police Department, who used a stun gun on King and repeatedly kicked him and hit him with batons.” (Sigelman et al. 777) All of the people featured in Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992 were aware of this act of violence committed by the LAPD and many of them shared their outlook on the event in their monologue. Most notably was Rodney King’s Aunt, Angela King who said, “Rodney–went through three plastic surgeons just to look like Rodney again.” (67) She said this to describe how the police beat him so badly that his face was disfigured. The beating was so bad that the people watching were scared for their own safety, but stayed to witness because they knew it was important. “My husband said, ‘Let’s go inside.’ He was trying to get me to come inside and away from the scene but I said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘We have to stay here and watch because this is wrong.’” (Morales 78) People all over the country were outraged by the actions of the officers, but the acquittal of all the officers involved added fuel to the fire. Maxine Waters, a congresswoman said, “The verdict. Oh, it was more than a slap in the face. It kind of reached in and grabbed you right here in the heart and it pulled at you and it hurts so bad.” (166) The citizens of L.A were enraged and felt like they had been betrayed when the verdict was announced. During the trial, it seemed like the people who were supposed to be defending Rodney King in court took actions that only benefitted the officers. One of the uncalled witnesses while explaining how she tried to contact the defense attorney, said, “And I faxed him a letter and I told him that those officers were going to be acquitted and one by one I explained these things to him in this letter and I told him, ‘If you do not put witnesses, if you don’t put one resident and testify to say what they saw,’ And I told him in the letter those officers were going to be acquitted.” (Morales 78-79) Despite her best efforts, she was never called to testify, and her assessment of the trial came to pass. The lives of the jury who came to the controversial decision were constantly threatened. One juror mentioned, “–the police were trying to get us into the bus and cover our faces, and, and this reporter said, ‘Why are you hiding your heads in shame? Do you know that buildings are burning and people are dying in South L.A because of you?’” (Anonymous 81) It was expected that following the verdict there would be some uproar and disorder, but the magnitude at which it occurred took the country by shock. In an attempt to maintain peace, the mayor of Los Angeles advised, “Let us not kill that effort by reacting with violence. Speak your...your heart, say what you feel in terms of your dissatisfaction with the jury verdict.” (Bradley 102) Alas, his suggestion fell on deaf ears. The news of the verdict had the same effect for the inhabitants of Los Angeles as poking a wasp nest with a stick.

In the riots following the verdict for the Rodney King trial, Reginald Denny, a white man was pulled out of his truck and beaten within an inch of life by rioters on a rampage. The response by the media and police to the assault of Denny sparked its own controversy. A few of the monologues in the play give some insight into this controversy. Denny, himself, explained that he was only trying to do his job when he was attacked. When thinking back about that day, he noted, “–when I knew something was wrong was when they bashed in the right window of my truck. That’s the end of what I remember as far as anything until five or six days later. They say I was in a coma.” (118) Denny mentioned not really understanding everything that had happened to him and that he was thankful to all the people who risked their lives to save him. The media covered Denny’s story heavily and the police were putting their best foot forward to find the men that carried out the attack, but their actions angered some people. Paul Parker said the only reason they had so much concern for Denny was, “Because Denny is white, that’s the bottom line. If Denny was Latino, Indian, or black, they wouldn’t give a damn, they would not give damn.” Many compared what happened to Denny and Rodney King believing that they couldn’t bother to get justice for Rodney King since he was black, but since Denny was white, they were doing everything they could. “They caught it on video. Some brothers beatin’ the shit out of a white man. And they were going to do everything in their power to convict these brothers.” (Parker 176) The measures taken by the police when dealing with the beating of Reginald Denny only further angered the people of color living in Los Angeles.

Many of the people witnessed and had first-hand experiences with the riots and one of the biggest aspects that sparked the 1992 riots was police brutality. In (Mis)interpretations and (In)justice: The 1992 Los Angeles “Riots” and “Black-Korean Conflict,” by King-Kok Cheung it says, “Sociologists, Melvin Oliver et al. believe that besides the longstanding abusive treatment of black suspects by the police, there were many underlying causes for the uprising in 1992, and the police-brutality trial was but ‘the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.’” (6) In Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992 many people were given the opportunity to tell of the things they went through during the unrest in Los Angeles. A plethora of them told stories where they
or someone they loved was a victim of police brutality. In the monologue “My Enemy,” originally spoken by Rudy Salas, a sculptor, and painter, he recalled his experience with police brutality by saying, “They took me to a room and they locked the door behind and there was four guys, four cops there kicking me in the head. As a result of the kicks in the head they fractured my eardrum, and, uh, I couldn’t hear on both ears. I was deaf, worse than I am now.” (26) He was beaten so badly by police that he sustained permanent damage to his body, but unfortunately, he was not the only one. While Michael Zinzun was being apprehended by police, he was blinded by an officer even though he had already been restrained. He said, “One these pigs stepped outta the crowd with his flashlight, caught me right in the eye, and you can still see the stitches and exploded the optic nerve to the brain, ya see, and boom that was it. I couldn’t see no more since then.” (39) There are many stories from the play that tell of similar experiences when dealing with police. Every time people had altercations with police during this time, they risked having permanent damage done to them or even death. Though not much has changed in present times and people still wonder, “These police officers are just like you and I. Take that damn uniform off of ‘em, they the same as you and I. Why do they have so much power? Why does the system work for them? Where can we go to get the justice that they have?” (Allison 56)

The 1992 riots in Los Angeles is the main topic featured in Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992. The riots had many different causes and results, witnesses and victims, and shone a light on the immense amount of gun violence in the city. All of which were mentioned at least once by someone in the play. On the topic of what caused the riots, “The uprising story that emerges from the pages of the Sentinel is not a story of violence and destruction as much as it is a story of moral indignation over the injustice of the Rodney King verdict.” (Twomey 144) Ensuing the riots, people felt that the country, as a whole, needed healing. Peter Sellars remarked, “Right now in America, there isn’t a family...We may have a good GNP not a family to come home to. Can’t live in our own house. That’s what the LA riots is about. We can’t live, our own house burning.” (203) Gladis Sibrian considered the riots a “social explosion.” Residents of Los Angeles shared feelings of trepidation and things like, “I was scared to death. I’ve never felt as scared, as frightened, in my life.” (Anonymous 161) and “Everybody’s scared in L.A.” (Weinstein 214) when remembering their sentiments from the disturbing time. The riots also increased the amount of gun violence in the city. A former manager at the Beverly Hills Gun Club recalled, “After the riots our business went up forty percent, maybe as much as fifty percent.” (Smet 223) Getting a gun is an easy solution to a problem that requires much more action. For those who decided to get a firearm, Elaine Brown warned, “This is the United States of America. There isn’t another country, there isn’t another community that is more organized and armed.” (226) It is clear that the riots were a confusing and distressing time that pushed people to embrace violence out of fear for their lives.

Many of the accounts from the play address the violence and prejudice directed towards Korean-Americans during the riots. “‘Can we all get along?’ asked Rodney King during the Los Angeles civil disturbance in April 1992.” (Cheung 3) Despite even one of the main victims that sparked the riots asking for non-violence, peace did not prevail. Of course, Korean-Americans felt as though they did not deserve the way they were being treated, but many African Americans felt that Korean-Americans brought this abuse upon themselves. To add insult to injury, the businesses owned by Korean-Americans were targeted during the riots and they felt like the country, the people that were supposed to protect them, had abandoned them. “I think that the Korean stores that got burned in the Black neighborhood that were Korean-owned, it was due to lack of gettin’ to know the people that come to your store–that's what it is.” (Miller 137) Moreover, Reverend Tom Choi said, “Also I remember some people complaining that Korean-Americans didn’t patronize black businesses.” (205) Black people that shared neighborhoods with Korean-Americans felt that their Asian neighbors failed to get to know them, disrespected them when they came into their establishments, and neglected to support Black businesses, so as a consequence of these actions, their stores were the main targets for looting and acts of arson. During a shoot-out in front of an appliance store owned by Richard Kim, a Korean-American, he said, “There was no police officer to be found anywhere.” (104) The lack of help pushed Korean-Americans to give up on the things that were important to them saying, “I realized then that a riot had begun, so even though our stuff was thrown out there, we decided to give up any sense of attachment to our possessions.” (Lee 100) The police were not coming to assist them in their time of need, so they had no choice, but to abandon the things they cared for the most. Moreover, to explain why Korean-Americans were cast aside when in need, it was said, “According to the abandonment narrative, Koreans were abandoned by the state to deal with looters who were targeting them because the state did not care about Korean immigrants since they were not white.” (Nopper 85) Despite Korean-Americans’ belief they were receiving unjust treatment, some of them still desired to get along with their neighbors. Mrs. Young Soon Han who had formerly owned a liquor store said, “I wish I could live together with eh [sic] Blacks, but after the riots there were too much differences.” (Han 243) Regardless of who abandoned or perpetrated the violence against Korean-Americans, it is certain that just as Mrs. Young Soon Han said, “Korean immigrants were left out from this society and we were nothing.” (240)

During 1992 in Los Angeles, gangs were trying to have an impact that would benefit the city, but it is difficult to change the ways of young men who do not any better. In the play, there are multiple people that witnessed or participated in the activities of the gangs in the city. The most prominent gang affairs included the truce and the violence. One of the reasons for the truce was because the two gangs, the Bloods and Crips had a common enemy: the police. Furthermore, due to the level of violence that was spreading through Los Angeles, members of both gangs were less worried about the street war and more concerned with the safety of their families. Additionally, there was much concern about the impact that gangs had on the youth. Many young men were so involved with the gangs they developed a mentality that lead them to say things like, “My theory was when you shot somebody in broad daylight people gonna mostly be scared, they not gonna just sit there and look at you, you know, to identify you.” (Anonymous 45) That mindset among youths shows no signs of remorse, guilt, or desire to stop the cruelty plaguing their communities. The gang truce helped promote peace, but before the truce actually happened, many people felt that such a truce wasn’t possible. Twilight Bey, an organizer of the truce said, “When I talked about the truce back in 1988, that was something they considered before it’s time, yet in 1992 we made it realistic.” (248) Though, the truce between the gangs went further than just reducing the amount of bloodshed going on. Mike Davis said, “–the gang truce has been something of a miracle, you know. It’s the sign of a generation that won’t commit suicide.” (46) The fruition of the gang truce proves that with enough effort and support, people can make positive changes, especially for the young men who idolized the lifestyle that comes with being in a gang.

The people of Los Angeles were constantly at odds with each other during this time, but they all shared one sentiment: the system that was meant to protect them had utterly failed them. A large number of the monologues in the play explain how the system failed people of color, white people, gangs, and police alike. The jury from the Rodney King trial said, “We just feel like we were pawns that were thrown away by the system.” (Anonymous 82) One of the jurors mentioned that the judge had the ability to keep their names private, but instead, immediately released them to the public following the verdict. Captain Lane Haywood recalled putting out a fire that was started in Compton during the riots when someone started shooting at his department while they were on the roof of the burning building. In his account, he tells of another city’s fire department who were supported by the police and came to put out a separate fire, saying, “They, eh, had the protection, they had the manning, they had the equipment. And they started to extinguish the fire across the street, and I’m standing there with four guys and this big old truck. No help, no vests, no police, no nothing.” (126) It was like the police just abandoned his department and were unwilling to even help them. Maxine Waters, when speaking about how the government is dealing with the trouble in Los Angeles, said, “I mean, our leadership is so far removed from what really goes on in the world they, um, it’s not enough to say they’re insensitive or they don’t care. They really don’t know.” (167) The former chief of the LAPD felt like not only had the system failed, but also his fellow officers. He complained, “I am the symbol of police oppression. Just because some officers whacked Rodney King out in Foothill Division while I was in Washington, D.C.” (Gates 187) The system that is intended to aid the people failed everyone without any discrimination. It seems like the only time the system worked without prejudice is when it ceased to function for everyone. One statements that truly paint a clear picture of the state of affairs during this time is, “–this is a city at war with its own children.” (Davis 47)

Los Angeles faced many trials and tribulations in 1992 causing an even stronger desire for change among its residents. The need for change is addressed multiple times during the play and each person had a different way to approach that need. Bill Bradley, a senator, mentioned, “I mean, all of us have responsibility to try to improve the circumstances among the races of this country.” (217) Essentially, for change to come, everyone must stand together. Even the police, who are often seen as an enemy to people, will have to help. The former president of the Los Angeles Police commission was being pressured to pick a side: the police or the gangs. In response, he said, “Why do I have to be on a side? There’s a problem here.” (Sheinbaum 35) Many believed that they were fighting for more than just the people of current times, but the people that suffered in the past. Paul Parker said, “This is for Kunta. This is for Kizzy. This is for Chicken George.” (178) Additionally, it is important to think before acting in this fight for change. To, “Be conscious of what you are doing. If you want to die and become a poster, go ahead and do that–we will all put you on the wall with the rest of the people. But if you want to effect change for your people and you are serious about it, that doesn’t mean throw down your gun.” (Brown 227) You’re not really helping your people if the stand you take is a suicide mission in disguise. The battle for change only got stronger in light of the riots because as was told to the president of the United States in 1992, “‘This country is falling apart.’” (Waters 172)

The distinct perspectives provided in Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992 make the feelings of those who went through the turbulent times in Los Angeles transparent. Los Angeles residents resent the verdict that followed the beating of Rodney King. They disapproved of the response by the media and police to Reginald Denny’s beating. They are all too aware that police brutality is out of control. They know that violence against Korean-Americans was cruel, but still have mixed feelings on what caused it. They are proud that they could witness and participate in the truce between the gangs, but they still have concerns about gang violence. They hate the system for failing them all equally. Finally, they believe change has to come, so history does not repeat itself. Though, based on the academic journals it is apparent that what happened in 1992 was bound to happen at some point. Los Angeles was a ticking time bomb. At the end of the day, no matter how each person viewed the events of Los Angeles in 1992, they all believe that nothing will be solved until some form of equality is reached, so until that day comes, “No Justice No Peace.” (Parker 178)