All action takes place in one room. All parts can be played by any gender. Each character has their own musical ‘theme’ played by a single, different instrument. Until the third act, the music is subtle and non-intrusive, as if heard from another room.

ACT 1

Charlie’s theme underscores quietly. Charlie sits at their desk in a cramped office. There is a vacant chair the other side of it. On the desk sits a paper file, a jug with some water in it and two glasses (one full, one empty). Charlie swipes mindlessly on a tablet and sips their water.

Pryor enters. Charlie’s theme merges into Pryor’s theme. Charlie puts the tablet down.

Charlie:         Hi, hello, please, take a seat.

Pryor reclines on the vacant chair and Charlie pours a second glass of water, which empties the jug. Pryor’s theme fades out.

Charlie:         Normally we’d do this over the phone or email or smoke signal – urgh, anything but real human contact, eh? He he, yeah, but er, there were some – not inconsistencies I wouldn’t say that –

Pryor:           You just did.

Charlie:         Er, yes, but not on purpose, its more just we had a few, er, queries we wanted to, a few questions we wanted to run by you and the phone just didn’t seem quite the er, quite the thing. In the circumstances.

Pryor:           What are the circumstances?

Charlie:         The, er, the circumstances that we find ourselves… in – shall I just kick things off?

They quickly open the file.

Charlie:         So you’re making a claim for personal loss, yes?

Pryor nods.

Charlie:         And you took your policy out in May 2035 and you’ve had no prior claims – that’s what we like to hear! He he, and er, perhaps it might be better if you – yes, if you talk us through, in your own words, the er, the circumstances of your loss.

Pryor:           Aren’t I here because of the circumstances?

Charlie:         Er, yes, true, true, but er – this is why – in your own words, that might help illuminate the er, the er, circumstances.

Pryor:           Well, it’s about my kid.

Charlie:         Yes, good, excellent.

Pryor:           Is it?

Charlie:         Well no obviously, I mean, well it might not be, certainly not ideal. Anyway, yes, please continue.

Pryor:           That’s it.

Charlie:         You’re claiming on behalf of your child?

Pryor:           No, I made a claim for my child.

Charlie drinks some water.

Charlie:         You’re… sorry I don’t, oh, I see! Sorry, I mean, has your – this has affected your ability to er, have –

Pryor:           No, I claimed for the actual kid.

Charlie:         So, erm, this is for a child that, oh god, did they – is this a bereave- I’m so sorry, when did they, er, er, er, you know, er-

Pryor:           They’re not dead.

Charlie:         Oh thank god. I mean, yes, that’s good.

Pryor:           They were never born.

Charlie:         Pardon?

Pryor:           They were never born.

Charlie drinks some more water and then flicks through the file quite urgently.

Charlie:         Er, how do you, erm, how?

Pryor:           How?

Charlie:         Mmm.

Pryor:           Like, they were never conceived.

Charlie finishes their water.

Pryor:           Is there a problem?

Charlie:         No, no, no, no, it’s just er, what makes you think there should have been er, er, a thing – child?

Pryor:           It’s this song, it’s been driving me crazy.

Charlie:         A song?

Pryor:           More like a tune, like, there aren’t lyrics or anything, at least I don’t think so.

Charlie:         Ok.

Pryor:           And it won’t leave me alone, it’s just there all the time, in the back of my head.

Charlie:         Right. Sounds, er, difficult.

Pryor:           Yeah, it’s been so annoying.

Charlie:         Must be. Must be. But can I ask, how this pertains to, er, how this could relate to the question of parental, what I mean is-

Pryor:           This song, it’s like a lullaby or something. It’s got to be for a kid. So I figure I must have had it at some point and something’s happened that means now I don’t.

Charlie:         But you wouldn’t, I mean, you can’t have – you don’t have memories of an actual child?

Pryor:           I’m not the kid.

Charlie:         No, I mean, memories of them being around.

Pryor:           No just this tune. But you wouldn’t call it a memory, it’s not complete, it’s just, like, the echo of it.

Charlie:         The echo of it.

Pryor:           Yeah, like that.

Charlie:         No, I mean, that is, how can you even have a memory or ‘echo’ of a memory of this child or, or, what have you, because if you’re in this timeline you wouldn’t.

Pryor:           How do you mean?

Charlie:         You see, normally this all works the other way around. You don’t claim for something you think might have happened, you claim for something you know happened.

Pryor:           What?

Charlie sips Pryor’s glass of water.

Charlie:         Oh sorry! (puts glass down) What am I like? Sorry, no, I mean people put in claims in order to – to rectify an event that has taken place. Which is usually a mass claim from a collective rather than an individual like yourself, except perhaps maybe for minor time dilations or what have you –

Pryor:           Time dilation.

Charlie:         But that’s by the by. As I say, normally it’s a big collective claim for something that has happened, a major accident, such as a major train crash where a hundred people were killed or something. Or in some cases, you get representation from an entire country, for mass catastrophes, but we’re a much smaller company so they wouldn’t normally approach us, but again, sorry, yes, by the by. Anyway, so they put in a claim and past us gets an alert so they can evacuate the people or, er, cancel the train – leaves on the line or what have you, Southern Rail eh? He he, so yes, crisis averted. But if we’re the ones putting in the claim, we don’t get the benefit.

Pryor:           The benefit of what?

Charlie:         Of the claim. That’s a different timeline, one for which the event didn’t happen. But if we’re the ones putting in the claim, then its already happened for us and well, it’s our tough cookie sadly. As I understand it, we’ve already benefitted from several of these claims –

Pryor:           We have?

Charlie:         Well the collective ‘we’, this timeline. I think we’ve received three alerts in total. I suppose you’ve got to feel sorry for the poor souls who went through it all, but in this timeline they didn’t, so it’s all a bit immaterial in the end I suppose.

Pryor:           So if it happened in the past –

Charlie:         And you can imagine what it did to the insurance industry. For the first time in history, you could actually claim for an act of God. Finally complete cover for all your needs! He he, but, yes, no, sadly in this case-

Pryor:           But if it already happened, how are we still changing it?

Charlie:         Well, we’re not.

Pryor:           We’re not.

Charlie takes another sip of the other glass.

Charlie:         Ah I did it again! (slaps own hand) Urgh! Apologies. No, so we’re not changing it, at least not for the poor people who went through it. But, and this is where the science comes in, sometimes those people – those timelines, will notify others. Because it all branches out.

Pryor:           You have other branches?

Charlie:         No time branches. When you go back, you create an alternate timeline. Otherwise you’d have paradoxes of – I think its grandfathers killing each other or something like that. Well, not that anyone actually goes back of course, but the information does, much safer that way.

Pryor:           Ok.

Charlie:         And that’s the thing you see, we don’t have any memory of it, because for us, it didn’t happen. We got the warning and prevented it.

Pryor:           So we did make a change.

Charlie:         No, no, I wouldn’t call it a change, it’s more of a, more of an avoidance.

Pryor:           But we still did something we wouldn’t normally do.

Charlie:         Well we don’t know that for sure.

Pryor:           We might have acted differently than we would have and its changed everyone’s path. Changed my path.

Charlie:         Theoretically, yes, but you would have no knowledge of that.

Pryor:           But you said there’ve been three claims.

Charlie:         Three alerts that we have acted on, yes, but it doesn’t change the fact that you can’t have memories of something that never happened in this timeline.

Pryor:           So it’s a question of proof?

Charlie:         I, er, possibly, well, no because it’s not – hmm, yes, ok. So, even if you were, which you’re not because it’s not possible, experiencing the memories of a you from another timeline, which you can’t, then your son or daughter, theoretically speaking, is safe and well in that timeline. So they do exist. Just not here.

Pryor:           So like, another me could be communicating with this me on a virtual plane?

Charlie:         No, now, now, now you’re putting words in my– I said directly that that is not possible. Hang on, you haven’t been to an Alternate Lives Practitioner, have you? I’m sorry but they are charlatans of the worst kind.

Pryor:           Those quacks? God, no. But with the timelines, we can, like, talk to each other – they made the claims.

Charlie:         Claims to the past, not in the present. And it’s not a conversation as such. Its not like ‘how are you past me? Oh I’m alright, you?’ It’s all quite formal in fact, perhaps rather sadly. But it’s the passing of crucial information in binary form to the past. And in returning to the past, it creates an alternate future for that past.

Pryor:           …This wasn’t in the policy wording.

Charlie:         Well, I think that might make it a bit long. (another sip of water, they don’t notice the mistake this time)

Pryor:           What does my cover say?

Charlie:         Look, it’s not that I’m not trying to be, this is all a bit… (looking at the file) You have a child.

Pryor:           Hmm?

Charlie:         It says you have a child.

Pryor:           I didn’t say I didn’t.

Charlie:         Wait, no, no, I mean, you said –

Pryor:           Yeah, I have a kid, but I’m not talking about that one, am I?

Charlie finishes the second glass of water.

Charlie:         Argh! Take this away from me! (pushes glass away)

Pryor:           This song or whatever. I never sung it to this kid. So at some point, I must have had a different one.

Charlie:         That’s a pretty big claim.

Pryor:           Yeah, it’s classed as ‘significant injury to person or persons’. 

Charlie:         No, I mean, that’s er, that’s quite a big er, er, assertion. What makes you think, I mean, why wouldn’t it be a tune from your own childhood? It might be in your subconscious; I expect your own parents –

Pryor:           (half laughs) If you knew my childhood, you would not have said that.

Charlie:         Ok, but, let me just – playing devil’s advocate for a second, if you’re claiming for this other child, aren’t you in effect saying that your current child is a mistake?

Pryor:           Only technically.

Charlie:         But how can I – I mean, how can you quantify- I mean… if we’re talking technically, technically under your current policy its already a like for like replacement.