Customer Reviews

Inherit the Wind

5 star:		(46)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

"Inherit the Wind," the play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, premiered on Broadway during the 1955-56 theater season. But the play's genesis (no pun intended) lies in the events of 1925. In that year, a high school teacher named John Scopes was put on trial in Tennessee for violating a law that forbade the teaching of Darwinian evolution. With William Jennings Bryan for the prosecution and Clarence Darrow for the defense, this became one of the most important trials in United States history. The trial remains a key battle in the ongoing war of biblical literalism versus science and reason.

The play freely adapts the details of history. The authors even change the names of the principal characters involved: Bryan becomes "Matthew Harrison Brady," Darrow becomes "Henry Drummond," etc. But the core events of that historic trial remain firmly embedded in the play.

"Inherit" is an excellent play that is very readable in book form. Lawrence and Lee write superb dialogue, and create vivid characters in Brady, Drummond, and the rest. The play is an effective satire of religious fundamentalism.

With the continuing efforts of religious fundamentalists to force their views on the general public (both in the United States and elsewhere), "Inherit the Wind" remains as relevant as ever. Highly recommended.

On a number of levels, this is a great story. Some people see it only as a take on the Scopes trial. The characters are fictitious, but the story is largely based on facts. The readers that only see this as a book about the monkey trial miss the point.

Those who view this book as promoting evolutionism, see Chrisitians portrayed as narrow-minded and intolerant. This is no more of a stereotype than a Middle Easterner playing the role of a terrorist in a James Bond film. In the Scopes Trial, the Chirstians were intolerant of evolution being taught. Tolerant Christians, which still comprise the majority, would not exactly play the role well.

The point of the story is clearly laid out in the final pages of the book. The agnostic defense attorney Henry Drummond (who represents Clarence Darrow in the actual Scopes Trial) is talking to the arrogant reporter E. K. Hornbeck. Hornbeck assumes Drummond agrees with his view that the peopleof Hillsboro are backwards and ignorant in their Christian beliefs. Drummond lashes out at Hornbeck, telling him the people of Hillsboro have every right to have their beliefs. In the same way, people have a right to believe in evolution.

The 1st Amendment provides freedom of religion, or freedom not to subscribe to any particular religious beliefs. This book is a powerful statement not about evolution, but the right to think. Whether you fall on either side of the argument for evolution or have compromised between the sides, the story is a lesson worth noting.

Though it is based on the Scopes Trial, which took place in Tennessee in 1925, INHERIT THE WIND is essentially a work of fiction; even the names of the principal characters have been changed (John Scopes is now Bertram Cates; Clarence Darrow is Henry Drummond; William Jennings Bryan becomes Matthew Harrison Brady). In addition, the setting of the play is non-specific: a certain southern town, "not long ago." IDEAS are what the play is about, and like most great works of art, INHERIT THE WIND does not offer simple answers. Just as Drummond argues for "the right to think," so does the play allow the reader/audience member to consider many possibilities. For instance, in the play's final moments Drummond places both a copy of Darwin's book and a Bible in his briefcase, then leaves the courtroom. This suggests the possibility that science and religion might be compatible. Because he is willing to consider both theories, Drummond is very unlike both Brady, who believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible, and the cynical reporter E.K. Hornbeck (originally H.L. Mencken -- the "Greek chorus character," or commentator, who speaks in free verse), who completely rejects Brady's ideas. It is in fact Brady who emerges as a true tragic figure; it is also Brady who undergoes change and is therefore the most complex character in the play. INHERIT THE WIND has everything: a tragic hero, colorful characters and dialogue, gripping courtroom scenes, and a skillfully foreshadowed, climactic death. Also recommended: the 1960 film version, starring Spencer Tracy as Drummond and Frederic March as Brady.

"He that troubleth his own home shall inherit the wind:
And the fool shall be servant to the wise in heart."
Proverbs 11:29

In Inherit the Wind, Bertram Cates, a small-time schoolteacher, teaches Darwinism and dares to challenge his upbringing in the small town of Hillsboro. The mob mentality of overzealous religious people causes them to object. The protagonist of the story is Henry Drummond, the defending attorney for Bertram Cates. The antagonists are Matthew Harrison Brady, the prosecuting attorney, Reverend Jeremiah Brown, who condemns to Hell all people who dare to challenge his strict interpretations of the Bible, and Hornbeck, the forever cynic of everyone's thoughts and feelings but his own.
Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee are not supporters of Darwinism. They just want to convey, through their story, that things and thoughts should not be condemned merely because they are different. In their writing, the authors used flashbacks through Henry Drummond and metaphors through many of the characters in order to communicate their feelings. This book conveys a message to its audience that is well-worth reading.

I'd have to say that this is one of the best books i've read this year. No, it is not a historical account, and I am somewhat surprised that people looked at it that way at all.

I think it portrays the "bible beaters" as ignorant for a reason: fundamentalism tends to breed ignorance. Oh, and maybe I'm the only one who noticed, but there are still people who refuse to think about evolution at all and instead take the word of the Bible literally without thinking. In fact, there are many such people, especially in my home state of Utah, so this book was particularly meaningful to me because of my experience in junior high/high school. (it is also good to remember that fundamentalism is not limited to religion.)

This is not to say that it is a proponent of atheism, either. If you notice, all of the characters believe in God with the exception of Hornbeck, and he isn't any sort of hero. Rather, the heros are those who can think for themselves and balance science with religion without harming the work of either. Evolution and Creation are simply a structure in which to discuss the issue of free thinking. That is what this book/play is about -- the ability to think for oneself.

Happy reading!

Scott

In this introduction to "Inherit the Wind" Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee attempt to put the play into historical perspective: "'Inherit the Wind' is hot history. The events which took place in Dayton, Tennessee...are clearly the genesis of the play [but] it has...an exodus entirely its own." The playwrights took only a handful of phrases from the trial transcript and declared that "The collision of Bryan and Darrow at Dayton was dramatic, but it was not a drama." In the play William Jennings Bryan becomes Matthew Harrison Brady, Clarence Darrow was transformed into Henry Drummond, H.L. Mencken changed to E.K. Hornbeck, and John Scopes was now Bertram Cates. However, from the play's first performance in 1955 it has been impossible to dissociate the characters from their historical counterparts.

The Scopes "Monkey" Trial did not pop up in American history books until the late 1950s after the debut of "Inherit the Wind," and many early descriptions followed the play rather than actual events despite the fact that changes are numerous. Unlike Scopes, who was persuaded to be a test case, Bert Cates takes it upon himself to violate the law, becoming a pariah in the town of Hillsboro. The citizens of the town in the play have much more of a lynch mob mentality (which is played up even more in Stanley Kramer's 1960 film version), but the centerpiece for both the historical drama and the theater version is the cross-examination of one lawyer by another before the media and the world.

Whereas Darrow had a weekend to practice his examination of Bryan, Drummond is suddenly inspired to put Brady on the stand. The cross-examination in "Inherit the Wind" most notably differs from the Scopes trial transcript in that Drummond is required to confine his questions only to the subject of the Bible, where as Darrow could ask not only about the miracles in the Bible but explore Bryan's knowledge of various sciences and non-Christian religions as well. Drummond insists that "it takes a very smart fella to say 'I don't know the answer,'" which, ironically, is what Bryan repeatedly responded to Darrow on the witness stand in Dayton.

The character of E.K. Hornbeck, the cynical observer, has such an extreme view of the proceedings that he forces the audience, whether viewing or reading the play, to take a more moderate position. Ultimately, the judgment here is of "Brady" and "Drummond." Brady is portrayed as a foolish fundamentalist, whose chief sin is ignorance more than bigotry. In contrast, Drummond is a religious atheist, who finds the right to think to be holy. When Drummond leaves at the play's conclusion he puts the Bible and a copy of Darwin into his satchel together, suggesting an equality of sorts that neither character, in the drama or in history, ever espoused. There was such a figure of reconciliation during the trial, defense lawyer Dudley Field Malone, but he remains the most forgotten figure of the trial as the idea of the compatibility between Genesis and evolution has come to be rejected more and more by both sides.

Lawrence and Lee's fictionalized account of the Scopes trial was not only the first major work to touch on the Monkey trial after World War II, it was the most significant in terms of public knowledge about the trial. Certainly more people have seen the film or television movie versions of "Inherit the Wind" than have read all the books on the Scopes trial combined. Whatever disclaimers are provided to the contrary, the play's version of what happened in "Hillsboro" is accepted as either being true or close enough to the truth to make the differences inconsequential. When Susan Epperson challenged Arkansas' Rotenberry Act journalists actually invoked "Inherit the Wind" rather than the Scopes Trial as their point of reference.

Furthermore, the "Inherit the Wind" dramatization has never been challenged. Scopes admitted the film "altered the facts of the real trial," but focused on the "small liberties" of suggesting he had been jailed and met his future wife during the trial. Overall, Scopes declared that the film version "captured the emotions in the battle of words between Bryan and Darrow." In the final analysis that idea of "emotions" may be the best way of capturing the essence of the Scopes myth; it is a version of the Scopes trial that is shaped and colored by emotions rather than by factors or logic. After all, when the play premiered the Butler Act was still on the books in Tennessee.

It was not until the vote by the Tennessee legislature to repeal the Butler Act, after the supreme court decision in Epperson vs. Arkansas, that "Inherit the Wind" became more history that rhetoric, although certainly the rhetorical dimension has, to some extent, been subsumed by the theatricality of the piece. After all, from Paul Muni and Ed Begley to Spencer Tracy and Frederic March to Jason Robards and Kirk Douglas to Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott the play has been a dramatic showcase for its two male leads. Perhaps it is for that reason that it will remain a staple of high school and community theaters rather than for the resonance it brings to current events regarding the teaching of evolution in American schools. Furthermore, you can argue that the touchstone for the play is now more the separation of church and state than the original issue of evolution. What is not in dispute is that "Inherit the Wind" has become a rare instance of fiction that has assumed the mantle of fact.

I didn't read Inherit the Wind in school. Maybe because I went to Catholic schools? But I can see why many people did and still do. This is a true classic, concerning a gigantic human and national issue, one which well defines America still.

Based on the Scopes Monkey Trial, this is a spectacular drama, full of people from the town of Hillsboro (a fictional setting) and outsiders, converging to witness the trial of a man who dared to teach or suggest Darwinian evolutionary theory, and the two lawyers who argue for the law of God (and here the law of the state) and the laws of Science, respectively.

This is an important, positive play because it is about choice. I wish I could have been part of a class discussion of the play, and to see how other people, especially kids take this story.

I read the Dramatists Play Service edition, which features extensive stage directions that take up equal space to the dialogue itself. The scope of the production is evident, with about 30 speaking parts and dozens of other bystandards. For this reason I wonder if another edition is less extensive...

But the stage directions can be skimmed, and if you are reading for the heart if it, they should be. The heart being the trial scenes themselves, particularly when defence attorney Henry Drummond cross examines his counterpart Matt Brady, an avowed Biblical expert.

Highly recommended. The kind of play and story I'd like to re-read once a year...

Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee is about a trial against a biology teacher that taught evolution. Towards the end of the play it was no longer about evolution vs. religion, but the right to think. Neither religion nor evolution won. However, there wasn't a winning side, but it was left for us to decide. The point that was to be proved was that every man has the right to think. The only character in my opinion that was fully atheist (it became obvious towards the end of the play) was Hornbeck, the cynical journalist. He was not ready to back down from his point of view. Drummond, the defense lawyer, doesn't agree with Hornbeck about the townspeople and says they have the right to their belief. The townspeople were followers, but that didn't matter either (it was brought up in many scenes of the play). At the end of the play, Drummond weighed the Bible and the Origin of Species in his hands like a scale. It was significant because he was called the devil (atheist), but he didn't dismiss one book or choose between the two. He wanted to balance them, in other words, faith and thought. In my opinion, the last idea was that everyone has the right to think and it matters on how you use your ideas. You can have faith and belief, but you also have a mind. It was biased, but that represents the atmosphere of the play. I don't think it was a debate at the end; it was what you want to think of it. Interpret and understand what you thought as you read the play.

There are very few books that I am required to read for school that I actually enjoy, and even fewer that I find myself reading all in one sitting.
Inherit the Wind was one of these books. There's no Dickinson-esque wordiness, its a short book that cuts to the point but is full of action and meaning.
Inherit the Wind is a play that is based on the events in the Scopes Monkey Trials from 1925. The book has no exact setting, Hillsboro, but that Hillsboro could be anywhere at anytime so that readers can relate. This small conservative Christian town is brought into a tailspin of controversy when school teacher Bertram Cates challenges his students to think "outside the box", by suggesting the evolutionists point of view, that life comes from a long, long miracle; man wasn't just put here in seven days. This one lesson he taught, brings Hillsoboro into the national spotlight with a trial that goes against all conventional ideas.
This book will leave you thinking long after you've finished reading it. I definitely reccomend it for anybody who wants a quick meaningful read!

INHERIT THE WIND WAS AWSOME. IT WAS A BOOK ANOUT THE SCOPES TRIAL. IN HILSBORO,WHICH IS A VERY RELIGIOUS TOWN, A MAN DID WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS RIGHT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ILLIGAL.