Inherit the wind analysis paper
Abstract
Inherit the Wind is an American play by Robert E. Lee and Jerome Lawrence based on the famous scopes trial. The trial was officially referred to as The State of Tennessee vs John Thomas Scope famously referred to as the Scopes Monkey Trial considering its issue of contention. In 1925, John Scopes a high school teacher in the state of Tennessee was accused of going against the Butler Act in Tennessee, which prohibited the teaching of evolution or teaching any other doctrine contrary to the creation theory in schools within the jurisdiction of Tennessee. The law stated that it was unlawful for any teacher in any university or any other public school to teach any other theory that contradicts the biblical creation theory or to insinuate in any way possible that man descended from a lower species. Any teacher violating this act would be liable of a 100 to 500 dollars fine (Collins 47). John Scope was just a volunteer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) that sought to attack the Butler Act and was willing to cater for all expenses.
In the play, Henry Drummond, Matthew Harrison Brady, Bertram Cates and Hornbeck E.K represent Clarence Darrow, William Jennings Bryan, John Thomas Scopes and Menken H.L (Collins 22). The events in the play also correspond to the events that happened during the scopes trial though some have been invented by the authors to suit their purposes of writing this play. The preacher and his daughter are fictional characters while the town’s people were never hostile towards anyone who was present at the trial. These inventions are included to bring out the theme that the play intends to bring out.
Theme: Freedom of thought
The Play Inherit the Wind seeks to portray the theme of freedom of thought against fundamentalism, which is the main theme. Bertram is arrested for allegedly violating a law against teaching evolution in school. He refuses to submit to Rachel Brown’s pleas to plead guilty and allow the court to make its decision. Brown is Bertram’s girl friend and the minister’s daughter. It is ironic here that the minister’s daughter who logically is supposed to be against Bertram’s ideas of evolution is in fact supporting him (Collins 34).
Henry Drummond the defense lawyer in this case through his line of questioning of the witnesses called to the stand is bent on showing that the freedom to think and decide is a fundamental right of every human being. He says in act two scene two that “ an idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man’s knowledge is more of a miracle than sticks turned to snakes, or the parting of waters” (Lawrence and Lee 56). Lee and Jerome through the character of Drummond are essentially trying to show that no doctrine should be instituted as the absolute truth in a human society. It is only through free thought and criticisms of the various schools of thought in human societies can the society advance in knowledge and well being.
Drummond dramatically changes the flow of events in the court room when he calls Brady to the witness stand as a Bible expert. He goes ahead to question Brady of the Bible doctrines of the creation theory which reveals so many inconsistencies as a result (Willingham 78). This calls for Davenport to object when Brady is overwhelmed. It is in this notion that Drummond shows the importance of allowing human beings the free will of thought and choice rather than instituting doctrines that are followed through fear.
In the opening act one scene one, Howard a young student in Bertram’s class explains lightheartedly to Melinda a young ardent believer of the Bible that all human beings were once worms. “ there was nothin’ but worms and blobs of jelly. And you and your whole family was worms” (Lawrence and Lee 5). The authors meant on the surface are seen to satirize the creation doctrine but then their intention is revealed when Howard is being cross examined in the witness stand. Howard when asked whether he believed in the evolution theory says that he has not made up his mind as yet. This shows that despite Howard having a young mind, he has not been indoctrinated by the set theory of creation but exercises his free will to decide.
Rachel Brown is also used to portray the theme of free thought. She was raised by her father Reverend Brown who sticks to the doctrine of creation and terms any other theory as a blasphemy. She is the girlfriend of Bertram who the minister is against. The minister is a fundamentalist who instead of teaching the biblical doctrines of love, instills fear in people by telling them that they will burn in hell if they contradict the Bible truth. He is condemning rather than teaching. At the end of the play, Ms. Brown asserts that she was led by fear rather than rationality. “You see, I haven’t really thought very much. I was afraid of what I might think- so it seemed safer not to think at all. But now I know” (Lawrence and Lee 120).
Bertram Cates, the main character who the whole play revolves around. He however plays a very passive role in the actual play since he is in prison. He remains steadfast with his ideals despite attempts by Ms. Brown his girl friend and his legal attorney Mr. Drummond to denounce his belief. This is a true reflection of the freedom of thought inherent every individual despite the doctrines one might be exposed to.
Works cited
Collins, Mary B. Inherit the Wind: A Unit Plan. New York: Teacher's Pet Publications,
Incorporated, 2000. Print.
Lawrence Jerome and Robert Edwin Lee. Inherit the Wind. Whitefish: Literary Licensing, LLC,
2012. Print
Willingham, Bill. Fables 17: Inherit the Wind. New York: Dc Comics, 2012. Print.
