Inherit the Wind (1960) is a film directed by Stanley Kramer that is based on the play of the same name that debuted in 1955. The play was not intended to be an exact historical account of the famous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee, and so the movie also contains various differences from what actually happened. The film allows the viewer to understand the basic concepts and outcomes of the trial, but there are many inaccurate details which make the trial of Inherit the Wind significantly different from reality. However, in order to learn the facts about the trial it is necessary to compare the portrayal of the trial in Inherit the Wind with historical accounts of what actually occurred. Menton observes that the film has been used as “educational,” although the film should be supplemented by a historical account of the trail.
The trial in the movie and historically was cause by a violation of the Butler Act. The movie simply portrays this law as a statute passed by the state of Tennessee that prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools. In reality, the Butler Act only made it illegal to teach that humans evolved. During 1925 in the state of Tennesse, one could teach that all species evolved except humans and not have violated the Butler Act. The film also demonstrates that the Butler Act favored fundamentalist Christianity over science in public schools. This is continually emphasized in the movie by the speech and actions, such as the parade when Brady arrives in Tennessee, of the characters who are all clearly fundamentalist Christians. In reality, the Butler Act was intended to actually increase the neutrality of the two views. This is because the Bible could not be taught in public schools, yet this new scien...
... middle of paper ...
..., in 1925 only about half of the community members were religious and the majority were members of various Protestant denominations. There were only a few Christians, and most of them were not strict fundamentalists. They did not literally believe in the six day Biblical creation account that is portrayed with great fervor in the film. The film also shows that the local people were very disappointed at the arrival of Henry Drummond, the character name for Clarence Darrow, and clearly expressed the belief that they wanted him to leave town. In the trial transcript, Darrow comments on the hospitality of the people of Tennessee. The film changes the context in which the trial was held. Although it is possible for one to understand the basic arguments of the trial, it is not possible to obtain an accurate historical account of the events that prefaced the Scopes trial.
... But the damage was already done, the trial wasn’t truly about if Scopes was guilty but ultimately the role of religion in society especially schools, and the Bryan’s mistake at the trial left the argument wide open. This issue is still being addressed to this day, no one knows if their is a right answer and it still causes tensions between the conservatives and liberals of society.
Early in his career, Drummond defended two teenage child murderers and helped them escape their consequences. Due to this act, he entered Dayton surrounded by strong feelings of hatred. After his scientists were refused a spot on the stand, Drummond was enraged. Henry decided to put Matthew Harrison Brady on the stand to question him. “I call to the stand one of the world’s foremost experts on the Bible and its teachings – Matthew Harrison Brady” he insisted (Lawrence and Lee 82). After Cate’s verdict was announced, Drummond appealed it, causing it to be sent to a higher court. All these actions resemble the same activities of Clarence Darrow during the Scopes Trial. Clarence Darrow was frowned upon because of his success while taking on the teenage murderer’s situation. When he put William Jennings Bryan on stand, the crowd was shocked by his unorthodox action, but he knew exactly what he was doing. “On the seventh day of the trial, on a platform outside the Dayton, Tennessee courthouse, he called William Jennings Bryan to the stand as an expert on the Bible” (“People & Events” 1). His plan worked, allowing him to reduce the sentence to a reasonable consequence, but he was still unhappy about the verdict. He requested that the case be taken to a higher court in hopes of reversing the outcome. All in all, Henry’s actions are a near mirror image of Clarence’s.
The purpose of this essay is to compare three very similar cases, the Scottsboro Trials, Brown v. Mississippi, and the fictional trial of Tom Robinson in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird; and to prove why the defendant of the third trial never had a chance. Each took place in the rural South in the 1920’s and 30’s and involved the unfair conviction of young black males by all-white juries pressured by the threat of mob violence. Each lacked the evidence sufficient for conviction, most especially for the death penalty. Last, heroes emerged from each trial and made small but solid steps towards equal justice for all.
The stage was set in Dayton, Tennessee. The leading actor in this show was a twenty five-year-old science teacher named John T. Scopes. Scopes was under the direction of advancing America. The playbill read The Scopes “Monkey” Trial. In 1925 John T. Scopes was encouraged to challenge the Butler Law. This law had been passed by a small town in Dayton, Tennessee to prohibit teaching contra to those in the Bible. Teaching from an evolutionary text, Scopes broke the law and gained the attention of the National media. The concentration of the media on the Scopes Trial effectively presented the contrasting ideas of a religious town and an evolving country.
Stanley Kramer's film, Inherit the Wind, examines a trial based on the 1925 Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee. Often referred to as "The Trial of the Century" (Scopes Trial Web Page), the Scopes trial illuminated the controversy between the Christian theory of creation and the more scientific theory of evolution. John Scopes, a high school biology teacher, was arrested for illegally teaching evolutionism to his class. "The meaning of the trial emerged because it was seen as a conflict of social and intellectual values" (Scopes Trial Web Page). Kramer's film dramatizes this conflict between the Christian believers and the evolutionists in "Hillsboro, heavenly Hillsboro, the buckle on the Bible belt" (Inherit the Wind). Prosecutor Matthew Brady represents the values of fundamental Christianity while defense attorney Henry Drummond is the voice of reason and science. Although the two men have been good friends and partners in the past, the case in Hillsboro illuminates the difference in their values. Through the scene on the porch with Matthew Brady and Henry Drummond, director Stanley Kramer illustrates the incessant tug-of-war between religion and science. More specifically, camera angle and Drummond's metaphor of the "Golden Dancer" help deliver Kramer's belief in evolutionism.
The Scopes trial, writes Edward Larson, to most Americans embodies “the timeless debate over science and religion.” (265) Written by historians, judges, and playwrights, the history of the Scopes trial has caused Americans to perceive “the relationship between science and religion in . . . simple terms: either Darwin or the Bible was true.” (265) The road to the trial began when Tennessee passed the Butler Act in 1925 banning the teaching of evolution in secondary schools. It was only a matter of time before a young biology teacher, John T. Scopes, prompted by the ACLU tested the law. Spectators and newspapermen came from allover to witness whether science or religion would win the day. Yet below all the hype, the trial had a deeper meaning. In Summer for the Gods, Edward Larson argues that a more significant battle was waged between individual liberty and majoritarian democracy. Even though the rural fundamentalist majority legally banned teaching evolution in 1925, the rise of modernism, started long before the trial, raised a critical question for rural Americans: should they publicly impose their religious beliefs upon individuals who believed more and more in science.
In Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee’s tense drama, “Inherit the Wind”, three strong characters express powerful opinions: Bertrum Cates , Henry Drummond, and Mathew Harrison Brady. First, Bert Cates, the defendant, is charged with teaching “Darwinism” to his sophomore class . Second, Henry Drummond, the defense attorney for Cates, displays his beliefs of the right to think. third, Mathew Harrison Brady, the “big-shot” prosecuting attorney, illustrates his bigotry of creationism. To conclude, these three essential characters are fighting for their personal beliefs.
... times and the changing of social norms. Clarence Darrow and those on the defense were fighting for more freedom. The believed that the Butler Laws were imposing religious matters on them when they did not want it. They wanted to be able to have science and religion work together in a way that one does not out rule the other; that they are coequal and cover different questions. No matter which way you spin the results from this trial, the only true winners were the monkeys.
The Butler Act in Tennessee forbade the teaching of human evolution as written by Charles Darwin. In its place, teachers were to only teach the story of Creation as found in Genesis, the first book of the Bible. This, and thirty-six similar laws, was seen as an infringement on civil liberties. Upon learning of this new law, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), located in New York, placed advertisements in Tennessee newspapers in an attempt to find a teacher willing to stand up to the law.
“I think there’s just one kind of folks. Folks” (Lee 304). Harper Lee is the renowned author of To Kill a Mockingbird which was inspired by the real events of the Scottsboro Trials. Throughout her novel, Lee indirectly references the case by creating characters, events, and symbols that resemble and contrast the case. These elements allow the novel to emerge with a more realistic and historic plot. In particular, the similarities and differences between Judge Horton and Judge Taylor, Victoria and Mayella, and the atmosphere of the courtroom are most prevalent. By examining these components one will be able to respect the historical features present in Harper Lee’s fictional literary phenomenon, To Kill a Mockingbird.
The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) were already aware that the Act was likely to become law because it had been passed by the lower house of the Tennessee legislature by a landslide (in January, 1925). After a few false starts, the ACLU sent a press release to several Tennessee newspapers, such as the Chattanooga Daily Times, announcing that they would provide legal assistance, etc. for a school teacher in Tennessee who would be willing to stand trial for having taught evolution in a public school so that a test case could be mounted to challenge the constitutional validity of the Act.
Since the Age of the Enlightenment, the institution of religion has had to contend with the opposition of science regarding the issues of the origins of the world and of the human species. Up until around the end of the 17th century, the church was the authority on how the world and everything in it had come to be. However, with the great intellectual revolution came thinkers such as Galileo, Copernicus, Bacon, Descartes, and many others who challenged the biblical assumptions with empirically deduced scientific theories. The Catholic Church had a nasty habit of persecuting such ideological dissent toward creationism, calling it heresy and thereby somewhat suppressing a complete upheaval of the Scriptures. For many centuries to come, the scientific research grew and developed into theories like the Big Bang and evolution, though primarily in places where such progress was tolerated. The state of Tennessee in 1925 was not such a place. In the town of Dayton in Tennessee, a high school biology teacher was found to be in violation of a recently passed law, the Butler Act, because he taught the theory of evolution in his classroom. The debate that ensued has yet to be resolved, what with the modification of creationism into the theory of intelligent design. The argument in favor of creationism was solely based in scripture, though it had to be changed in light of its revamping, whereas the argument for evolution has only been strengthened by continued scientific discoveries.
For this assignment, I decided to do my film review on To Kill a Mockingbird (Mulligan, R., & Pakula, A. (Directors). (1962). To Kill a Mockingbird[Motion picture on VHS]. United States of America.) I have a personal connection to this film because it is one of my most beloved novels by Harper Lee. I have never watched the film so it was a nice experience to see the characters I have loved for years come to life just before my eyes. The film particularly focuses on a white family living in the South of the United States in the 1930s. The two siblings, Jem and Scout Finch, undergo major changes while experiencing evil and injustice in their small town of Maycomb. Jem and Scout’s father is named Atticus and he is a well-respected man in the town as well as being a lawyer.
This movie goes to show how such crucial facts and minuet evidence if not processed fully and clearly can change the outcome in such a big way. In this jury you have 12 men from all different walks of life, 12 different times, and 12 different personalities. Who have an obligation to come to one conclusion and that's whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Under much frustration and lack of patience these 12 men began to get unruly and unfocused. Throughout this distraction key terms get misused, facts get turned around and more importantly emotions start to cross making it hard for these men to produce a verdict.
The scene that introduces the audience to Matthew Harrison Brady, in Inherit the Wind, (Dir. Stanley Kramer. With Spencer Tracy, Frederic March, and Gene Kelly. MGM. 1960) uses dialogue, composition, camera work and music to develop Matthew Brady. Kramer reveals important information about the plot of the film in this scene. The scene opens with a bird's eye view shot of the town of Hillsboro, and focuses in on the movement of the parade below. The camera comes to rest on the convertible that transports Brady and his wife. The town of Hillsboro welcomes the well-known politician. He will serve the town by being the prosecutor in a trial about evolution, similar to that of the historical Scopes Trial. This scene, where we first meet Brady, reveals his strong character, and the role of savior that the town expects him to play. Through the development of Brady, Kramer also introduces us to the issues of religion and politics. Stanley Kramer, the director, introduces the audience to two key ideas in the very first shot of the scene. He does this through the use of background tools, like music and scenery. As the camera fades in from the previous scene, music begins to play, and a group of women sing a religious hymn, "Give me that old time religion." The extremely loud music continues for the duration of the parade. At first the audience doesn't know the source of the music, but as the parade comes to an end, the camera focuses on a group of militant looking women, who march and sing. This song draws the audience into the impending controversy over religion. It expresses the entire town's point of view on the issue. The audience can see that religion affects the soc...