In Inherit The Wind, by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, is about a big trial in a small town, and a controversial Creation versus Evolution debate. There are many characters with flamboyant and powerful personalities. Among them are: Matthew Harrison Brady, and Henry Drummond. Although all of these influential people are powerful, not all of them have the same amount of power, not only over other people, but over themselves as well. Matthew Harrison Brady is a very powerful, and revered man at the beginning of the playwright, however his power declines as the play continues. At the beginning of the novel, Brady is the most powerful person in the state. From the period he got off the train, to the trial, he was lionized. He heads up the creationist side, and is very well liked among the people of Hilsboro. When he is called to the stand by Drummond, all of the power in the room shifts. This is especially notable in the movie. Brady is the biggest fish, in a small town. When he is asked about how he stands on the bible, he responds with this quote “I believe that it is not boastful...
Reverend Jeremiah Brown - Hillsboro's minister. He is a hard- hearted man who feels no qualms about convincing the town to condemn Bert Cates and his daughter as incorrigible sinners.
First power, amongst the royal family the mother, Eleanor is the Queen; the father is King Henry, the youngest son John, middle son Geoffrey, and oldest son Richard. In the play not one, but all of these characters have power in some kind of way. King Henry spent his life conquering many regions and wants to continue to conquer by passing king down to one of his three sons. A quote from the play that shows the greed that having power can create Henry asked, “Isn’t being chancellor power enough?” Geoffrey replies, “It’s not the power I feel deprived of. It’s the mention I miss.” Geoffrey does not think he will receive enough respect if he is just the chancellor and his younger brother John is king. When he comes to Richard, the oldest brother he thinks he should be king because of his army he has behind him, but this is where futility comes into play. It is not always about war and killing people to prove your powerful, but in Richards’s ways that is the only way. Richard says, “I am a constant soldier, a sometime poet, and I will be king.” This quote describes the type of person Richard wants to be, he wants to have all the power to rein over the castle and do it through war. Each of the family members is jealous of one another especially the children of the king and queen, it is pretty much a sibling rivalry between them. Having power can be a good thing or bad thing, in this situation the king and queens children have a different view on having power and what they would do if crowned
In this paper I will explain and discuss the historical events that took place in a small rural town in early Massachusetts. The setting for which is Irene Quenzler Brown's and Richard D. Brown's, The Hanging of Ephraim Wheeler. I will explain the actions and motives of Hannah and Betsy Wheeler in seeking legal retribution of husband and father Ephraim Wheeler. I will also discuss the large scope of patriarchal power allowed by the law and that given to husbands and masters of households. Of course, this will also lead to discussions of what was considered abuse of these powers by society and the motivation for upholding the Supreme Court's decision to hang Ephraim Wheeler.
In Brady’s death, it becomes apparent how important Brady was in Drummond’s life, proven with much of what he says, but one line more than the rest. As E.K. Hornbeck picks fun at Brady after his passing, Drummond defends his old friend, “But Matt Brady got lost. Because he was looking for God too high up and too far away.” (114). What Drummond means to say could be interpreted in many different ways, the first, and probably least likely, considering Drummond’s beliefs, could be Brady’s presidential career, or rather lack of. Perhaps Drummond assumes that Brady thought that with power came the ability to become closer with God. Brady had run for president three consecutive times, and it becomes clear how insane this makes Brady by looking at what he was thinking of in his dying moments,
I read Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee. The book provides a fictional account of the Scopes Trial. The trial is altered and made more dramatic. It was written in order to be political commentary or satire on the McCarthy Trials, which in ongoing at the time Inherit the Wind was written. The story begins with Bertman Cates in jail. He is awaiting trial due to illegally teaching evolution to his students. It then becomes clear that many high-profile people in the town want Cates to be convicted. Also, famous and important attorneys are coming to town in order to represent both sides. Later, a jury selection begins. It becomes clear that the trial is about to main things. Religious impact on law and the creationism vs evolution debate. At the
Why Evolution is True is a book by Jerry A. Coyne about how modern man slowly evolved from single cell organisms. This book has changed my whole perspective of evolution. Before I read this book I was a strong believer in creation but while reading this book I realized that there are to many connections between all of earths animals. I am unable see a scenario where we could share so much of our genes with other creatures and still say that we did not evolve from other animals and were just created by a god.
Henry Drummond was created as a character in Inherit the Wind to represent Clarence Darrow. Their corresponding appearance, beliefs, and actions show that they were like fraternal twins; almost identical but containing the perfect amount of differences to tell them apart. Gradually, their personality and other features started to connect more and more as the trial got deeper. In a side-to-side comparison, Henry Drummond was impeccably equivalent to Clarence
thereby alter life situations in the natural? What he found was that it is possible that the mind acts back on itself (as the brain) to cause physical and structural change.
Throughout history, there have been many examples of governments and societies controlling their citizens. Inherit the Wind, by Robert Edwin Lee, fictionalizes the 1925 Scopes “Monkey” trial, as a means to discuss the then-contemporary McCarthy trials. This can be seen as the concepts of intellectualism and oppression can be witnessed in both trials. In the Scopes “Monkey” trial, ideas are being oppressed through ignorance towards evolution. In connection with this, people were being persecuted during the McCarthy trials because they had contradicting political views.
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.
Elizabeth Proctor, Abigail Williams and Mary Warren helps recapitulate how powerful manipulation has over the average human being as it can do a lot of damage and cause anyone to be forced to do things that they commonly wouldn’t do. To help prove the old saying “sticks and stones make break my bones, but will never hurt me” is wrong is an excellent way to bring up the power of manipulation because in an instant of a short transfer of words over top a bounty that may lay on top of your head, even you could be lead to do things that you never thought you would do, just to protect what you have established.
The twentieth century has witnessed the escalation of the creation - evolution debate through famous court cases and Supreme Court decisions on the teaching of evolution in public schools, culminating most recently in a Kansas Board of Education decision. As this highly controversial issue of the teaching of evolution in American classrooms rages on, it may be difficult for some individuals of Christian faith to form an alternative belief other than the extremes of creationism and evolutionism. Before discussing this issue any further, when I refer to strict beliefs in creationism or evolution as extreme views I am not necessarily implying that they are wrong, but are simply two views on completely opposite sides of the creation - evolution debate spectrum. For some creationists, accepting God as Creator as told in the Book of Genesis means the simultaneous rejection of evolutionary theory. For some evolution believers, accepting evolution ultimately results in the replacement of God as Creator with the process of evolution.
The relationship between a father and his son is an important theme in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part One, as it relates to the two main characters of the play, Prince Hal and Hotspur. These two characters, considered as youths and future rulers to the reader, are exposed to father-figures whose actions will influence their actions in later years. Both characters have two such father-figures; Henry IV and Falstaff for Prince Hal, and the Earl of Northumberland and the Earl of Worcester for Hotspur. Both father-figures for Hal and Hotspur have obvious good and bad connotations in their influence on the character. For example, Falstaff, in his drinking and reveling, is clearly a poor influence for a future ruler such as Prince Hal, and Worcester, who shares Hotspur's temper, encourages Hotspur to make rash decisions. The entire plot of the play is based on which father-figure these characters choose to follow: had they chosen the other, the outcome would have been wholly different.
The 19th century was full of revolutionary individuals seeking a higher knowledge and understanding of the way life and society operated. Two such individuals were Charles Darwin and Karl Marx. Each being masters of their own trade, Darwin was a scientist interested in the topics of natural history and the origins of species; while Marx was a philosopher who explored sociology, political history, and economic history. Over time, Darwin eventually became universally recognized as the father of the idea for natural selection and evolution, explaining these theories in a novel entitled The Origin of Species. Marx also became universally recognized for coining the term Marxism, a form of communism that centers on the idea of a utopian society with
Creation Vs Evolution “The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying celebration. The pending question that many scientists, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts.