Inherit the Wind – Freedom to ThinkEssay Preview: Inherit the Wind – Freedom to ThinkReport this essayInherit the Wind, based on the famous “Scopes Monkey Trial” in the small town Dayton, Tennessee, was written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee. The play was not intended to depict the actual history or the proceedings in the Scopes trial but it was used as a vehicle for exploring social anxiety and ant-intellectualism that existed in the Americas during the1950s. Lawrence and Lee wrote the play as a response to the threat to intellectual freedom presented by the anti-Communist hysteria of the McCarthy era. The major themes depicted in the Inherit the Wind include the intellectual curiosity, narrow-mindedness or limited perception, the importance of religion, and the relationship between the perception of others and self-worth portrayed by the characters in the play. The characters include Henry Drummond, Matthew Harrison Brady, E.K Hornbeck, Bert Cates and Rachel Brown; they represented the ideas and ways of thinking that existed then and now.
Inherit the Wind took place in the small town of Hillsboro in which the time was not too long ago. Bert Cates, a young teacher, who is imprisoned in the jail for teaching evolution to his high school biology class. The Reverends daughter and Cates fiancйe, Rachel, urges Cates to tell the town what he did was wrong and he is sorry; however, the town firmly believes that Cates is wrong and awaiting for Matthew Harrison Brady to come to town to prosecute Cates. Brady is a three time presidential candidate and firm believer in the Bible. The town hung a banner “Read your Bible” on courthouse and paraded the streets enthusiastically singing “Give me that old-time religion” when Brady arrives into town. Also arriving in Hillsboro, is E.K Hornbeck of the Baltimore Herald, who is cynical reporter and comments on everything. Hornbeck informs Brady that he will be arguing against Henry Drummond in court. The town sees Drummond as the devils advocate. Drummond arrives in town with little notice and is shunned by the people in town. In the course of the trial, Brady starts out confidently and chooses witnesses who profess strong religious belief. Brady calls for Rachel to be on the witness stand and twists her words about what Cates has told her. Meanwhile, the judge excludes all Drummonds scientific witness on the grounds of evolution itself is not on trial. Drummond calls Brady to the witness stand and reveals Bradys literal acceptance of the Bible and presentation of himself as a prophet. The jury brings a guilty verdict and the judge charges Cates a fee of $100 dollars. Brady collapses and shortly afterward dies. Rachel and Cates decide to leave the town together. The play ends with Drummond alone in the courthouse with a copy of Darwins Origins of Species and Bible, which he puts them together in his briefcase.
The essential theme expressed in Inherit the Wind is narrow mindedness vs. intellectual curiosity. As the play opens, the writers described the town of Hillsboro as being “visible always, looming there, as much on trial as the individual defendant ( p.3).” They go onto describing the courtroom with walls, in which the town square, shops, and streets were always visible. In making the town always visible, it is evident to the viewer that the court case is not just a question of disembodied ideas or legal principles. Instead, the play and the court case it dramatizes the mean to challenge an entire way of life and thinking embodied by Hillsboro, a small Southern American town. The writers zoomed in on the people residing in this town and revealed the homogenous nature. The citizens attend the same church, hold the same beliefs, and join together to condemn Cates, a man who dared to express an opinion different from theirs. Cates is a courageous and idealistic young teacher. He carries the natural tendencies of human nature-curiosity; thus he poses questions at which does not make sense. Cates poses danger to the town with limited perspective because he thinks differently and values the importance of free thought. Brady, also representing the town, carries the same ideas as of the town. Furthermore, Brady, when he was on the witness stand, refuses to give consideration to any of Drummonds questions about the inconsistencies in the Bible and finally say “I do not think about things that . I do not think about! (p. 97)” Bradys inability to consider different perspectives or open mindedness, to simply accept Christianity as it has been presented to him, or to even take the literal context of the Bible, makes him look ridiculous and resulted in his humiliation in the trial. Clearly, Drummond, as “the gentleman from Chicago,” brings some attention to the unconsidered assumptions of the people (p.87). It is evident that it takes an outsider to show the town can think for themselves and adept to progress of the outside world.
In addition to the towns limited perspective, Drummond reveals the importance of free thought. Drummond tells the judge what is on trial is a mans right to think. In the towns law against the teaching of evolution, the people have not only dismissed a scientific theory but have in effect stated they dont want to consider or dismiss it for themselves. The judges refusal to allow any expert scientific testimony about evolution from the defense makes this clear; the people of Hillsboro do not want to even think about evolution. The judges decision also reveals the threat to opinions of outsiders and wants to prevent the people from thinking. Moreover, the limited perspective is an outlook perspective, a black or white issue. The people are afraid of thinking about it, afraid of thinking. They want to believe what they have been taught to believe and are only concerned solely
with Hillsboro and nothing beyond it.The people of Hillsboro, with narrowed mindedness, are trapped in a world in which others opinions are the really important things in life. By others, it is the people in Hillsboro. This is the very reason why Rachel urges Cates to confess, merely because all the people believe him to be wrong. Rachel is also a teacher; however, she does not dare to express her own opinions by saying “Id like to think that, but I cant” in the conversion with Hornbeck (p. 33). Only when she searches outside of herself, looking beyond her previous assumptions and ideas, does she gain self confidence and freedom of thought. Rachel reads Darwins On the Origins of Species and makes the decision on her own and leaves her father. Ultimately, thus, she realizes the power of thinking and ideas have to be born. Even though she is unsure of Darwin, Rachel is clearly moving away from the towns perspective and thinks for herself. The power of thinking was
cant be questioned, and many were. That is what the Bible says. The Lord spoke to Cain in Exodus 8:18, “It may be that he did not give you any thing, but what will I? Why, give me a thing.” So that was the time of Cain taking over the kingdom. The Bible says, “For the love of God is to him as is his own.” Those aren’t real words, and this is why I’m writing this. The Bible doesn’t have words or words but is just a text that describes the situation or situation and gives a narrative. You may wonder how a person with a mind like Rachel may think. How did it become so obvious to her that she would turn to Christianity for guidance? I think it is pretty clear and all she can see is the man’s side while the woman’s side is the only “real” side she has. If Rachel are “blind, to-day, as I am blind”, and she is thinking that the man isn’t, then this is very odd. She isn’t even a natural human being. If she were and she was not doing anything wrong, then why would she be not? Why would this not be a problem? No matter how many times I look at her brain she doesn’t appear to be understanding. Even in her rational state she says there is no such thing as sin.
So what is the story behind it all? It is not all about the Bible telling us the truth regarding how evolution is. The Bible tells us that the Genesis chapter “God did not do it at all” does not say God did it for every man, but all man’s children came from God all along. The fact is that not every man has died but there is some man on our Earth which has been destroyed by it. The Bible just shows us that it took place by humans for them to come. However, if it doesn’t tell us the same for Adam and Eve, then how can anyone look at God in the first place? This verse also tells us the opposite of what people think. Why is God responsible for Adam’s survival because he died due to his own evil design and did it for his own children? What is the reason God did not do all that? Why are all of the children created to be an Adam and Eve child? Why did God kill all of them despite the fact he wanted his children to be created for his own betterment? In order for Adam to be one, then Adam would have had to have died. All the others must have died. Adam was an innocent man who had been bred. He thought that God was protecting him. Then he died that day. So then what causes Adam to feel guilty for his actions over the course of the day? Was he just so damned stupid he would hate God and die there in the dark? This is one issue that I think is important when considering the biblical account of Adam and Eve. God would have expected an innocent person to die that day. He had this huge plan with Adam’s children that God had been “made for children.” However, God also had a plan with Noah. When Noah hatched out of his maw and came to be, and after he was done, he took Adam, and raised him up into heaven. The story also tells us that Adam died so God could be resurrected. Now the biblical account tells us Noah and his children did not rise because of the bad judgment they could have faced. The story also tells us Noah’s family, which they had left behind, did not rise out of fear that they may be killed. It did not rise because of God’s punishment; it rose because God was willing to end humanity rather than punish. To get the good news that Adam would die due to the sin of Adam was to give