Those damn kids

Inherit the Wind begins with two children conversing about the weather. Howard, the boy, is looking for worms so he can go fishing. Melinda, the girl, does not like worms. She says they creep her out. Howard then goes on to say that we all came from worms, referencing evolution. Melinda disagrees completely, stating that what Howard says is sinful. This shows that Melinda was taught in the ways of the bible and strongly believes in them. Howard really does not care what Melinda has to say because he is stupid and doesn't know any better. This conversation shows that these two children believe different things and some people don't agree with the other ideas.

The begining

The reason for starting off this book with a conversatioin between kids was to show how these opinion can be formed by the adults. These children have been influenced by the adults to tqake up on sides of arguments they dont quite understand. Plus it gives a paritly unbias view on the whole situation. Every adult in this argument is largely on one side of things. basically it gives an easy unbaisish way too look at the argument

Inherit the Ignorance

It's all a puppet show. A game of chess, with the prevailing forces on opposing sides strategically moving each piece to gain an upperhand on the other. It's all petty puffery. No one is really in this town, no one is involved in this case for an intellectual debate over the role of religion in school and hence in government. There is not some higher aspiration behind anyone. They want, want, want, the fame and the publicity; they want the theatrics and the drama.
If one side can puff up their feathers more than the other, if one gains more momentum, more public power, they are deemed the victor.
The petty puffery is descriptive of the ongoing play that we're reading, but also of the play that seems to manifest itself in everyday life. The world's a stage, as it were.
The religious zealots are annoying, to say the least. They automatically consider all who oppose them as sinners, evil, and wrong. There is no respect for the other side. No respect for the other HUMANS who are in the midst of the debate. I don't believe that's "what the bible says we should do". I do not believe that a prophet so prophetic such as Jesus would consider it Godly to descriminate against someone because they "cannot see the light".
I cannot understand bigotry like that. I cannot understand how they can believe they are correct in anything. There is no logic. And without logic, I do not believe you can have true faith.
Blah.

Inherit the Wind

The concept of separation of church and state is a part of our government that is extremely crucial in terms of just law making and was instated for a reason and there was no separation of the two in 1925. The church and the government were indistinguishable from one another in 1925. Therefore, anyone who opposed or spoke up against religion or the values and teachings of religion were breaking the law and didn't stand a chance because the government had the power and the voice. This court case is the perfect example because the prosecuter was viewed as if he were a god, because he supported religion and the Bible, the people and the government supported him, and the defense and the accused were seen as filthy, sinning, spawns of Satin.

Oh... gluttony, taking more than one's fair share and being selfish and greedy is vast in quantity in our world and especially our country and the biggest example we have seen so far in Inherit the Wind is in the case of the prosecuter who in this book is named Mr. Brady. As humans we love attention and praise and Brady is no different. Soaking up every ounce of worship the citizens give him, as well as every morsel of food he can get his hands on. The thing about gluttony is we never accept or admit to it, oh ill just have one bite or lets just talk about me for one more minute. We are selfish and completely in denial about it, because we refuse, quite strongly, to believe anything other than that we are supreme, generous, perfect beings whom look down upon the rest of the world's creatures.

Ignorance, refusing to accept, believe, or acknowledge something that threatens of differs from one's own views. While I'm not trying to be ignorant but much ignorance occurs in this trial. No one can even think about the possibility that Creationism is not the truth of our creation, that is the way it is and that's that. No one questions it, everyone, OK not everyone, but many merely accept it. That is ignorance, while yes it may hurt to find out that the ways of God are not always right, it is important, no crucial to be able to investigate and think for one's self, and the fear of finding out that one may be wrong is the reason for the immense amount of ignorance that lies everywhere we turn.

Long term/short term changes to Hillsboro

The decision to hold the trial in Hillsboro causes many changes to the town, both long term and short term. The short term transformation of the small, sleepy Southern town into a bustling, town-fair like atmosphere happens almost immediately. It seems inevitable that media will follow this court case and therefore the citizens of the town wanted to make it seem as warm and welcoming as possible. They enhanced the true identity of the town by purposely displaying happy, religious supporting people. Lemonade and hot dog stands are put up along with bible sellers and other Church supporting signs. Yet, the impacts of the trial on this town are much more than the outside transformation for the press. The town is "as much on trial as the individual defendant." Hillsboro represents all of the small, Southern towns, and as the media looms upon it, It must prove to the rest of the world that they are correct. Everything about the town will be put under scrutiny, from the schools to the judge to the condition of the courthouse. If the defendant is proven innocent it will change the whole town drastically, not only will the schools' science classes have to be restructured, but the whole religious community will be offended and dishonored. By having this case tried is Hillsboro the community is putting its whole way of life on trial. They are opening their daily lives to the rest of the world and proving that they are not afraid to stand up for what they believe in.

INherit the WInd

Gluttony. Br. Brady, obviously symbolizes this attribute in part one of the play. His constant "snacking" or actually what we see as feasting, is constantly being brought up. His excessive need for "Oh, just a little more" shows how we are always "needing" more. Also, I guess you could look at it in a way where gluttony is exemplifying how we always have to want to be right. In a court case, this seems to sprout quite a lot...greed just gets in the way sometimes and really does just cause problems...is that bad though? I mean gluttony is known as a bad thing, and I'm definitely not denying it, but does it create good controversy to lead to discussions/battles? Hm...idk....this is getting too large for my brain to spit out...

Ignorance. Hahahahahahaha. This is one of the most debatable topics. It creates our points of view, our beliefs, morals, ideas, etc... whether it fully controls them, or not at all. This point definitely arouses conflict. Let's see, Brady is completely blinded by his ignorance of evolution because of religion, and then in his point of view, Cates is completely ignorant because he opposes the religious theory of creationism and believes in evolution. Hehe. I think that if people don't necessarily agree with us, they are ignorant in our minds. Interesting, eh?

Church&State. Oh Boy. This subject is always fun to discuss! Basically, they should just be separated...always...they should never intertwine. Not everyone abides by the same religion, so it just simply doesn't make sense to teach religious concepts in a public setting. This idea is the entire background on the Scopes trial, or I should say Cates trial really...It disrespects the non-included religions and just brings up too much uproar. Sure, you're always going to have people opposing, but in the case of something this big, it should satisfy the majority of the people. If you do go by hardcore religion, then you should be enrolled in a private, religious school. There. Problem solved. Separate the two and keep them that way.

Do you know what you're even talking about?

In the opening scene of the book, two of the children in the town, Melinda and Howard are discussing evolution. Neither of the children know exactly what they are talking about while talking to eachother. Howard says "we are all decendants from worms or jelly," which is not true. and Melinda is automatically disgusted by the fact that "when there was only water on the world, every living thing was a worm or jelly," just because her pa believes in creation. The entire trial is bassed on Creation vs. Evolution and even the two children have taken sides. This shows how not only did most people not know what they were taking sides on because people are so closed minded and hear only what they want to hear, but also the fact that everyone took a side on the issue, and it caused many conlflicts in everyday life. Teachers lost and disobeyed rights, people pulled their children out of school, and enrolled them in private religious schools. The trial effected the entire town, country, and world.

A Children's conversation

In the beginning of the play written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E Lee, a pair of children, Melinda and Howard have their own conversation about the trial that is to take place in their town. Howard insists that Melinda and her entire family were once worms and blobs of jelly, taking the evolution’s side of the fight, while Melinda refuses to believe his words, coming from a religious family. Neither of the pair really understands what they are speaking of as they defend their beliefs, the ideas simply engrained into their heads by their parents. This is a statement of the entire town, whose people have almost blindly chosen sides, following what they were taught, not necessarily the facts of each side. Ignorant people have taken up a fight they do not understand, making the entire idea of the trial almost pointless.

Inherant the Wind Kevin Doody

This converstation between Linda and Howerd shows how the people of the town are unsure of what evolution is so they rely on religion. There uncertanty breeds a sort of fear against the idea of evolution. This conversation also shows that people are discusted with the idea that they evolved from lesser beings. This is shown when Howerd tells Linda that she is evolved from worms and that her dad is monkey. Linda is appalled by the idea and says that that kind of talk is sinful and than runs home to her father.

Inherit the Blah.....

The conversation between the two kids is significant because of the bias that is instilled by the parents into the ignorant children. It shows that the parents and most of Tennessee are under the blanket of religious prejudice. The ignorance of the child is taken advantage of by their parents to form a reflection of their selves. In addition, the fact that the town, perhaps the state, is so religiously influenced that the division of church and state does not apply. Brady is an example of gluttony in that he is self indulging and eats too much. The “Monkey Trial” has brought the town of Dayton unparalleled fame and wealth. The author did not want to depict the exact story in order to give the reader an image of the setting of Dayton, without personally depicting any person; this diminishes the potential for legal issues as well as personal.

Like wtf?

The author put a warning in the begining of the book to tell you that the book was not exactly like how the real scopes trial was. He did this so he could write whatever he wanted, and stuff. It was good that he did this so people won't freak out if he said something that wasn't true to the real trial.

The opposite?

This town, filled with the "Children of God" is rather bias. SO, what would the scene look like if the bias was favoring the other side? Perhaps if this trial took place somewhere void of all religion, somewhere that challenges the old and loves to raise the Freak Flag. WHAT, if this trial took place in San Fransisco??!? Can you imagine the crowds that would gather to slug out the prosecutors on the spot? Actually, that is rather stupid. But my point is, this book pisses me off. Its just throwing a steak in a pit of lions, poor Darrow, defending the facts, getting verbally assaulted by these barbarians. "It is the mark of the wise man to be able to entertain an idea without fully accepting it", well this town of Hillsboro is filled with idiots.

Brady, God's Right Hand Man.

Brady, is quite the man to arrive at this trial. A presidential candidate, a man of the Bible, a pudgemallow, what an opponent! One might even go as far as to say that he is over-qualified for this trial. So, who would be brave, no stupid enough to challenge this guy; after all he does represent the entire Christian church and their fight against the Theory of Evolution. Easy, Darrow would, because the Christian faith is retarded, and it is not hard to point out flaws in their beliefs. This comes down to a battle of the truth versus the deepest pit of corruption and dictatorship. neither side will gain a true victory by the trial, but none-the-less a proxy war is taking place.

Hillsboro: Hit and Miss

There is no doubt that small towns have trouble accomodating large amounts of people. Families work extra hard to ensure everyone is fed, has a place to sleep, and feels comfortable wih their town. But could this sacrifice for the crowd also mean that they sacrifice what they believe, as not to draw any negative attention to themselves? When in Rome, do as the Romans... When in a Christian convention, shut your mouth. What concers me about Hillsboro, is that no one is hiding their beliefs. They have all been such a close knit group of religious fanatics for long that they know nothing else. There really is no person there that questions the church, other than the defendant. How could a fair trial be held with this audience? Wouldnt the jury be just as mentally corrupt as the people, the judge?!?

gettin it together grouch

The characters in act one are mostly religious men and women fighting for what they believe in. Rachel, the daughter of Reverand Brown, has a dirty love affair with Cates. Cates is the teacher that taught the story of evolution to his sophmore class. The cynical reporter, E.K. Hornbeck, plays with the people by shaking a monkeys hand and saying "grandpa!" Brady is the prsecuter, he ran for president three times, and is a strong believer in the bible. Brady has one of the seven sins, gluttony, he over endulges in everything. for example at the at the banquet they have for him he east all the f00d. The style of writing is very southern, Hornbecks line are as if they were headlines in a paper.

jacks inherit the wind post

Today we read through the first section of the book. in the first chapter we learned more of the back rounds of the characters and the town. i the book we saw how the characters reacted to the case and how the case in the book is some what different then the real case. we found out that Cate and Rachael had a substantial conversation between each other. also we found that scopes didn't care that he broke the law he was just doing what his boss told him to do. that is about it we will probably get more in depth as we read on.

As we read the first chapter of the Inherit the wind, I can see that this book is going to be pretty much paralell to the scopes trial. Throughout the first chaper, the stage has been set for something of epic proportions, much like the scene before the scopes trial. The major similarties between characters in this chapter are those of William Jennings Brian and Mr. Brady, Scopes and Crates, and Darrow and Drummond. The similarity between Bian and Brady is significant int that they are both big names, fighting for creationism, and warmly accepted by the town. The similarity between between Scopes and Crates is that thye are both in jail for teching evolution, and they both use the exuse that they were teaching what was in the book. The similarity between Darrow and Drummond are that they are both fighting for evolution, deny religion, are big names, and are known for getting murderers off the hook.

Lame Inherit the Wind Response: Act1 Scene1

The characters in this scene have a similiar sence of being, they all have a strong religous believe in God and live under that rule. Every one is in tuned with the bible, except for a few. Mr. Hornbacker is a journalist that seems to have a strong belife in Evolution. He is the man that walks around the town and spys on every one and trys to manipulate them into slipping up for a good headline! Another character who seems a little lost is Rachel, she wants to believe in God but she doesnt want to believe that Cates did anything wrong. She struggles with this because her and Cates have a thing going on and her father is the Reverend. All the characters have more attitude to them because its a play then just the trial. In the play you look at all the lives and everything outside the court room and not just what happens with in the case. In the scene they set the court room up, the whole story up, as a battle field. This is important becasue this trial is so important to this town. As William Gennings Bryan says it is a fight for Gods word not just any man. This Scene is the very beginning, it sets up the relationship between all the characters before the trial begins.

Inherit the Wind: Act I, Scene I-

Matt Lack
May 15th, 2009

After just reading Act I, Scene I in Inherit the wind, there were a few things that I noticed were emphasized, some done so cleverly, others done so with blatant intent to expose the humor of the situation. For example, the Organ-Grinder and his monkey was almost a direct example, take straight out of the funnies made in response to the court. When the monkey was referred to as a grandfather, it was an obvious attempt to strike irony and sarcasm into the situation. Others were not so obvious, but funny nonetheless. One I noticed in the italics of the script, (and whether this was done intentionally or not, who0 knows?) was the description of Mr. Brady eating the turkey leg. Once he finishes it, it describes the bone as a fossil. A small detail, indeed, but it made ma laugh anyhow. Another bit of irony, less obvious than the monkey, but easier to spot than the bone mentioned in italics, was the fact that Mr. Brady is a glutton. There is profound irony in this, as Mr. Brady claims to be a defender of the bible, and all things right, yet one of his major flaws just happens to be one of the seven deadly sins.
As for a comparison between the play and the actual court, there are few differences that are substantial. As for the subtle differences, I could go on for hours. Instead of listing them all, I'll point out the largest of the smallest, so to speak.
The fact that Rachel is a part of Cate's history is something that wasn't even mentioned during the real life trial, much less even a reality. (Or so it would seem, from the knowledge I have of Scopes.) I can see why this is done though; It adds drama to the story, and gives Cates a deeper personality than just a teacher who is guilty of a crime. The fact that Rachel is bound to Cates enhances the drama, and adds some irony at the same time. She is caught between religion and science, and wants to defend Cates, but is bound otherwise by her father.
That is the only major difference I noticed in Act I, Scene I. There were others, but they were less relevant and obvious were done to enhance the drama and interest of the play.
I'm looking forward to reading the rest of the play, and hope it keeps my interest, as Scene I definitely caught it.

Bertran Cates

In this screen play, one of the main characters is Bertan Cates. Bert was a science teacher that one day decided to teach chapter 17 in his given text book. This was unlawful because chapter 17 discussed Darwin and his theory on evolution. And during this play, it is illegal to give teachings in public schools about non religious beliefs. He did this in attempt to protect his right of freedom of speech. So now he is going to court in what is suppose to be the Scopes Trial. This trial is bigger than any court case, it is AN EVENT. People come from all around the USA to see this, venues are opening up as if it were a huge Baseball game and so on. This reeks havoc putting the entire town in interrogation of where they stand in this controversial phenomenon.

Inherit the Wind 1

The trial is smiler in some ways but different then the book in many ways too. First of all the diffident, William Jenins Bryin, was known as in Matthew Harrison Brady in the book. Other then the names the two characters are the same in the book and the trial. the biggest difference was that the people of Hilsberg treated Brady like a god. in the book they they treated him like the devil. they trash talk him and look down on him. Finlay the dialogue wasn't the same as in the trial they had different things said in the book that in the trial.

Characters of Inherit the Wind-Conner

As we read through the first section of Inherit the Wind we discovered the background and traits of the characters introduced. William Jennings Brady is a religous expert that is held in really high regard within the town Hillsboro. Brady is looked up to as a hero and a leader for the fights against religon. The town expects to win over the trial while bringing popularity into their small town. The town and its religious followers are really worked up about all the talk of evolution that has been brought on and they hold high standards for Brady to eliminate all the misunderstandings. With the progression of the novel we will only find out more about the characters and how their personalities come into play during this trial.

Inherit The Wind Scene 1

The book Inherit the Wind is a very interesting remake of the Scopes Trial.Bryan/Brady was a famous lawyer who was defending the bible. In the book Brady was a very glutenous character. Overall the dialoge in the book is very differnt then it was in thew actual trial. Most of the conversations they had in the book did truly not happen in real life. Secondly in the book the setting is kind of off. For example there was no sign that said "Read the bible," that was only in the book. Thirdly William Jenngings Bryan's name got changed to Matthew Harrison Brady in the book. Bryan/Brady was a famous lawyer who was defending the bible. In the book Brady was a very glutenous character. All the towns people treat Brady like he is a god. They do this because he is a famous lawyer and they think he is going to "save" their school from being tought evolution.