Today’s Almanac-May 25, 2010--Part I

[patrickmurfin]

Comments

Inherit the Wind

[anonymous]

I'm sure you made a marvelous Brady in "Inherit the Wind," and I appreciate the rich context you offer here. My only quibble is with your reference to Lawrence and Lee lifting "whole chunks of dialogue" from the Scopes trial transcripts. That is inaccurate. The playwrights studied the transcripts in detail, and conducted extensive interviews with Arthur Garfield Hays, who assisted Darrow. But only about four sentences in the great Act II trial scene from "Inherit" reflect the text of the trial. As Lawrence and Lee often said: the events in Dayton were dramatic, but they were not drama.

We Lees are always amused by the notion that people see the play "Inherit the Wind" as documentary, rather than what it is: an interpretation of historic events in a fresh, dramatic form that was designed to comment not only on the past, but the present and future.

-- Lucy Lee, daughter of playwright Robert E. Lee

Re: Inherit the Wind

[patrickmurfin]

I am honored you found my humble pop stand! I stand corrected, although I think there was a fair amount of paraphrasing.

We were able to do this great play in an American high school in 1967. I wonder how many would dare put it on today.

Accuracy of Inherit the Wind

[anonymous]

For a good comparison of Inherit the Wind to the facts of the trial, see www.themonkeytrial.com. Also, there's a new movie coming out about the trial in 2010 or 2011 with more of a focus on Mencken and a local reporter than on Bryan-Darrow. It's called "alleged" and stars Brian Dennehy (Darrow), Sen. Fred Thompson (Bryan), and Colm Meaney (Mencken). Ha!

Scopes not permitted to speak?

[anonymous]

I disagree with this characterization: "Judge Raulston imposed a $100 fine before even allowing Scopes to speak. Upon objection he let Scopes have his only say of the trial, '…I have been convicted of violating an unjust statute.'"

You make it sound like the Judge was opposed to letting Scopes speak. Not so. The defense had to keep Scopes off the stand because he never taught the kids evolution; to take the stand would have meant he would have to perjure himself and, while he was willing to lend his name to the test case, he wasn't willing to go that far. (The prosecution was probably okay with the staged event, too, as only $100 was at stake and Bryan had offered to pay it himself were it to be imposed on Scopes. Mencken, however, beat Bryan to it.)

Such a fun case!

Re: Scopes not permitted to speak?

[patrickmurfin]

I meant that Raulston imposed sentence before giving the defendent the cusomary opportunity to speak directly to the judge before sentencing is imposed.