Evolution Now: 'Inherit the Wind' opens at Venice Theatre

In 1925, the Scopes “Monkey” Trial rocked America. Tennessee’s Butler Act had made it illegal to teach human evolution in that state’s public schools.

A substitute teacher broke the law and was put on trial, with Clarence Darrow arguing for the defense and William Jennings Bryan arguing for the prosecution. The court found him guilty and fined him $100. 

In 1955, Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee rocked the theater world with “Inherit the Wind”—a fictionalized account of the trial, and the basis of Stanley Kramer’s 1960 movie. That might seem like yesterday’s news. But Kelly Woodland, the director of this month’s production at Venice Theatre, would raise an objection.

Issue-oriented courtroom dramas don’t age well.  Why does “Inherit the Wind” stand up — when “The Trial of Billy Jack” doesn’t?

Because … artistically, the play has many layers. It’s about an important historical event—the Scopes “Monkey” Trial. It also speaks to the McCarthy hearings, which were still going on while the play was being written. Dig deeper, and it’s about the mob mentality in any era. Like all great art, it resonates in different times.

How did the playwrights fictionalize the historic events?

The changes weren’t subtle. I think Lee and Lawrence raised the stakes and made it a battle of the titans. In the play, Henry Drummond and Matthew Brady are out to draw blood. In the real-life Scopes trial, Darrow and Bryant were respectful with each other. They were more colleagues than adversaries. Both were labor lawyers, and had argued for the same side on many legal issues. They’d worked together quite amicably before. Scopes, the actual science teacher, wasn’t rotting in jail during the trial. He was out playing tennis.

How’s rehearsal coming along?

It’s going great. The actors all shine, and I’m truly fortunate to have Preston Boyd and Murray Chase in the two main roles. They’re such incredibly talented, magical performers. Watching them find the nuances of their characters is like being in a master class.

How would you define the rhetorical style of the two main characters?

The playwrights hand you Brady’s style on a platter. Drummond’s constantly saying things like, “I ask the court to remind the learned counsel that he is not in a Chautauqua tent.” He’s referring to a series of large outdoor public meetings that toured rural America through the 1920s. The speakers were fond of bombastic oratory that was full of long sentences and elaborate descriptions. That’s Brady’s style; the closest modern equivalents would be a televangelist or a career politician.

How’d you describe Drummond’s style?

He’s more like Will Rodgers; he has a folksy, deadpan wit. His opponents tend to underestimate him—and always regret it when they drop their guard. He’s not an intellectual bully, but he’ll get his licks in. Drummond can be snarky, but it’s always in service of the truth.

As a director, how do you get your lead actors into the grooves of those different speaking styles?

That’s a hard question to answer, because it’s a very organic process. I’d say my most helpful note, is: Try to keep your target audience in mind. Are you talking to the jury and the judge—or are you playing to the crowd?

And let’s not forget the listeners in America’s living rooms.

No. In 1925, WGN had just gone on the air in Chicago—one of the America’s first commercial radio stations. They were broadcasting the Scopes trial in real time on the radio, which made it America’s first reality show. The McCarthy hearings would be an obvious parallel to theatergoers in the 1950s. Senator Joe McCarthy had used the power of television to launch his own reality show. The play premiered in 1955; the hearings had ended only a year before.

Is mass media the real villain of the play?

No, I’d say it’s the mob mentality. Mobs are blindly irrational, but they don’t just happen. There’s usually an instigator. In this play, it’s Reverend Brown.

He’s handing out the pitchforks and torches. Or selling them. Stirring up the mob is his business model?

I think he has a different motive. He’s not that consciously cynical or manipulative. He’s just afraid.

What’s he afraid of?

Smart questions. Once people start asking them, he loses control. He’s used to telling people what to think.

Which includes his daughter. But she’s chafing under his control.

Right. That touches on a possibility we explored in the Reverend’s backstory. His wife is conspicuously absent with no explanation. We wondered if she might have started asking the wrong questions—and then finally got fed up and left. Now his daughter’s learning to think, and that’s his greatest fear. The play doesn’t spell it out; we used it as a hypothetical explanation for his opposition to independent thought.

You’re saying a loss of faith isn’t the real issue — either in his daughter or the town.

I think that’s a cover story. Reverend Brown wants to maintain control. He claims to believe what the Bible says. He really wants to tell people what it says.

A subtle difference. Does anyone have faith in this play?

Brady does, but his thinking is stuck in the past, and he’s swept up in the mob mentality as a result. In the courtroom, that puts him at a disadvantage.

How so?

Because Drummond can think several moves ahead of him. At one point, Brady asserts that God could give a sponge the capacity of thought if He so willed. Drummond replies that he only wishes to give the science teacher the same rights as a sponge.

Does Drummond have faith?

In his own way. But his faith is more about questions than answers. There’s a great moment in the trial where he asks a kid if he believes everything his science teacher told him. The kid replies, “I’m not sure. I gotta think it over.” Drummond’s response is, “Good for you.”

IF YOU GO

“Inherit the Wind” runs April 11-30 at Venice Theatre, 140 W. Tampa Ave., Venice. For more information, call 488-1115, or visit www.venicestage.com.