The Drama with the Monkey Trial

Sometimes we stretch the truth to come up with a good story to tell. The writers of Inherit the Wind did the same thing. The monkey trial was a famous trial about a man who was sentenced, for teaching about evolution in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. The case was very famous and became a play. However, some people are angry about how the writers’ changed some real life events. Many people have tried to argue that the play was biased. The trial has gotten so famous that now every year more and more, productions of plays and screenings of the movie appear. This convinces some people the play was a documentary; however, under the circumstances the writers of Inherit the Wind had the right distort real live events. Nevertheless, Robert Lee and Jerome Lawrence were justified in distinguishing events and characters surrounding the monkey trial.

The first reason why the writers of Inherit the Wind were justified to desort real events because in the beginning of the book they claimed the book was fiction. My first example is, “Inherit the Wind is not history. The events which took place in Dayton, Tennessee during the scorching July in 1925 are clearly the genius of the play”. The writers are stating that the events that happened in the Scopes trial were created for the play. In Hollywood, many books, stories, and events are changed to adhere to the audience. Directors have been changing books since the beginning of movies, it is very common. My second example to show that the book was supposed to be to be fiction, is the quote by the authors. “The characters have a life and language of their own.” The writers made up characters like Rachel and the Reverend, to make the story more interesting. Both Rachel and the Reverend had big roles in the story, and caused a lot of drama. For example, the Reverend told a little boy’s parents he was going to hell because he was never baptized. After reading this I was shocked and at the character. My final reason that the writers claimed that the play is theatre not a documentary.“Inherit the Wind does not claim to be journalism; it is theatre”. The writers never claimed to be accurate, they said the play is not all facts. It should not be taken seriously the writers claim it is not a documentary, it is theatre.The writers of the book and play explained that Inherit the wind was not based off of real events.It is fiction and drama. The authors had the right to change the story because they justified the events never happened.

A second reason why the writers were justified to change real events is because they needed to make the story more enjoyable. My first example is, if the play was exactly like the trial, it would not be nearly as exciting as the play. Therefor, the play would not have this much success. The play is famous because of the drama; because, the drama is what caused the story to be successful.The writers and actors needed to be paid somehow, if they did not emphasize some events, they would not make any money. Another example, the writers changed the characters from the real people in the trial. In the play, the name Scopes was changed to Cates. Darrow. changed to Drummond. Bryan was changed to Brady. The characters names and personalities were altered in the story. Personally, Drummond was my favorite character because of his attitude he would not of made much of an impression on me if his character was like his personality in real life. The characters were the most important part of the play, therefore, the writers needed to alter them to make the play more interesting. A final example to how writers changed the story to make it more exciting is. when Brady dies suddenly in the courthouse. In real life, Bryan died in his hotel! If the writers kept the death the same, it would not be as dramatic. His death was unexpected and it made the scene more intense. Brady’s death was another example of how the writers rewrote the story to make it more exciting. If the writers of Inherit the Wind did not make small changes to the play, it would not have this much fame.

My final reason the writers of Inherit the Wind were justified to the change the story is because no one got hurt by the changes in the play. First, the writers claimed, “the collision of Bryan and Darren was dramatic but not drama.” The authors explained that the trial was, but not striking enough to become a play. The directors needed to add some depth to create a great play.They created a great play by stretching the truth on some events. My second quote the writers claimed was “we are gratitude to the reporters for their reporters.” The reporters gave all their information to the writers to make the play. The writers used mostly logical evidence to write the play. The trial was very famous and they had access to the information they needed to write the play. Finally, the people in Dayton, Tennessee are not disliked by the rest of the world. Even though, they were portrayed as bad people in the play. No one thinks the people of Dayton, Tennessee as bad people. In fact every, July since 1988, the town holds a Scopes trial festival celebrating the fame of the case. They have rides,food, and games. Obviously, the townspeople are not angry at the writers for portraying them as hateful in the play. In conclusion, the people who were affected by this book were not hurt in any way, shape or form.

The writers had the right to change the story of Inherit the Wind. If they kept the same events and characters, the book, the trial, and the play would not have nearly enough success. The writers claimed the play was fiction. The writers explained the year is not 1925. It might be last year, yesterday, or tomorrow. The play became a success from the dramatic events, no one really got hurt by the characters and event changes in the play. The drama was what made the book so enjoyable. The writers Robert Lee and Jerome Lawrence has were justified in distributing events and characters surrounding the Scopes trial in Inherit the Wind.