In life we tend to place people into two categories: winners and losers. The "Scopes Monkey Trial" was a hard fought court battle that started out as a small fire and in the words of Henry Drummond, "[lit] up the whole sky." The motives and agendas behind those involved in the case may not be easily reconciled. Each historical as well as fictional character fought for his own set of beliefs whether they be scientific, religious, philisophical or political. And for each of these players, the battle took on a different meaning, it's direction not always straight or narrow.
As with any "fight" there is assumed to be a clear winner and a subsequent loser in the end. Evaluate the resolution of the play. Who wins the case? Who loses? Is the jury's decision just? Understandable? Make sure you think about the setting including the town mentality, the court system and the actions and words of the people involved.
Inherit the Wind presents this court battle as a catalyst for a debate on the importance of freedom of thought, belief and speech. It speaks to the intolerance of differing opinions and illuminates the search for Truth. It may be a never-ending search for some, the road scattered with doubt and uncertainty, but a road well traveled nonetheless.
28 comments:
Technically, Brady and the town won in the case and Cates is punished with a $500 fine. The town will see it as a victory for Creation, while Drummond, Cates and Rachel see it as a win for the side of Darwinism.
Even though Brady claimed to be an expert on the Bible, when put on the spot he cracked under pressure and was discredited. The town stopped looking up to Brady as the God he self appointed himself as and saw him as a human being. The town is still very religious, while a few people may have opened their minds to new ideas.
The court wanted the whole case to go away because it brought a large amount of publicity to the town, so they found Cates guilty to please the town, but also ruled in favor of the defense by giving a small punishment.
Mentally, Cates won the case on account of the issue being such a controversial topic.
In order for there to be a struggle, there has to be two opposing sides fighting for an undeterminable out come. In this exetremely rural and religious setting, we already knew Bert would be found guilty. The point of the case was to see which side of the arguement could discredit the other.
Bert and Drummond fought Mr. Brady and made him look like a fool in front of everyone. They started at his knowledge of the bible and lack of knowledge of the opposition. Then directly focused on his knowledge of the bible itself and the loop holes in them. In the end Bert's arguement turned Brady into a joke, a clear victory to this fight.
By the letter of the law and by the jury’s ruling, Matthew Brady is declared the official winner because Cates is pronounced guilty as charged. Bertram and Drummond technically lose the battle, but may be winning the war. Cates has to pay a fine, meaning in addition to being declared guilty, and ‘losing’ his job, he is ‘losing’ money as well as ‘losing’ face. In reality, the Biggest Loser is Mount Brady in every sense; first he loses everyone’s respect, and then his own life.
Although the jury system is equitable theoretically, a jury’s decision can be influenced by many factors: money, threats, or bribery. In this case, Bert’s trial had to be wrapped up quickly due to the upcoming elections in November. The mayor didn’t want “the case to light up the sky” and have negative publicity affect his town and cause upheaval concerning the elections. Historically, the town has been supportive of organized religion; not surprising, in order to keep the crowd under control, only a guilty verdict would satisfy them. Yet, some progress has been made in that the legal victory is not overwhelming because the seed of doubt has been planted in some people’s minds (ie: Rachel).
Technically Brady won but in actuality, Bert and Drummond won. Drummond won because he brought the issue of both freedom of speech and separation of church and state to the attention of the entire country. There always has to be some big event, even if it is not a sucsess, to start a movement or change in society.
I do not think the jury was just in its decision. Drummond discredited Brady in multiple ways such as by luring Brady into saying he takes everything in the Bible literally. Nothing Brady said while examining his witnesses had as much impact as the arguments Drummond proposed.
Although I think that the jury's decision was unjust, I find it understandable. The people of Hillsboro were extremely biased and no amount of logical facts could change that. They did not bother to consider the facts because none of it would change their opinions.
This case in Hillsboro was probably just so dramatic because everyone probably wanted publicity among their town and quite frankly, i don't think nobody one. they are neither winners or losers because no matter how much you try to make the world see what you see, there is always going to be someone to contradict you. that's the thing, its not even about the case that made this into a whole big deal. it was because everyone was striving to make everyone else to see their side of the story when the people shouldn't be obligated to see it, period. the jury in the play acted the way they were because they did not want to be looked down upon the town. this is where equality takes a role in this situation because nobody in this world is equal and there are so many ideas of equality that the idea is endless. just like this case along with other cases out there in the world. they will never end no matter how hard we try to fix them.
In the end when everything is all said and done Brady has won the case. Bert is found guilty and fined with $500 so he is the loser of the case. When reading the book when Drummond is arguing with Brady it seems like the jury is in favor of Drummond's reasoning over Brady's. The court is unfair when they do not allow Drummond to call scientists to the stand. If anyone can help Cates it would be the scientists who know about Evolution as well. No one else in the courtroom has as much knowledge as them or Bert Cates. Everyone is against him because they are all taught to believe religion just like Brady. The town and Brady's beliefs overshadow Bert's and that is an unfair advantage. Thanks to Drummond who was able to persuade the audience that Brady had no knowledge of the book of Darwin and could not prove that Darwin was incorrect since he never read it. Brady dies tragically in the end so in the long run Bert is still alive and is bailed out of jail making him the only real winner.
At the end of the play, we interpret that Brady technically won and Bert didn't necessarily lose. Technically, the jury found Bert Cates guilty, but on a deeper level, Brady loses everything. He loses his life and loses complete respect from the town of Hillsboro when he proclaimed himself a prophet of God. I believe that Bert won because he accomplished his goal of letting others know that there are people out there that believe in other versions of how the world was created other than the verison stated in the Bible. Also, Bert only had to pay a $100 fine, so was not severly punished. If I lived in Hillsboro and was part of the jury, I would most likely vote Bert guilty too. Hillsboro has this mentality that the Bible is the one and only way to live life, so the jury's verdict was understandable for the people of Hillsboro. Bert really did open a whole can of worms and we are still rigoriously debating this topic today, but Bert has shown everyone that we should have the right to believe what we want and think what we want of other things, because no one should have the authority of our thoughts.
Legally, Brady won, He was completely Humiliated and his ignorance was shown to the whole country, but he won. Bert Cates legally lost and has to pay $100. Cates lost on complete unfair terms, The whole town in Hilsboro acted like he was possessed by a demon and that evolution is the devil (Just a figure of speech, the last part was literal though.) Drummond was not even allowed his witnessness, which is total madness since they helped prove evolution, and yet they have a banner that says "Read your Bible."
On a much lighter note however, Cates really won. He proved his point to the country and possably helped another person speak their opinion somewhere else, and a fine is really just a slap on the wrist for him. Brady on the other hand lost EVERYTHING! His respect in Hilsboro, the case and ultimately his life. The haunting mermories of losing the presidnetal election three times, pounded with a lost case and total humiliation literaly almost made the poor man have a heart attack and a mental breakdown/stroke at the same time. But it is to be understood that we all must have freedom of thought and speech, no matter how outragous it may seem to society.
Technically in the play Brady was the winner, but when you really think about it the winner was Cates. In the town of Hillsboro there used to be only one thought in everybodys mind, and it's that the bible is what you live by. The fact that Cates was able to make the case such a controversy, and make people actually challenge their thoughts on religion shows a clear win for Cates. No one before Cates in that town was able to do what Cates did, and to me that shows how he clearly won. I feel that Brady actually truly ended up losing the court case because he ended up not being able to defend the bible. He calls himself such a true follower of the bible, but when put under pressure he was not able to do what he was in town to do which was to crush any non bible thought.
Well technically Brady won because he believed that Cates created a crime because he thaught the little school children about the evolution and not about the bible and everyone else agreed that he crated a crime by not teaching them about God. I also think that it is a win win situation because in a way, Cates won to. The reason why I say that Cates won also is because he did not have to go to jail and he only had to pay a fine but he did not have to pay the fine because Hornbeck offered to help him out and pay for his fine. At the end of the day Brady might have won but could not enjoy it because he possible died of a heart attack but Cates and Rachel ran away togther without really suffering too much.
In terms of enforcing a law, Brady wins this case. However, when it comes to winning the battle for freedom to express one's thoughts and beliefs one might interpret that the battle has just begun, and Cates and Drummond are off to a great start.
The jury's decision is not just, for the case is not just. The law is not a just one and thus, no enforcement or bias of that law is.
Throughout the whole play they jury is biased toward this law; the defense is rejected his witnesses and arguments. All because of the general mentality of the town, which is the very thing Cates and his new found followers are fighting.
This case was very odd as far as the outcome of it. Even though Brady won, it was Bert and Drummond who won in my opinion. They basically got off the hook with just a slap on the wrist. Drummond proved that in a town where religion was king, two opposing theories could coexist and even sway some people to a different way of thinking. One thing to take into consideration though, is the fact that the mayor spoke to the judge before the he had to make his sentence. The mayor did this to sway the voters on both sides of the argument to vote for him. So if you look at it a certain way, Bert was allowed to show that religion and science can coexist by politics.
The way this trial worked out, both sides were meant to win, and they both did. Brady's side won on a technicality, but Drummond/Cates side really won in my opinion. In the beginning of the trial everything was pointing towards Cates being found guilty, and the town of Hillsboro looked down on him. Brady was looked upon as a god-like figure throughout the town. By the end of the trial, Cates was just charged with a $500 fine, and some people saw why he did, what he did. While Brady ended up looking like a fool in front of everyone, and ended up dead. So in the end, there is no clear winner, but if there was it would be Cates and Drummond.
When reading the play in a shallow way, Brady won. However, if one is reading the play in a profound way, he/she would believe that Cates won the case. Therefore, in my opinion Cates won the case. Why; simply because he fought for the rights of a thinker. He fought for the rights of a person who does not believe everything that is spoon fed to him or her. Based upon the town's biased opinions, Drummond may have won the biggest case of his career. Knowing that the town would not accept beliefs that deferred from their values, Cates got mildly punished; he only had to pay 100 dollars! Although the jury and the case were unjust, Cates helped the people who did not believe in the town’s system to speak out for a new fair system.
In act three of Inherit the Wind, Matthew Brady is the winner of the "Scopes Monkey Trial." The jury found Bertram Cates guilty. He was charged a $500 fine. Although Brady technically won, so did Bert and Drummond. Bert also won because he wasn't sent back to jail.
In Hillsboro, the people just believed everything what the bible said. Drummond changed that during the trial. As soon as Brady was on the spot, he panicked and the spectators realized that. During the battle, many spectators began to go against Brady and onto Drummond's side.
In the Play in technical terms Brady wins the case. The jury finds the prosecuted Bert Cates guilty for bringing the evolution conversation into the town. But in context Drummon wins because one the punishment towards Cates is only a $100 dollar fine plus the talk of Evolution in the town will not stop it will keep spreading. Plus Brady dies, he dies of a stomach burts from engorging himself with food when he was nervous.The decision by the jury is not reasonable. Eventhough Drummond showed his knowledge of the bible futher then there beloved Brady they still followed their roots and Bert Cates was found guilty. It was not understandable because there was no specific reason for him to be found guilty so it was a unreasonable charge.
I agree with what Efe has stated. There are two ways of understanding the results of this play. If the results of the case is indeed looked at in a more simple way, it shows that Matthew Brady won the case. But if it is thought upon in a more complex matter people would say that Bert Cates won the case. Brady won the case in some views because Cates was found guilty and had to pay a $500 fine. In another view, Cates was the winner in the case because he ONLY had to pay a $500 fine instead of paying a larger amount or being sent back to jail. Also because at the end of the day he got his perspective out to the public about evolution. Cates got the acknowledgement of being one of the only people that has ever had the courage to speak about their way of thinking. The jury was chosen in a biased form, but by the end of the case, the jury started to beleive in the words and beleifs being brought onto the table by Drummond and Cates. At the end of the day, the jury was just because in a town so biased, the jury still gave Cates a fair advantage at the case.
Brady won the case. However, Drummond was able to humiliate him and make him look like a huge fool. Because Drummond did this, Bert Cates received a less harsh sentence. He was only fined $100 dollars instead of received jail time. Brady's reaction even showed that he wasn't happy with the outcome of the case. Drummond also received an appeal to a higher court which means that the fight isn't over for Bert Cates. The juries decision is understandable. They all believe in religion instead of evolution. Drummonds argument against Brady influenced them to think about what they know and what they may not know. This played a big part in Bert Cates' sentence. I actually think the sentence would have been different based on how the people were acting in the beginning of the story.
To me, it is clear that neither side won anything. In the end, Brady lost his life and Drummond and Bert lost the case. Simply put they both lost. If you think about it, after the case every single person on the planet did what they wanted to do and did not all believe the same idea. On paper, of course, Brady won, and I am sure a lot of people would say that, other than a couple hundred bucks, Bert did not lose anything.
The Jury's decision was unjust since not one person in the courtroom did anything deserving of a fine. The punishment was probably thought up to make short of the case and make everyone happy. This could be seen as understandable but still not doing any good for some peoples lack of being able to understand something.
In fact, this case is contradictory to its self in that it caused more pain and grief in people instead of solving it by trying to get rid of the theory of evolution. It is pointless to argue about and if no one did argue about ideas then life would go along a lot smoother than it is now. On the other hand,I think the only person in that courtroom who is the closest to being right is the reporter Hornbeck. He is the only one who does not try to get rid of one idea so the other can strive and he does not take sides. It is still not important who is right or wrong in this situation but Drummond and Brady could have learned something from someone like Hornbeck.
Finally, not one single person will be right about what rules to live by until they show you a monkey turning into a man, and/or some creature with the power to make anything without any effort. Even then, if it does happen, there will still be questions and that will never change.
Brady won and Cates got a fine. The winner was Brady for he won the case, even though he did not get what he wanted, Cates still was proven guilty. There was also another winner. The next science teacher, who decides to teach evolution instead of what he is supposed to. He is a winner too, because Cates opened up a door, to teaching evolution, and now the next science teacher is going to teach it too and say if Cates did it then i would too.
The loser is Cates, just because he is the first one to break this "law" but the next teacher wouldn't lose as much.
The court case was very fair, because if the any teacher taught something that he or she was not supposed to then there should be a punishment, and a fine is an appropriate punishment.
So...I don't know why people are saying he was charged $500, because Bert was only charged $100, which in such a monumental case, is pocket change. Brady wins the case, but also loses in a way. He was expecting fanfare and celebration, but got such a small victory that it was almost like a slap in the face. He also loses because, well...he dies. Bert and Drummond suffer a small defeat in this battle, but they still come out ahead in the war. The right to think has become a conceivable notion, which was really what Bert and Drummond were trying to accomplish. The jury's decision was understandable. They were probably dazed after watching two intellectuals such as Brady and Drummond go head-to-head like that, so they came up with an insignificant fine to put an end to their confusion.
Sai made an important point: Get your facts straight when referencing the play. The amount of the fine is an important detail not to get incorrect.
Ms. D
What does it really mean to lose? The definition of to lose is to fail inadvertently to retain (something) in such a way that it cannot be immediately recovered. During the book of Inherit the Wind the court ruled Bert guilty and Brady the victor. I believe that in the end Bert/Drummond were the victors and Brady the loser. Berte learned to defend and stay strong for what he believes in.He got his thoughts across to the town making valid points for each of his action, where as Brady ended up before made a fool of as a "bible expert", and he died.I think that the jury's decision wasn't just because Drummond's case brought not only more evidence, but they were prejudice toward all of his witnesses(the scientist). It may have not been just but the ruling was understandable, because the town of hillsbury wasn't ready and will not be ready for a case such as this one for a while so in order to hush everything up and restore some type of order I believe it was necessary.
Technically, Brady won the case, because Bert received a $100 fine. But when really looked at Bert won and Brady lost due to the fact he did not face imprisonment and only received a fine. The fine that was received might not even have to be paid because Drummond said that they were going to appeal this case. Brady not only because Drummond made him look like a fool, but he also lost his life>
In the play “Inherit the Wind” technically Mr. Brady won the case, because the jury accuses Mr. Bert guilty. Mr. Bert is penalized with a fine, but is not sentence to jail. Therefore, Mr. Brady has his own loss, but not being capable of putting Mr. Bert in jail. Who is the real winner in the case? In my opinion I believe Mr. Bert won the case. At the end of act three Mr. Brady looses all the respect and fans, and all the attention is put on Bert. Like Mr. Drummond stated “ What Jury? Twelve men? Millions of people will say you won,” Mr. Bert had gained many new fans, and those who believe that he was right. Mr. Bert ended up getting the best outcome of the trial, and only having to pay 100 dollars. Even those the jury’s decision may be irrelevant, the case had not yet ended. It had only began and will be going to the Supreme court.
Technically speaking, Brady won the case. Although in my opinion, both Brady and Drummond won. The judge pleased both sides by punishing Bert with a fine. Brady's side would be pleased by this because Bert was still being punished in some way. Even though the punishment was minor, they felt as if justice was served. Drummond's side feels like they won because Bert is not charged harshly. 100 dollars is not a huge fine to pay and Bert could have been charged far worse. He could have ended up in jail for the crime he committed. The jury probably felt like they were making the right decision by voting Bert guilty because they are sheltered and do not like change. I can understand why they did what they did but it doesn't make them right.
In the end of the case, I felt that no one "won" the case. Both Brady and Cates were given fair trial, and even though Brady was determined "winner" both were given fair punishment in the end. Cates got away with a mere $500 fine. I think he got away with a small fine because the court secretly wanted to hint to Bert that what he was saying makes him not guilty, but the fact that agreeing with evolution is illegal in Hillsboro, the court had to make him guilty. Brady won the case because the court said so. He was only stating what the rest of the peoples thought was true and everyone knew that going into the case. The jury made and unjust decision because they were siding with their form of government so they would not get in trouble. What they decided was very understandable because I understand that they would want to be put in a situation against the law. At the same time, it does not make it right.
REMINDER:
The blog entries count as a 100 POINT GRADE. Failure to complete them will affect your marking period grade. I expect to see all 31 students responding.
Post a Comment