God Wins, But Does He Really?

IT says a lot about the glacial slowness of some religious and political debates in the U.S. that Inherit the Wind, the famed 1955 play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee now playing on Broadway at the Lyceum Theatre, seems more relevant today than the era in which it was written.

A fictionalized account of a very real event, the 1925 Scopes Trial (or the Monkey Trial, as it quickly became known), it resulted in schoolteacher John Scopes’s conviction for teaching Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution to a high school class in the “buckle of the Bible belt.”

In 1925 Tennessee state law mandated the teaching of what is currently called creationism. Believers in the creationist doctrine then and indeed now —maintained that the earth is no more than 6,000 years old, and that God created it and the entire universe in just seven days.

But, not surprisingly, most scientists won’t swallow the hypothesis that states “there exists a super-human, supernatural intelligence that deliberately designed and created the universe and everything in it, including us.”

That question who made the world, including us is still a thorny one; with one side claiming it’s all God’s work and all debate should end there; and with the other side, the international scientific community, claiming that life on earth is the work of billions of years of chance, science and evolution. For believers creation is an act of faith; for scientists, creation is the result of evolution and natural selection.

These staunchly opposing teams square off from the very beginning of Inherit the Wind, dividing the stage, the characters and indeed some of the audience members, who cheered loudly when their particular views were espoused.

In Tennessee in 1925, creationism was not merely an idea, it had the force of law behind it if you believed God made the world then you were completely in step with your ostentatiously religious neighbors, but teach Charles Darwin’s theories to your neighbors high school kids and you were going to jail.

It becomes clear early on in Inherit the Wind that only one official version will make it out of the courtroom. But as the play makes clear, something far more interesting than a run of the mill religion versus science debate is occurring, because hidden beneath all this very public wrangling lies a far more unsettling question: what makes us moral? Does the fear of God keep us good?

Cast as the irascible Yankee lawyer Henry Drummond, Christopher Plummer quickly turns his attention to this rather troubling question, skillfully demolishing the argument that we need religion in order to be good. Instead he maintains that our morality has a far more Darwinian explanation we possess a natural empathy to further our race and smooth its path; we are good because it manifestly benefits us.

As Matthew Harrison Brady, Drummond’s inherently decent but increasingly demagogic “God fearing” opponent, Brian Dennehy gives a barnstormer performance as a man possessed by an idea that may no longer match the landscape of fact.

Initially convinced of the righteousness of his cause, Dennehy artfully shows us what it costs him to support his faith based beliefs. When faith becomes inflexibility as it quickly does here and when religion trumps reason, an individual and a community chart dangerous waters.

As E. K. Hornbeck, the wisecracking journalist sent down to cover the latest Baptists versus science spat, Denis O’Hare brings an unexpected but thoroughly welcome showman’s flair to the proceedings. Half Coney Island huckster, half philosopher poet, he’s a charmingly acid tongued commentator and his observations bring some welcome levity to the show.

Director Doug Hughes’ stagecraft is unmistakable, and he brings wise and witty touches to every scene in play, quietly allowing the good old boy religious fundamentalism of his 34 member cast to transform at crucial moments into the unquestioning fascism it is always threatening to become.

The extreme heat of the summer courtroom is alluded to in every trial scene, making the sweltering humidity a character in the drama. fans appear, jackets are shed and positions are taken.

But in the end the defense lose their case God wins! although John Scopes can claim a victory in the court of public opinion.

“You don’t suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you?” says lawyer Drummond, with a half smile.

It’s that quiet realization that marks the play’s endurance, and its continuing relevance.