Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate over Science and Religion

Rating:
Summary: The most publicized misdemeanor case in American history
Review: Edward Larson has accomplished something wonderful with this book. In only 266 pages (318 including footnotes and index), he has captured the flow of cultural issues surrounding science, education, and religion in the early twentieth century, the political goals and maneuvering of the parties involved, the actual Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tennessee with the dénouement of the appeal, the falsifying of the events involved in the popular culture, and the ongoing cultural impact of the issues involved in this trial.

As I read I found myself marveling at how Larson so richly captures the cultural forces coming together like tectonic plates and crashing into the Scopes trial. I haven't seen as fair a treatment of the issues involved for all the varying parties (there were many more self-interested folks than Darrow and Bryan) on any other subject. To have that time before the trial captured in such a beautiful way is very valuable.

As others have noted, the notion of the trial started as a publicity stunt to promote the hard luck town of Dayton, TN. The ACLU wanted a narrowly defined test case to overturn the laws forbidding the teaching of evolution. Darrow and his crowd wanted to attack religion more than work out the civil liberties issues involved, Bryan cared more about the rights of the parents as taxpayers to control what their children were taught. Remember, universal public education was still a rather new thing in 1925 and parents then, as now, want to have the education support them in raising their children. The education establishment then, as now, feels a responsibility to teach what they think best.

Bryan and many others were also concerned about the political uses to which evolution had recently been put in the name of survival of the fittest. It isn't a simple issue and shouldn't be turned into a cartoon. Especially since we are in some ways still grappling with these issues.

Yes, Bryan was also a Fundamentalist (although some were more Fundamental than him because he didn't insist on the strict 6 days of 24 hours for the Creation), but imposing that belief wasn't his goal.

Clarifying the truth of the trial versus the popular perceptions in our culture provided by "Only Yesterday" and "Inherit the Wind" is a very valuable service provided by this book. However, the culture seems to want the oversimplification and distortions of "Inherit the Wind" more than the truth of Scopes being a willing participant in a test case more or less on a lark. Or that Scopes never really "taught" evolution. He had used the textbook provided to him by the school and it discussed evolution, but he may never have gotten to that section since he wasn't the regular biology teacher. He taught physics, math, and football and was substituting in the biology class.

The book has a number of very nice pictures that also help capture the period of the trial and the characters involved.

One especially small quibble is that the book does not address the difference between the anti-clerical activities in Great Britain and their political nature because of the state power of the Church and the anti-clerical activities in the United States that were really anti-religion. In fact, a great deal of the fundamentalist backlash against evolution came out of this anti-religion sentiment.

I think it a reasonable view to say that most of the reaction against evolution wasn't from a considered rejection of the theory, but a reaction against being attacked by those who wanted to free America of religion. We didn't have a state church, although most in power were also believers (or publicly posed as believers). The anti-clerical movement was transplanted but to somewhat different effect here than in Europe where evolution was not seen as necessarily inconsistent with Faith (as it has become to be viewed here). But this is a trivial point compared to many wonderful insights this book provides.

Rating:
Summary: The most publicized misdemeanor case in American history
Review: Edward Larson has accomplished something wonderful with this book. In only 266 pages (318 including footnotes and index), he has captured the flow of cultural issues surrounding science, education, and religion in the early twentieth century, the political goals and maneuvering of the parties involved, the actual Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tennessee with the dénouement of the appeal, the falsifying of the events involved in the popular culture, and the ongoing cultural impact of the issues involved in this trial.

As I read I found myself marveling at how Larson so richly captures the cultural forces coming together like tectonic plates and crashing into the Scopes trial. I haven't seen as fair a treatment of the issues involved for all the varying parties (there were many more self-interested folks than Darrow and Bryan) on any other subject. To have that time before the trial captured in such a beautiful way is very valuable.

As others have noted, the notion of the trial started as a publicity stunt to promote the hard luck town of Dayton, TN. The ACLU wanted a narrowly defined test case to overturn the laws forbidding the teaching of evolution. Darrow and his crowd wanted to attack religion more than work out the civil liberties issues involved, Bryan cared more about the rights of the parents as taxpayers to control what their children were taught. Remember, universal public education was still a rather new thing in 1925 and parents then, as now, want to have the education support them in raising their children. The education establishment then, as now, feels a responsibility to teach what they think best.

Bryan and many others were also concerned about the political uses to which evolution had recently been put in the name of survival of the fittest. It isn't a simple issue and shouldn't be turned into a cartoon. Especially since we are in some ways still grappling with these issues.

Yes, Bryan was also a Fundamentalist (although some were more Fundamental than him because he didn't insist on the strict 6 days of 24 hours for the Creation), but imposing that belief wasn't his goal.

Clarifying the truth of the trial versus the popular perceptions in our culture provided by "Only Yesterday" and "Inherit the Wind" is a very valuable service provided by this book. However, the culture seems to want the oversimplification and distortions of "Inherit the Wind" more than the truth of Scopes being a willing participant in a test case more or less on a lark. Or that Scopes never really "taught" evolution. He had used the textbook provided to him by the school and it discussed evolution, but he may never have gotten to that section since he wasn't the regular biology teacher. He taught physics, math, and football and was substituting in the biology class.

The book has a number of very nice pictures that also help capture the period of the trial and the characters involved.

One especially small quibble is that the book does not address the difference between the anti-clerical activities in Great Britain and their political nature because of the state power of the Church and the anti-clerical activities in the United States that were really anti-religion. In fact, a great deal of the fundamentalist backlash against evolution came out of this anti-religion sentiment.

I think it a reasonable view to say that most of the reaction against evolution wasn't from a considered rejection of the theory, but a reaction against being attacked by those who wanted to free America of religion. We didn't have a state church, although most in power were also believers (or publicly posed as believers). The anti-clerical movement was transplanted but to somewhat different effect here than in Europe where evolution was not seen as necessarily inconsistent with Faith (as it has become to be viewed here). But this is a trivial point compared to many wonderful insights this book provides.

Rating:
Summary: Gripping journallistic account!
Review: Edward Larson has done us a favor by writing on an often both neglected and misunderstood piece of history in the Scopes trial. The author handles all involved with an even hand minus the kid gloves so often used in the name of 'objective' journalism. Criticism (and praise)is given to all parties when it is deserved.

One glaring problem. The reader quickly picks up that, in Larsons view,- and I tend to agree- the case became more about evolution versus creationism than about whether Scopes violated the Tennessee antievolution law or even the constitutionality of the law itself. So the problem becomes that, in Larsons desire to give us a journalistic account of the trial, he never comments on the issues of law involved. For instance, we know that the defense read the antievolution law to prohibit teaching evolution ONLY if it's account differs with the bible. The defense's challenge was that evolution can be taught in accordance with biblical creationism. Hence, Scopes broke no law. Although the scholars to prove this were never able to testify, it would've been nice to hear comments on legal issues like this one.

I also could've done without some of the tedium of the pre-trial explanation. Some of the detail was repetitive. I'm not sure how many times we needed to be reminded of the fact that the ACLU did not want Darrow's name associated with the trial.

Still, this is a great read that moves like a legal-thriller of the first rate. At last, an author has found a way to give scholarly treatment and serious attention to a trial looked on by many as a joke.

Rating:
Summary: History as Myth, a careful reinterpretation
Review: I come to the book as part of a self-directed study of the issues involved in the creation-evolution-design debate(CED). I deeply enjoy history and appreciate good historical writing. This book is such good, informative history. The author is a careful, balanced, objective-striving historian, and i like his writing. His intention is to dissipate the myths that have grown up around the Scopes trial via a careful reinterpretation of the events and personalities that were involved. To a very great extent he does so. My only sadness in reading the book is that it reaffirms my belief that very little has changed in the conservative/fundamentalist community since the trial, an unfortunate problem. For i continually hear the exact same arguments on the discussion boards, it seems no one is listening to books like this.

W.J.Bryan and C.Darrow are the primary characters involved in the trial. Their polarization of the issues as between religion and godless atheism on Bryan's part, and between science as reason and fundamentalism as unthinking faith are exactly the polarizing demands from their respective successors today. The real issues (like one line in the book pointed to epistemology), the problem of taking past each other, the radical 'emptying' of any compromise positions, these are still the issues people fight about. If you are interested in these things this book will be a gentle introduction to the historical and continuing character of them.

The book is history, it doesnt try to answer these perennial questions, but rather is trying to clear the field of misconceptions as in the movie "Inherit the Wind". It has places that if the author had desired to could have been jumping off points for extended discussions, as in the introduction of the theistic evolutionist as expert witnesses. But this was not followed up, as it was not the author's intention to move past the history towards solutions, sadly for i think his ideas and research could help here. Maybe that is another book for him.

One real strength is the presentation of the trial as politically contrived, for the purpose of bringing people and money to Dayton. Contrived as a platform for the presentation of ideas or the playing to the crowd. I ended up with a greater respect for Bryan and a lesser one for Darrow, having read what their intentions were, and how they tried to accomplish them. Bryan ends up as an anomolous character, progressive in his politics, but holding to a somewhat childish faith with an inability to logically inform or express it. Sadly i feel that he died before he could begin to learn for the experiences of the trial and grow as a result of the troubles he had.

It's a good book, but i dont know who to recommend it to. Perhaps a history buff, or someone who liked Inherit the Wind and wants to learn the truth of the issues. It didnt really give me a lot of details about the issues in CED that i didnt already dig up myself, but it did confirm the fundamental correctness of several things i have thought about.

Rating:
Summary: Finally, a true accounting!
Review: Inherit the Wind is good entertainment... but it's entertainment, and only loosely based on facts. Read this book, if you're interested in the true story of the Scopes trial.

This book is roughly divided into 3 sections. 1., the time before the trial, political and social context, and the people involved. 2. The trial itself, and 3. after the trial, the appeals, and some comments on modern-day Dayton, TN.

The background information is the largest section of this book, and is the most valuable. It's interesting to hear who William Jennings Bryan was as a person, how the ACLU became involved, the personalities of Scopes, Darrow, Bryan, as well as the other lawyers involved, the citizens of Dayton, and the judge. You will understand that contrary to the popular view that Scopes was harassed by the religious folk in town, he volunteered to take part, for the sole purpose of testing the anti-evolution law that had just hit the books. You will read how Darrow and Bryan both expanded the issues in the trial, so that religion and evolution became the focus of the trial, instead of simpler questions about what can be taught in school, and educational freedoms. The latter is what the ACLU was testing, although the former became the scope of the trial, much to their chagrin.

The trial and wrap-ups were also interesting. I was a bit disappointed that the trial description was so short, relatively. I would have liked to read more transcripts of it, hence the 4 stars instead of 5.

Overall, a fascinating and educational book, that is still relevant today. The issues discussed in the Scopes trial are prevalent in modern society, and played out daily in our classrooms.

Rating:
Summary: Monkey Myths
Review: It is incredibly ironic that the Scopes trial, promised by both the prosecution and the defense to be a battle for the truth, is represented in popular & religious culture and, most unfortunately, taught in classrooms in a largely false manner. This book won the Pulitzer Prize in History for good reason; it is the first (and best) attempt to accurately reflect not only the Scopes trial but also the events before it and the three-quarters worth of a century that followed.

As one who fell asleep while trying to watch "Inherit the Wind," I find the truth far more rivetting. The bredth of the defense team.. and the strong convictions and performances of Arthur Garfield Hays and Dudley Field Moore are entirely bypassed in popular history.

The only fault with the work is Larson's apparent effort to be so objective that no one is offended. This causes him to refrain from defending Darrow from years of attacks for his "cross-examination" (outside the presence of the jury and ultimately stricken from the record) of Bryan. The prosecution-- and Bryan in particular-- had promised/threatened/guaranteed a showdown.. to prove that evolution was false, especially if one accepts a literal reading of the bible. The reason Bryan was called to the stand and Darrow was able to question him as he did without the jury present is because the PROSECUTION changed strategies. Unable to find a single competent scientist to support its view, the prosecution was forced to argue against Malone's efforts to show that christianity and evolution were compatable. By keeping out the evidence of the defense's religious and scientific experts, the only defense left was to demostrate the absurdity of Bryan particular views. Though Darrow no doubt enjoyed it, his treatment of Bryan was the third line of defense, not the first.

The manipulation of the facts surrounding Scopes and a rise in the number of so-called scientists pushing creationism demonstrates that, in spite of our supposed rapid intellectual growth as a nation, there are more individuals than ever willing to say, do, or believe whatever will give them control, power, or money. It is a shame that after more than 75 years, Bryan would today have no trouble finding an "expert" witness.

Rating:
Summary: No more monkeying with history
Review: It's one of the defining scenes of our century. The young science teacher, John Scopes, is chased from his class by a rabid bunch of anti-evolutionists. He's thrown in jail and a show trial is set up to punish him. Then Clarence Darrow arrives ... the white knight for science and rationalism. In a brilliant oration he destroys the older fundamentalist, William Jennings Bryan, exposing him as a fool and winning the case, making the world free for evolution. One small problem.

The truth is nothing like that happy story. What you're thinking of is the plot of Inheirit the Wind, a second-rate movie that used the Scopes trial to dramatize the McCarthy hearings. Spencer Tracy and Gene Kelley weren't in Dayton for the trial, and what really happened was far from black and white.

But in the hands of Edward Larson, it's also far more interesting. Larson's book, Summer for the Gods is a brialliantly reasoned look at what led to the trial, the trial itself, and its continuing impact on society. (Okay, on American society ... but it's still interesting.) Larson manages a tremendously difficult task: he manages to be unbiased and dispassionate without becoming dull. And he walks the line masterfully. There were times when I couldn't honestly say whose "side" Larson was on ... which is kind of the point. I read a lot of history, and it's very seldom I come across something that's so even-handed. Which would be a triumph in itself, even if it weren't so darn readable. For the rest of the review, visit my web page at exn.net/printedmatter

Rating:
Summary: A lively and timely account of the Scopes Trial
Review: Like many of my generation, I learned of the Scopes "Monkey" Trial through the Lawrence and Lee play, "Inherit the Wind." Edward J. Larson's Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate over Science and Religion is a fine and lively historical account of the trial and its aftermath. Winner of the 1998 Pulitzer Prize, Larson's book sets the battle between fundamentalist religion and the "modern" science of Darwinism in both an historical and cultural context. In the 1920s, several states attempted to pass anti-evolution laws, and Tennessee finally succeeded in 1925. Thereafter, the ACLU found a test plaintiff in teacher John Scopes, and a test venue in the sleepy town of Dayton, Tennessee, which hoped to use the trial to "get on the map" and increase tourism. Using newspaper accounts, memoirs, and other contemporaneous sources, Larson displays in vivid detail both the seriousness and naivete of the battle between religion and science, William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow. He also argues, convincingly for me, that the trial did not -- contrary to the Lawrence and Lee depiction -- leave Bryan a broken man (although he died within a week of the verdict). Going beyond the trial and its immediate aftermath, the final section of this book examines how later historians and writers -- including Lawrence and Lee -- have interpreted and often mis-interpreted the trial for later generations. In particular, Larson argues that "Inherit the Wind", like the Arthur Miller classic "The Crucible", must be viewed as both a product of and attack upon the McCarthy era of the 1950's. This is an insightful and enjoyable account.

Rating:
Summary: A Fine Work
Review: Prof. Larson has done an outstanding job with his study of the famous "Scopes Trial". The characters are vivid and the writing is wonderful. You can feel the heat in Dayton and the discomfort as Darrow puts Bryan on the stand to make a fool of the Great Commoner. Bryan gets a fair hearing and Larson shows that he was much more complex than Darrow tried to paint him to be. Well researched and well written. A great read.

Rating:
Summary: Good book, but favors humanistic view
Review: Sadly, it is only too true that in modern-day America, to get a truly lucid view of facts and history one often has to look to secular scholars. In the past many of the greatest works, in any sphere of life or calling, were authored by men of biblical faith. For example, Issac Newton, a prolific writer on matters of science (and acknowledged as the greatest scientist who ever lived) actually devoted more words to commentary on the Bible. Therefore if one desires a truly comprehensive and fairly accurate account of the "Trial of the Century", this is a good book. No question about it.

Nevertheless one must be prepared for the subtle bias throughout this work, in favor of the pro-humanist, pro-evolution cabal. For example this book contains a full-page photograph of Clarence Darrow (who was, after all, only a lawyer) and no photograph at all of William Jennings Bryan, who was one of the greatest statesman (regardless of one's opinion of the man) of his time.

Dr. Larson correctly points out that the trial was part of the struggle between a "majoritarian" vs. "individual rights" interpretation of our constitution. The indivdual rights interpretation is dominant today, but that doesn't necessarily make it right. You wouldn't know that from reading this book.

As I write this review I have on my desk the results of an ABC News poll, released 02/15/04, that demonstrated 61% of all Americans believe God created the world in six literal 24-hour days. Read this book for a good and accurate account of the Scopes trial but don't be lured in by Mr. Larson's patronizing insinuations that any American who believes in the Biblical account of creation is not only half-witted, but in the minority. Facts (like those revealed in the ABC poll) are troublesome things Dr. Larson.