Inherit the Wind Updated for the 21st Century

[Don]

Inherit the Wind seems dated today. No public schools teach creationism. Evolution is widely accepted as a fact. Now it would be controversial to teach intelligent design. I realized you could take this play and make it much more relevant by changing the plot from a teacher teaching evolution to one teaching intelligent design. You still have the brash confident prosecutor and the washed up politician turned defense lawyer.

For more information see

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10...

or

http://www.amazon.com/Inherit-The-Win...

[Feliks]

I think Gandalf should fly in on the back of one of the eagles and toss the Ring into Mt Doom, saving Sam and Frodo that way

[Don]

Hmm, sound like the type of comment you would hear from creationists 80 years ago.

[Chris]

I don't like the analog at all. In Inherit the Wind, the teacher, Bertram Cates, is being prosecuted by the law for teaching the established scientific consensus in a science classroom. Now, since intelligent design is NOT science, what would the conflict be? That a science teacher SHOULD be teaching philosophy or religion in a science class? I do believe that in this case, the whole meaning of the story would be turned into something entirely different.

[Feliks]

Pardon me. Is the OP saying that he re-wrote an 'update' to this play under his own name? A revision? And published it? I didn't bother to follow the links, sorry. I thought this was purely a "what if.." topic.

I would re-affirm is that creationism is far from 'completely dead' as a controversy, seems like the state of Kansas has continual issues with it. Some school board there just missed installing creationism or the 'Bible as a textbook' a few years ago; Kansas schoolchildren narrowly escaped being a laughingstock by a margin of one vote, if I recall.

No matter. Instinctively, I just wouldn't agree that a play of this much-respected provenance would necessarily be better if 'updated'. Probably for several reasons. Its not just being mindful that this is a stage-play which is still performed and that maintaining a piece of theater-craft accurately is important for its own sake..(and its not just that I rarely think updates to anything ever prove more valuable than the original, which I do).

My reaction is: since 'intelligent design' is just a cozy euphemism for creationism-type belief..the play still does its job effectively. It shouldn't be altered to suit some momentary name-change. 'Intelligent design' could be called something else in a few years. Would the play have to be changed again to keep up with fad?

[Don]

Chris wrote: "I don't like the analog at all. In Inherit the Wind, the teacher, Bertram Cates, is being prosecuted by the law for teaching the established scientific consensus in a science classroom. Now, sinc..."

If a teacher were to introduce intelligent design in a 21st century classroom, it is very likely he or she would get the same type of reaction Scopes got in the 1920s for teach evolution. Evolution was not a consensus this early. It was not an established part of public school science textbooks until the 1950s and 1960s.

[Don]

Feliks wrote: "Pardon me. Is the OP saying that he re-wrote an 'update' to this play under his own name? A revision? And published it? I didn't bother to follow the links, sorry. I thought this was purely a "what..."

It is an easy, but lazy statement to label intelligent design as a euphemism for creationism. They are not the same. My play reveals how this attempt to dismiss intelligent design is a way to avoid debating its merits. Using evolution to explain the creation of life is closer than intelligent design to creationism. Both creationism and evolution rely on faith in place of evidence.

[[deleted user]]

Inherit the Wind.....dated?

Have you even read it?

Dated?

Inherit the Wind is a play about the inevitability of progress. It's message is that no matter how important or loved you once were, you will be left behind if you don't progress. Old ideas give way to new truths and the impossibility of stopping progress.

Inherit the Wind may be more timely NOW than when it was first written.

At the very least, you could never make a valid argument that it's dated.

If you want to write a play about ID then write one. Don't try to ride the coat tails of a great play to do it.

Your play will stand are fall on it's own merits, not by standing on the backs of others.

You could probably learn more about false progressive by reading.......Inherit the Wind.

Dated.

SMH.....