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

by Edward J. Larson

The Pulitzer Prize-winning history of the Scopes Trial and the battle over evolution and creation in America's schools.


In the summer of 1925, the sleepy hamlet of Dayton, Tennessee, became the setting for one of the twentieth century's most contentious courtroom dramas, pitting William Jennings Bryan and the anti-Darwinists against a teacher named John Scopes, represented by Clarence Darrow and the ACLU, in a famous debate over science, religion, and their place in public education. That trial marked the start of a battle that continues to this day in cities and states throughout the country.


Edward Larson's classic Summer for the Gods -- winner of the Pulitzer Prize in History -- is the single most authoritative account of this pivotal event. An afterword assesses the state of the battle between creationism and evolution, and points the way to how it might potentially be resolved.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Science, Religion, Politics, American History, Law

352 pages, Paperback

First published June 26, 1997

About the author

Edward J. Larson is the author of many acclaimed works in American history, including the Pulitzer Prize–winning history of the Scopes Trial, Summer for the Gods. He is University Professor of History and Hugh and Hazel Darling Chair in Law at Pepperdine University, and lives with his family near Los Angeles.

Reviews

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

It seemed a propitious time to read Edward Larson’s Summer for the Gods. This past February, Bill Nye made the (unfortunate, lose-lose) decision to debate young earth creationist Ken Ham at the Creationist Museum . Four months earlier, Texas – which has enormous sway in the textbook industry – once again began working on legislation to “teach the controversy,” a euphemistic way of saying “teach creationism” alongside evolution.

This is all well and good, because there is literally nothing else going on in the world that demands our attention.

The evolution controversy (manufactured and for-profit) is not a new phenomena. It has been brewing ever since Charles Darwin wrote his impenetrable classic, On the Origin of Species, which sits unread on my bookshelf, right next to Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations.

One of the first– and undoubtedly most famous – salvos in this ongoing (and thoroughly ridiculous battle) was the 1925 case of State of Tennessee vs. John T. Scope, more familiarly known as the Scopes (or Scopes Monkey) Trial. Undoubtedly you’ve heard of the case. Perhaps, like me, you sometimes drink wine and watch Turner Classic Movies and saw part of Inherit the Wind before passing out one night.

Summer of the Gods is the brisk (266 pages of text), readable, Pulitzer Prize winning story of this seminal case. And if you’re like me, and your knowledge about this event is restricted to imbibing Yellow Tail chardonnay and watching Spencer Tracey spar with Frederic March, you will be surprised by what you learn.

Most surprisingly, perhaps, is that the Scopes Trial began as a publicity stunt. Whenever a controversial law is passed, opponents of that law will look for a test case to challenge the law’s constitutionality. Tennessee’s law, the Butler Act, forbade the teaching of evolution in public schools.

(The Butler Act made teaching evolution a jail-able offense, a fact that made even supporters of the law uncomfortable. Marinate on that, for a second. A law that would put teachers in jail for teaching a subject. In America. Jailed in America for teaching. It boggles the mind.)

The American Civil Liberties Union offered to provide the defense of anyone charged with violating the Butler Act. This would allow them to get the case before the State – and ultimately – United States Supreme Court, where they hoped it would be struck down as a violation of the First Amendment.

In Robinson’s Drugstore in Dayton, Tennessee, an entrepreneurial coal company manufacturer and several other conspirators – including the school superintendent – decided that a trial on the law would be great for tourism. With that in mind, and with all parties colluding, including the prosecutors and local judges, a teacher named John Scopes (with minimal local ties, for obvious reasons) was recruited to serve as the defendant. He was indicted, went before the judge, and was released without bond pending trial.

(It is unclear that Scopes ever actually violated the law. In later years he denied teaching evolution subsequent to the Butler Act. At his trial, the students called to testify against him – with Scopes’ blessing – were vague in the extreme. If Scopes ever taught them evolution, he didn't teach it very well).

The run-up to the trial promised everything the Dayton chamber of commerce could’ve hoped for. The prosecutors brought in William Jennings Bryan, a former secretary of state, presidential nominee, and ardent creationist. The defense countered with a controversial choice (even among other defense attorneys): Clarence Darrow, a latter day cross between Richard Dawkins and Barry Scheck.

The defense eventually settled on a strategy of arguing that evolution and the Bible were compatible. After the prosecution staged its case-in-chief, showing that Scopes taught evolution in violation of the law, Judge John Raulston suddenly tired of the spectacle. He ruled that the defense’s proposed experts were irrelevant to the narrow question of whether or not Scopes taught evolution.

To preserve a record for appeal, the defense made an offer of proof outside the presence of the jury. Darrow also shocked everyone by calling Bryan to the stand (and Bryan shocked everyone by taking the stand). The Darrow-Bryan examination is the most famous aspect of the Scopes trial, the part you’ve heard of even if you don’t know anything else about the case. Interestingly, Judge Raulston eventually determined Bryan’s testimony irrelevant and had it expunged from the record.

With its strategy thwarted, the defense conceded Scope’s conviction. Scopes was fined $100 and the defense appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court. The high court upheld the conviction, but overturned the sentence (the fine) on a technicality. Then, in an extremely unusual bit of dicta, they recommended that the prosecution not retry the case. The purpose of this suggestion was to keep the defense from appealing to the United States Supreme Court.

Larson tracks these many twists and turns in clear and transparent prose. He is a law professor, but writes for laypeople. He is good at explaining the different legal strategies and nuances of a fairly convoluted proceeding.

The tone of Summer for the Gods is restrained. This is not by any means a polemic. Larson does not have an axe to grind. Of course, I’m sure there are certain readers who will find Larson’s lack of bias to be a bias in and of itself. (It might also have made the book a bit more lively. Objectivity is fine; subjectivity is more fun).

If there is a bias, it is the bias of fact and history. Neither Darrow or Bryan come out looking very good. Darrow is portrayed as something of a jerk, gravely disliked by his putative colleagues (the ACLU tried its best to get him off the case). Bryan simply looks like a fool. Darrow’s decision to call Bryan was a sublime strategic move. Even though it did not change the trial, it hurt the creationist cause. Bryan’s steadfast reliance on a Biblical interpretation led him to deny natural realities. When you read the transcript of his examination, Bryan seems an ignorant buffoon.

(Bryan died in his sleep shortly after the trial. Darrow stated he “died of a busted belly.” H.L. Mencken allegedly remarked, “We killed the son-of-a-bitch!”).

Maybe the most stunning thing about Summer for the Gods is that it was written in 1997. It feels like it came out yesterday. It is disheartening, to say the least, that this issue is still alive in 2014, and that we’ve walked in a large circle since 1925, ending right back in Dayton where we started.

Due in part to Supreme Court rulings on the First Amendment, the nature of the debate has changed. It is no longer about keeping evolution out, but of allowing alternate explanations in. The “competing theories” movement is far more subtle and nuanced than anything propounded by William Jennings Bryan. That’s what makes it so perfidious.

I don’t pretend to know with any certainty how the world began. On most days, I don’t even care. But I do know that in science, “theory” does not mean something scribbled on a napkin during happy hours at Applebee’s. It is an idea that gets put through the scientific method, that is verified through observations and experiments. Evolution rightly belongs in public school science classes. Creationism does not.

I went to Catholic schools from fifth grade all the way through law school. I learned a couple things from that. First, Catholic schools are expensive. Second, that the separation of church and state works, even within a parochial school. The math classes I went to taught math. The science classes taught science. The theology classes taught theology. It worked.

My experience does not point the way to an answer. It’s obvious that the solution it to maintain separation, to have different spheres for science and faith. It’s equally obvious, as Larson notes, that huge numbers of people view the Bible as authoritative on matters of science (and on every other aspect of life). For certain church leaders, the controversy is the giving tree, inspiring activism and donations and publicity. Larson is probably correct in noting that the Scopes Trial is not the trial of the century, but more aptly the trial of the centuries.

A verdict is not expected any time soon.

[Susan O · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 - Overall an enjoyable and easy read. Excellent summary in the Afterword of the current (as of 2006) status of the creation vs. evolution debate.

[Theo Logos · Rating 5 out of 5]

”Scopes is not on trial. civilization is on trial.”
Clarance Darrow


They called it “the trial of the century.” (They called lots of trials that, but in this case, its lingering significance almost justified the hyperbole.) It was a huge spectacle — an event where the defendant voluntarily incriminated himself to become a test case, where small town Dayton, Tennessee boosters campaigned hard to host the trial, which attracted the nation’s media, and where legends of American politics and jurisprudence (William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow) faced off as adversarial champions of their respective causes. It became a contest between faith and science, revealed religion and rational inquiry, majoritarian democracy and minority and individual rights. It was a seismic event within America’s culture wars, still reverberating in today’s headlines, yet likely most of what you think you know about the Scopes Monkey Trial is wrong.

Most people who are aware of this 1925 trial know it not from its actual history, but from Inherit the Wind, a movie based on a McCarthy era play. Inherit the Wind was using the historic Scopes trial as a vehicle to address McCarthyism, and as such was less interested in the actual history of the event than in what it could be used to say about the events of the 1950s Red Scare. Edward Larson’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book is a corrective, illuminating the Scopes Trial as a historical event within its original context, its cultural significance, and its factual, rather than mythic or propaganda outcome. Summer for the Gods is of vital importance, as the issues at stake in this century-old trial are still open and ongoing battles in our own time. Highly recommend.

[Porter Broyles · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have only labelled a few Pulitzers as “Had any other book won, it would have been an injustice,” but Summer for the Gods earns that ranking.

The book capitivated me from the very beginning. It starts off citing the discourse between William Jennings Bryant and Clarence Darrow. Bryant, the 4 time presidential candidate and former Secretary of State, was arguing for the prosecution of Scopes. Clarence Darrow, already known as “the Attorney for the Damned”, had taken up the cause of Thomas Scopes. The two had a history---and their encounter in the trial was the stuff of legend.

After hooking the reader with this witty banter, the introduction ends. Chapter 1 starts off with the standard history of Lamarckian and Darwinian history. Just as the reader starts to think, “Oh no, this is simply another book about evolution” a twist is introduced. It is not about the theory of evolution, but about how said theory was introduced and received by the public as a whole.

I knew that the Scope's trial was essentially staged---that Scopes had been recruited to be a test case, but I did not realize the extent to which that was true.

I didn't realize that he had been recruited by city to challenge a law that had no penalty and no real intention of being enforced, but would put Dayton, TN on the map. That they were responding to a call from the ACLU to challenge the law, and Scopes was a substitute teacher with no friends/family (e.g. he had nothing to lose.)

When the case was started---and the ACLU came to Scopes defense---there was a familial attitude between the ACLU and city prosecutors. It was all for show after all.

Then William Jennings Bryant---four time presidential candidate and former Secretary of State---comes to the rescue. The city can't turn him down, but suddenly it's not a game! WJB is serious about prosecuting Scopes. He saw the trial as an open and shut case---the state had the right and obligation to establish curriculum’s and set standards. Right or wrong, it was not the purview of a teacher to supersede the state's role.

But Clarence Darrow steps in to defend him. (One thing the book doesn't do is show that Darrow and WJB had a personal animosity that went back decades!) Darrow put the entirety of revealed religion, creationism, and most importantly (to Darrow) WJB on trial. I’m not going to go into details on the trial or results, don’t want to spoil the book too much.

But the trial ends with about 20-30% of the book left!

The last few chapters are captivating.

First, Larson explores how the trial has become immortalized in America’s national consciousness. Apparently, while it capture media headlines at the time, it had almost become forgotten until a historian used it as the central object of the 1920s and Robert E Lee (a playwright not the general) wrote the play/movie “Inherent the Wind.” “Inherent the Wind” was a protest against McCarthyism, but has become the principal way in which people know/remember the Scopes Trial. Larson highlights the various ways in which the play failed to accurately portray the characters and events. It does not purport to be the trial itself---the names are all changed---but for most people this mythical presentation has become reality.

Second, the book talks about the legacy of Scopes and the Evolution/Creation debate. For example, when a related case (Epperson v Arkansas) came before the Supreme Court in the late 60’s, the Supreme Court Judge Abe Fortis fought to ensure that the case was decided upon religious freedom grounds. Fortis was a Jewish Tennessee high schooler during the Scopes trial and realized the risk associated with religion dictating scientific discourse in the school. His majority opinion in Epperson, however, ended up backfiring on him. It became the foundation upon which fundamentalist fought to have Creationism taught in public schools!

A strong five star review!

[Daniel Solera · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the last year, I have developed an insatiable fascination for the clash between religion and science, specifically as this encounter relates to social policy.  The famous Scopes trial (also commonly referred to as "the Monkey Trial") was the most fervently hyped and widely publicized legal dispute on this matter, and Edward Larson's book does the confrontation justice. 

The book is divided into three sections:

Before:
Larson begins by detailing the intellectual leaps that les to Charles Darwin's theories on evolution, followed by the rise of Christian fundamentalism and its rejection of the concept on religious and ethical grounds.  The global climate at the turn of the century leads religious groups to associate Darwinism with wanton brutality in the shape of World War I.  Finally, with Darwinism removing God from the picture, the Tennessee state legislature forbade its teaching.  Shortly thereafter, a group of citizens from Dayton decide to "test" the law, using a local science teacher as their guinea pig. 

During:
Aside from being a high-profile debate between agnosticism and theism, the Scopes trial was also a battle of big personalities. The defense counsel Clarence Darrow was an intimidating yet charming lawyer, famous for his controversial clients. William Jennings Bryan, arguing for the prosecution (though not as legal counsel), had three decades of political campaigns and speech circuits under his belt - Bryan alone was responsible for drawing large crowds to Dayton.  Furthermore, each side had their own philosophy and legal strategy. Darrow wanted to frame the issue as an assault on intelligence, while Bryan aimed to keep a narrower focus, arguing that it was a matter of upholding a majoritarian statute.  It's this dynamic and each player's celebrity status that elevated this trial's status to that of a spectacle. 

After:
Larson details the related events that have taken place since 1925 and the familiar arguments that continue to surface. His style is very journalistic and uneditorial, which means it's dry and very collected, though his bias towards science isn't successfully veiled. 

This was a great read for many reasons, the most notable of which is the narration of the trial itself with Larson's characterization of each important figure allowing for electric court room scenes to unfold brilliantly.  But also noteworthy are the questions his research asks: What should be the statute of limitations on government by the majority? Who should decide public school curricula? Why are Christian fundamentalists so opposed to the Darwinian model when they readily accept the Copernican model?

I recommend this book for anyone interested in the intersection between politics, science and religion. It is a perfect foundation for the understanding of the ensuing debate.    

[Sher · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 This book leads up to the Scopes Trials by explaining the issues of tension between religion and evolution well before the trial. Williams Jennings Bryant is well covered. The trial is covered in detail and also what impact the controversy had on the debate going forward. Most readers will remember the Scopes Trial from the film Inherit the Wind, and this book makes clear what was accurate in that film and what was not. Intelligent Design today is covered too. It's really a comprehensive and interesting look at the trial and all of its implications on education, law, and the debate with science and religion.

[Stefania Dzhanamova · Rating 4 out of 5]

The American controversy over evolution and creation is mainly fought over what is taught in US public school biology classes. Actually, neither someone opposes the teaching of evolution, nor there is a serious debate among biologists over the essential evolutional concept of common descent. The discussion focuses on theology and philosophy. Critics of the evolution usually demand removing it from the classroom, balancing it with some other form of creationist instruction, or teaching it as “just a theory”.

The trial of John Scopes highlighted the first phase of antievolutionism, marked by efforts to remove the evolution from the high school biology classroom altogether. From the outset, the so-called antievolution crusade was seen as evidence of a new rupture between traditional values and modernity. However, the antievolutionism did not cause that rupture; it simply exposed it. By the early 20th century, studies began detecting a widening gap between the God-fearing American majority and the disbelieving cultural elite. Not that the elite wanted to denounce biblical revelation, but the rise of rational modes of analysis made it unbelievable.
No idea split the modernists from the fundamentalists more than the Darwinian theory of human evolution. It was the scientific method in general, as applied to all aspects of life, that lay at core of modernity, but Darwinism was crucial in applying that method to the key issues of human morality and biological origins.

The Scopes Trial of 1925 has had an enormous impact on the national relationship between science and religion. It not only symbolized modernist VS fundamentalist debate, but also shaped the development of religious freedom in America.

Summer for the Gods comprehends a broad scope of subjects. Edward J. Larson creates a very detailed analysis of the trial itself, its immortalizing in the nation’s consciousness, and the creationist-evolutionist debate. Throughly researched, compelling, and informative.

[Pamela · Rating 5 out of 5]

"It's déjà vu all over again.", as the wag said and that's the feeling you wind up with after finishing Edward J. Larson's Summer For the Gods: The Scope's Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion. The arguments and counter-arguments discussed in this excellent book about the famous "Monkey" trial of 1925 recur again and again in our own time. I have no doubt that there are court cases winding their way through the judicial maze even now concerning the teaching of evolution in public schools. It is a constant hot button issue for a segment of American citizens.

In the 1920's the ACLU was interested in freedom of speech and expression issues and when the Butler Act was passed in Tennessee, they became interested in developing a test case. They offered to defend any teacher charged for teaching the descent of man from Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Dayton, Tennessee, on the other hand, saw the offer as an opportunity to garner publicity for their town and persuaded a substitute biology teacher, John Scopes, to become the defendant. Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan promptly came on board, offering their services for respectively, the defense and the prosecution. Each had their own personal ax to grind. The game was now on. The spectacle had now begun.

The book is divided neatly into Before, During, and After. It covers all the issues in detail and if most of your information comes from the movie versions of this trial, you will be amazed and surprised at how much more interesting this story really is. Complex in its arguments and pertinent to today's headlines as well, this one is a definite Don't Miss!

[Helga Cohen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Larson’s Pulitzer Prize winning book “Summer for the Gods” was a very enlightening book. I really like reading about the conflict between science and religion and getting the true story of this famous “Trial of the Century”.
This book gave a great history of the Scopes Trial or the well-known “Monkey Trial”. He describes the run-up to the trial and the trial and the outcome and what it has meant for American society and American culture. We get an intriguing picture of some of the key players, Clarence Darrow, the defense attorney and John Scopes a young teacher teaching Evolution thrown into the trial as a test case, and Williams Jennings Bryan the attorney for the prosecution and proponent for the emerging Fundamentalist movement. There is a good overview of the evolving status of creationism and evolutionism over the past century, especially in relation to school curriculum and religious revivals. We also learn about the role of the ACLU which was interested in this case on the grounds of civil liberties for education, speech and expression.
There is much court room drama described and thoughts and actions of the locals and the events following the decision. We see the passion people have regarding scientific and religious beliefs. And the debate that still exists today, now the term Intelligent Design is regularly used and debated.
This book is highly recommended for those who have heard the legends of the Scopes trial and for the younger generation who might not have ever heard of it except in passing. It helps to understand history and the path it takes today.

[Erik Graff · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been going up to NW Wisconsin for several years now with members of the Gregory family to stay in the house once occupied by an ancestor and now used as a vacation retreat. Knowing the area, I can now go up there without a book, confident that the Hayward Public Library twenty or so miles away will have titles worth purchasing. That is where I purchased this history a few days ago.

This writer, both a lawyer and an historian, has long specialized on matters pertaining the themes treated in this history of the Scopes Trial. Author of several books about evolutionary theory, Larson brings his expertise to bear on the legal issues of the case pertaining to such matters as the separation of church and state, the first amendment to the Constitution and the gradual extension of federal liberties to the states by means of the fourteenth. As an historian, he puts the trial in context, discussing not only the facts of the case, but also the context within which it occurred and the cultural repercussions it has had up to the present day. In so doing, many common misconceptions are exploded.

Like many cultural histories, this is a fun, and often amusing, read. Larson writes well, certainly much better than the average academic historian and much, much better than one could reasonably expect of a lawyer. Even if constitutional issues don't excite, even if the scientific issues of creationism versus evolutionism seems irrelevant, even if the political conundrums of individual liberties versus majoritarian rule seem inscruitable, this book will still serve as an entertaining page-turner.

[Kaleb · Rating 5 out of 5]

William Jennings Bryan, lawyer, presidential candidate, Secretary of State, and activist, led the charge for Tennessee to prohibit the teaching of evolution in its public schools. Bryan was a bit of a superstar politically, and he had made a crusade against evolution his cause by the 1920s. Represented by the ACLU, John Scopes intentionally broke the law to trigger a trial, a trial that would serve as a public showdown and an attempt to overturn the law.

There are a lot of narratives about the trial, something the book does a great job of showing. On one hand, the Fundamentalists. This was a time when the historical-critical method of reading the Bible was taking off, with more Modernists entertaining unconventional ways of reading the Bible. The Fundamentalists (self-identified, by the way) saw themselves as taking a stand against this theological liberalism. Evolution and its perceived attack on Genesis and the creation story was the best stand-in for that broader attack. Fundamentalists were also worried about evolution leading to social Darwinism, militarism, and eugenics; which, to be fair, did happen. The law also became a source of Southern pride

The defense had more complex narratives. The Christian Modernists used the trial as a way of showing that evolution wasn’t incompatible with the Bible, that reason and faith were in harmony. The ACLU viewed this as a story about academic freedom; similar to the contemporary Red Scare, the antievolution bill was an attack on free speech. Clarence Darrow, superstar attorney for the defense (also did Leopold and Loeb, Ossian Sweet, Los Angeles Times bombing), viewed the trial as science vs. religion, and science had to win. Darrow was an agnostic who hated religion’s influence in American life and politics.

Lots of high drama throughout the trial. Bryan was called to the stand by Darrow, who proceeded to have a cinematic cross-examination about the Bible and miracles; part of the trial had to be outdoors because of how many spectators, there was a prayer at the start of the trial that the defense objected to, Bryan died shortly after the trial, etc.

This book was extremely well written, a ton of fun to read. Definitely recommend if you’re interested in religion in America, the Scopes Trial, or freedom of speech.

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent, if not always readable account, of the famous 1925 Scopes trial, and what really happened - a quite important and difficult task because the 'monkey trial' as it is often called, has attracted more misinformation, misunderstanding and down right legends then it is possible for anyone to refute - even on Goodreads one of the most lengthy reviewers says, in flat contradiction to Mr. Larson's book (and the facts) that under the Butler Act of 1925 Scopes, or any other teacher, faced going to gaol for teaching evolution. In fact teaching evolution was only ever a misdemeanour, like parking violation. The most fascinating part of the book is the way it places the trial (which was a set up various citizens of Dayton, Tennessee as a way of gaining publicity and boosting their economically declining town) in the context of its time. Doing this brings all sorts of interesting, and unexpected, issues to light. For example The anti-evolutionists, and Williams Jennings Bryan in particularly, were anti-evolution and anti-Darwin because of the opposition to the new fangled eugenics movement.

The book is particularly strong in its presentation of how the trial was presented and used from the 1930s through the 1960s and how it was used as way of condemning and fighting McCarthyism, particularly in the version presented in the play and film 'Inherit the Wind' which, although it's heart was in the right place in terms of McCarthyism, had as much to do with what really happened as 'The Crucible' is an accurate presentation of Salem witch trials.

As a UK reader my quibble about it's readability really refers to the opening chapters which set the seen in terms of what many religious groups in the USA thought about evolution. It is heavy with names and organisations that are not just unknown but alien to us. But is worth persevering through any longeurs to allow the book to get into the trial proper, and the background proves in the end to be relevant and vital to the story.

I think anyone reading the book who has not grown up in the USA will constantly feel baffled at the way so many religious people in the United States are obsessed with insisting that the Bible is literally true. No poetics, no metaphor, if it says God created the world in 7 days of 24 hours, even if the sun wasn't created till day 4, and on and on through so many other absurdities. As someone raised a catholic and who attended schools run by catholic religious orders it is even more baffling. The Catholic church is crammed full of bizarre beliefs but even the infallible pope has never asked us to believe in the word accuracy of the Bible. I can remember many years ago, when I was a student, meeting two members of Opus Dei (if you aren't aware of it looking for free thinker member of Opus Dei is like searching for a civil libertarian amongst the Klu Klux Klan) both of them scientist dealing with research concerning evolution. They had no problem with combining science and a theological outlook that positively medieval. But they would never have thought it necessary to insist that the book of genesis was a accurate description of the world was created.

Of course explaining why so many people in the USA are obsessed with denying that the earth is more then a few thousand years old is not the point of this book. It would a different and far longer book to try and do that. For those of us not from the USA it will always be difficult to quite grasp why the issues behind the Scopes trial was, and remains, so important.

[Elizabeth A.G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

If "Inherit the Wind," a long-running Broadway play and a 1960's movie based on the Scopes trial, is your only familiarity with the 1925 so-called "Monkey Trial/Trial of the Century," you need to read Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion by Edward J. Larson. For an unbiased historian's account of the actual trial and a lawyer's mindset, Mr. Larson provides a thoroughly researched telling of the era's culture, religious and political views, the background for the trial, the personalities involved, and the issues involved in the debate between science and religion in education. The author provides the background of Darwinism & evolution and the tensions built up with the Christian fundamentalist view of creation; and the planning of the trial's contrived beginnings between the lawyers and the defendant which was a surprise to me. The trial scenes describe the carnival-like atmosphere of Dayton, TN and the bombast of the trial attorneys, Clarence Darrow and Wm. Jennings Bryan.

Mr. Larson's writing is fluid, including bits of humor, well-documented with references and even-handed in his treatment of the issues. The "Afterword" is a very helpful summary of the impact of the trial and the ongoing controversy of teaching religion & evolutionary science in schools. Mr. Larson won the Pulitzer Prize in History in 1998 for this work.

[AC · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book that discusses, in very readable form, the historical and intellectual foundations of, and the struggle between, the rural (largely Southern) religious majoritarian anti-modernism of William Jennings Bryan (the Democratic populist of Nebraska, who ran for President in 1896, 1900, 1904, and 1908) and the modern, skeptical, rationalist and ever-courageous Clarence Darrow of Chicago. The fundamental divide in America still today. The afterward clearly traces the rise of recent creationism and Intelligent Design theory in this context. Good book.

[Sam · Rating 4 out of 5]

i read this again for my exams and am way more into it than the first time, apparently. i still disagree with how larson frames the fundamentalist-modernist divide, but i really appreciate what this history offers and think it’s a fantastic read. i particularly love his treatment of Bryan, which avoids piling him in with other fundamentalists of the time and showing just how truly weird it seems to us in contemporary times that a progressive era populist led the antievolution case! a much better handling of Bryan than Marsden, i think.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Summer for the Gods is phenomenal. The book tells a riveting story well, but it elevates itself over other histories by critically examining the public's later interpretation of the events, and showing all the effects of such interpretation (also probably why it got the 1998 Pulitzer Prize in History). “Before” “During” and “And After” are its three parts, covering the build-up to the prosecution, the trial itself, and the public’s reaction to and later interpretation of the events.

The book details the 1925 "Scopes monkey trial", but first situates the prosecution. Early 20th century Americans were religious. Religion and education hadn't really done battle because public high school was not yet widespread, but that changed quickly: Tennessee's high school population was 10,000 in 1910, then grew to more than 50,000 by 1925. (24) The mass public education of children raised the question of what to teach them.

Two organizations destined to battle over such topic emerged at about the same time. In 1919 the World's Christian Fundamentals Association was founded (leading to the term “fundamentalist” to describe its adherents) to fight the slide towards modernism. (36) The ACLU began in 1920. (82) Shortly thereafter, it started a committee on academic freedom, and while looking for a test case, discovered Tennessee's new anti-evolution law, which fined public school teachers who espoused the doctrine; the ACLU took out an advertisement in a Tennessee newspaper, offering free legal representation, and a Dayton teacher took the bait. (82-83) The ACLU wanted to defend academic freedom, here, the right of the teacher to teach biology how he wanted, but when populist politician William Jennings Bryan offered to help the prosecution, Clarence Darrow publicly offered his services (the defendant accepted) and the case (or at least the defense's case) became about religion --Darrow's agnosticism being nationally known. (100)

Contrary to later portrayals, Larson's description of the prosecution, and especially Bryan, suggest sincere belief and eminently reasonable principles (at least in theory, not necessarily as applied to this statute), for example, Bryan frames the case as broadly about "the right of the people speaking through the legislature, to control the schools which they create and support" or more narrowly about how "Mr. Scopes demands pay for teaching what the state does not want taught and demands that the state furnish him with an audience of children to which he can talk and say things contrary to law." (128, 129) In essence, the anti-evolution statute represented the people's ability to exercise control over their public schools.

The prosecution was cut and dried, an easy factual case (and one that got a conviction after only a few minutes of jury deliberations, as the defense admitted he taught evolution) but the defense wanted to put on experts as part of its case. After the prosecution rested, and the judge denied the defense’s attempt to introduce expert witnesses, he (the judge) allowed them to make an offer of proof -- essentially, showing a later-reviewing appellate court what its experts would have said. But in addition to its listed experts, the defense (specifically, Darrow) had a trick up its sleeve. Darrow's method to get Bryan on the witness stand was formalistic--he presented Bryan as an "expert" witness on the Bible -- as part of the defense's case, they asserted the prosecution needed to show that teaching evolution was contrary to the Bible's teachings, because technically it prohibited only "teach[ing] any theory that denies the Story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and [teaching] instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals" -- and was able to grill him about biblical "facts", providing the grist for later science-makes-religion-look-stupid articles about the trial.

In some sense, the prosecution itself ended in a draw: although Scopes was convicted, it was overturned by the Tennessee Supreme Court, which used a procedural formality (involving the imposition of the sentence) to vacate the conviction while sustaining the law’s constitutionality. (221)

The telling of the story of the trial is excellent, but the last third is where Larson’s book moves from very good to excellent: in it, he documents and critiques (the evolution of) later perceptions of the event. Both during and after trial, elite opinion sided with the defense, and was successful in focusing portrayals on Darrow’s cross-examination of Bryan, and in painting the prosecution as out for blood, when in fact the maximum punishment for the misdemeanor was a fine, and Bryan had told Scopes that he would pay it for him.

The defense’s arguments about individual liberty were fondly recalled, while the prosecution’s articulation of majority power was forgotten. Larson surveys later textbooks and popular historical accounts of the time, one of the first of which was poorly researched (at least regarding the Scopes trial) yet immensely popular and influential, with subsequent works using it as a quasi-primary source, as it was written in 1931. (225)

Thinking that the Scopes trial represented a simple good v. evil or smart v. dumb, and that the good guys humiliated the bad ones, had a couple interesting effects. Because that perception of the trial became so widespread in subsequent years, it drove fundamentalists essentially underground -- their views rejected, yet still disgusted with materialistic evolution as a worldview, they decided to stop trying to convince others, and formed their own private schools and society. (236) The Supreme Court helped further this perception, announcing a significant shift in its First Amendment doctrine in a 1968 case striking down an Arkansas law similar to the one that Scopes violated (and enacted around the same time). In Epperson, the Court mentioned the Scopes case, using it as evidence of the legislature’s purported purpose to ensure teaching of a particular religion in the school; the Court disapproved, and announced that to pass muster under the Establishment Clause, a statute must have a “secular purpose.” (260) Now, such statutes were unconstitutional. Finally, the idea that science won made scientists complacent. They didn’t need to convince the public to accept evolution, because (especially post-1968) the public appeared powerless to stop them.

But the public hasn’t (yet) really accepted evolution, and they have devised creative ways to circumvent Epperson’s requirement. Almost sixty years post-Scopes, in 1982, Americans were divided 50/50 between believing in a biblical account of creation and those believing in evolution (those believing in God-influenced evolution are lumped in with those believing in evolution without God). And more than 80% wanted to include creationist theories in public school curriculum. (258) That matters because there are ways to undermine evolution without banning the teaching of it, e.g. presenting creationism and evolution as two competing (presumably, to a student, at least initially equally valid) “theories,” preying on the difference between the scientific use of the term and the general one.

(This book was published in 1997; based on more recent data it looks like scientists have had some success in convincing the public, albeit of the slow-and-steady variety:
Gallup’s 1999 poll pegged the creationist-inclusion number at 68%, with the former 50/50 split remaining in place; in 2005 only 54% of Americans wanted creationism taught in public schools .)

This book should move to the top of your list if you’re interested in learning the context of and complexities involved with a famous trial, or in developing some measure of nuance when discussing the issue of sincere religious beliefs conflicting with science, especially in the realm of publicly-funded schools. The fact that I would recommend this book equally to both a fervent believer and ardent atheist speaks to Larson’s thoroughness and even-handedness in canvassing a brutally contested terrain.

[Kristel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reason read: AAC/LT, Read a Pulitzer prize for history. This was published 1997 and is an examination of the impact of the Scopes Trial of 1925. The author presents the most accurate information about this famous court case and points out the fake news and rewriting of history that has occurred. This should be famous because it was the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) first court case known as the Scopes Trial (State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes), also known as the "Scopes Monkey Trial" The ACLU went looking for a pawn, Scopes agreed to be this pawn. He really wasn't the biology teacher but occasionally subbed for the biology class. The ACLU was taking on a law passed by John Washington Butler, Tennessee representative who wrote a bill designed to prohibit the teaching of human evolution in the state's public schools. The other characters were the three time Democratic candidate for president verses Clarence Darrow, the agnostic attorney working on behalf of the ACLU. Another major character was H.L. Mencken, journalist for the Baltimore Sun. The book offers a complete account of the trial relying on court documents and newspaper stories. In Part III, he examines the various ways that the scope trial has been interpreted since 1925. The trial has had lasted impact on debates over evolution, science education, and religious freedom. Larson also examines the cultural and legal ramifications, including its influence on the development of constitutional law and the ongoing tension between science and religion. Factors that have led to the misinformation include the play Inherit the Wind (1950) written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee. The play distorted the facts, characters and the tenor of the trial. From its conception this has been a political issue.

[Jocelyn Chin]

This was an interesting and weirdly relevant read. However the entire book was written in the tone of a formal academic paper; the author was citing quotes left and right and over and under. Like okay man, we get that you did your research! Some of the quotes were truly entertaining, especially when we got to the heat of the drama during the trial itself. But some were just plain nerdy (derogatory). That being said, I enjoyed learning about the wider cultural contexts of Darwinism/evolution and its reception across the globe, the historical figures who held personal, ideological stakes in this case, the ACLU's involvement, the schemes of the defense and plaintiffs, the dramatization of everything, the influences and opinions of Tennesseans and different Christians from different denominations with different Biblical interpretations, the ideas of academic freedom and liberty, and of course the legacy of the trial (in which Scopes was really a minor character, the dishwasher—William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow were the head chefs). Throughout the past century (exactly 100 years!), the Scopes Monkey Trial has been really smushed into a two-dimensional story by both sides, and this book worked really hard to debunk an oversimplified narrative. But man, don't read this for fun if you don't like reading textbooks. (correction: ok wait this book was not textbook-like but was def rlly formal paper-like)

[Cynda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Accessible
Descriptive

This book is written so that those who
*grew up in the American Bible Belt or the American South will easily follow the discussion.
*have a basic understanding of the history of the fight for civil rights will easily follow the discussion.
*enjoy personalities and characters will also easily follow the discussion.

What started out as a publicity stunt turned into a cultural phenomena. Read here how it all came into being.

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

The definitive book ( I think) about the famous Scopes "Monkey Trial" in Tennessee in the summer of 1925. It has been seen as the Battle between Science and Religion, Evolution and Creationism. it was the Battle of the Titans--Clarence Darrow vs. William Jennings Bryan. It gained enormous media attention at the time and inspired the classic play and, later, the film, "Inherit the Wind."
I will add more to this review later. A very engaging read. 5 stars.

[Megan]

A meticulously researched account of the 1925 Scopes trial. I was expecting more about the last aspect of the subtitle (the continuing debate over science and religion), so this history wasn't what I was specifically looking for, but I still appreciated how Larson smoothly depicted the nuances of the cultural context of the trial. His account was quite balanced while still depicting clearly the passions of all sides of the debate. The writing was always clear, but the immense amounts of quotations without additional analysis and the nature of the trial (repetitive, sides arguing past one another) often dragged the reading down for me.

While the very painstaking depiction of the trial was necessary, I still vastly preferred the final chapters of the book that analyzed the immediate reactions as well as the emergent mythos of the trial. The Scopes trial didn't merit notice in my high school history class, and I've never seen Inherit the Wind, but I'm familiar with it being a cultural sticking point, so I appreciated the depth to which Larson was able to trace how and why misconceptions evolved (yeah, yeah, pun intended).

I had mistaken expectations about the extent of which the book got into the continuing debate alluded to by the subtitle, and I was a little irritated when cultural changes in regard to how fundamentalism's stand against evolution manifested were only analyzed in terms of the Scopes trial. I know, I know, that's the focus of the book, but still, for example, I wanted to know about the other contributing factors that led to a shift from fundamentalists protesting the teaching of evolution in public schools to abandoning public education for home schooling or private Christian schools. What were the economic and broader social changes that went into this? For example, did racial integration play a part? I completely understood why the book focused on just putting this in the context of antievolution, but it still felt like a pretty superficial analysis to make a point of pointing out this shift but only explaining it in the antievolution context.

[Eric_W · Rating 5 out of 5]

By the late nineteenth century, Darwin's evolutionary theories had been widely accepted by Christian fundamentalists.. The had adopted a form of Lamarckian explanation for changes in form. In fact, James Orr, well-known theologian, wrote in The Fundamentals, " Assume God – as many devout evolutionists do– to be immanent in the evolutionary process, and His intelligence and purpose to be expressed in it; then evolution, so far from conflicting with theism, may become a new and heightened form of theistic argument. What raised their ire was his theory of natural selection with its implicit unguided randomness. Edward J. Larson is the author of an excellent history of the Scopes trial. He reports the history of the debate that led to events in Tennessee. Natural selection had been pretty much ignored until genetics began to supply some evidence for it in the early twentieth century. Genetics provided further evidence that change was due to random variation. This the fundamentalists could not abide. Soon evolution came under attack, natural selection becoming fully identified with all of Darwin. The very nature of science– that is, continual debate– provided ammunition to the forces of darkness although debate and difference of opinion on this subject were not limited to science. Surely religion has been subject to more difference of opinion than perhaps and other theoretical field being as speculative as it is. William Jennings Bryan, the more vocal of opponents to evolution, had his fear fueled by the development of eugenics, a natural outgrowth of the popularization of natural selection and survival of the fittest. Some thirty-five states eventually passed legislation compelling the sexual segregation and sterilization of unfortunates that society chose to label as misfits. Soon eugenics became identified with evolutionary theory and more fat was added to the fire. Bryan was an interesting mix of contradictions. A pacifist and anti-Republican he had resigned from Wilson's Cabinet was war fever erupted. He was a fervent admirer of hard currency yet made millions from land speculation in Florida. Bryan's anti-evolutionist views originated from his view that "the Darwinian theory represents man as reaching his present perfection [!] by the operation of the law of hate– the merciless law by which the strong crowd out and kill off the weak." He blamed belief in evolution for WW I and the apparent decline in religious faith. He was not – contrary to the Inherit the Wind version – opposed to an extended geologic time frame, but he resisted vehemently the notion that humans were not created supernaturally. Bryan's majoritarian stance – the majority rules and schools should teach what the majority believes – was a major reason for the entry of the ACLU into the case. The NCLU– forerunner to the ACLU– had been founded by the Quakers to help provide support and defense for their anti-war activities and pacifist members who refused to serve in Wilson's war. The president's statements against disloyalty and his support for legislation against any kind of opposition to the war created a climate that fueled majoritarian thinking. The government had already used the postal service to help suppress any kind of minority point-of-view and the ACLU – originally quite cooperative with the Wilson government – soon became disillusioned. Samuel Walker, ACLU historian, wrote "largely oblivious to civil liberties considerations before the war, the wartime crisis forced them [the ACLU] to abandon their faith in the inevitability of social progress and their majoritarian view of democracy. They now began to see that majority rule and liberty were not necessarily synonymous and thus discovered the First Amendment as a new principle for advancing human freedom." Clarence Darrow's "appropriation" of the defense was not appreciated by the ACLU which wanted to concentrate on the issue of free speech. Darrow just wanted to lampoon the Christian Fundamentalists, a pathetically easy task – it was the only time he volunteered his services. Darrow delighted in challenging the traditional concepts of religion and morality. He hated "do-gooders" and regarded Christianity as a "slave religion that encouraged acquiescence in injustice, a willingness to make do with the mediocre, and complacency in the face of the intolerable." The biblical concept of original sin was to Darrow, "a very dangerous doctrine – silly, impossible and wicked." Yet he had voted for William Jennings Bryan in 1896 As the Democratic candidate for Congress. Many traditional institutions were undergoing radical change at the turn of the century. The university, heretofore, an arm of a church sect, offered little chance for teachers to stray from the party line. The rise of pragmatism led by the French philosopher Auguste Comte, offered a path away from a paradigm of obedience to a central authority and toward "a positive stage ion which empirical investigation would be accepted as the only reliable road to truth." Empiricism soon dominated both sciences and humanities in academic research. The newly formed American Association of University Professors wanted to join in Scopes's defense. They wanted to emphasize the deleterious effects of a popularly orchestrated curriculum. "It is, we believe, a principle to be rigidly adhered to that the decision as to what is taught would be determined not by a popular vote. . . but by teachers and investigators in their respective fields." The lawyer who represented them, John Neal, had been fired by the University of Tennessee in violation of newly created AAUP procedures. (Neal was perhaps not the best choice. A brilliant lawyer and teacher, he was usually late for class, often never appearing, rarely lecturing on the topic at hand, preferring political discourses and giving his students grades of 95 without reading their exams.) Following passage of the law forbidding the teaching of evolution that contradicted the biblical teaching (this odd phraseology was to provide the opening that Darrow needed) the ACLU began looking for a test case site. Most school superintendents wanted nothing to do with the case simply declaring they did not teach Darwinism. The Knoxville superintendent even declared that, "Our teachers have a hard enough time teaching the children how to distinguish between plant and animal life." One suspects he was part vegetable himself. The civic boosters in Dayton lusted at the idea of all the publicity. They were perhaps atypical. A relatively new little town, it was a Republican enclave in a predominantly Democratic south. Even H. L. Mencken was pleasantly surprised. "I expected to find a squalid Southern village, with darkies snoozing on the houseblocks, pigs rooting under the houses, and the inhabitants full of hookworm and malaria. What I found was a country town full of charm and even beauty . . . . Nor is there any evidence in the town of that poisonous spirit which usually shows itself where Christian men gather to defend the great doctrines of their faith." It was not really a fight against evolution for the Daytonites, but rather an attempt to overcome obscurity. It eventually blew up in their faces, as Dayton became the laughingstock of the country. "Powerful social forces converged on Dayton that summer: populist majoritarianism and traditional evangelical faith versus scientific secularianism and modern concepts of individual liberty." "If the anti-evolutionists in Tennessee were aware of the existence of any other religions than their own, they might realize that it is the very genius of religion itself to evolve from primary forms to higher forms. The author of the anti-evolution bill is obviously nearer in mental development to the nomads of early biblical times than he is to the intelligence of the young man [Scopes] who is under trial." Charles Francis Potter

[Luke Koran · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even the biggest young history enthusiast out there learns something new every once and again. This book was such an occasion. And boy, was it a joyous occasion! After only seeing (and never really getting a basic understanding of) the term "Monkey Trial" on occasion while passing through a thick history textbook during high school, I took great pleasure during my collegiate studies when my professor assigned our class to read this book about this famed "The Trial of the Century." We even got to watch the 1960 film "Inherit the Wind", which is a close adaption of the events of this book, albeit with different names for the characters. I was ready and eager to learn as much as possible about what the heck this "Monkey Trial" was all about.

Larson re-discovers the passion that enabled this trial, especially it's pre-hype, to captivate so much of the nation's attention during the mid-1920s. He does an excellent job detailing the changing social climate regarding traditionalism and progressivism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Larson gives the 21st century reader a great overview of what the two big faces of this trial, Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan, would've meant to the people - both the locals and the national media - during that time period. The tiny Tennessee town of Dayton was transformed overnight into a media circus, with every aspect of the trial being transferred across the country (and the world) through one of the newest forms of communication, the telegraph; these aspects are beautifully covered in this book, as well. Even if you are not a fan of legal proceedings, I PROMISE YOU that you will not be disappointed with both the courtroom drama and the dramatic events that happen out-of-the-court and following the decision. It's science versus religion! Heads are bound to clash! Finally, a great overview of the evolving status of creationism and evolutionism over the past century is explored, especially in relation to school curriculum but also in religious revivals among the general populace.

Larson impressed me greatly by covering a complex topic that is often overly condensed by text books and explores all aspects of this trial, including its causes and its legacy. As I said before, it would be great (especially for the visual learner) to watch the 1960 parable film of this trial, "Inherit the Wind." This book will likely leave you in awe, both of the "gods" that dominated that summer of 1925 and of the incredible passion people have regarding scientific and religious beliefs.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

"It would be ridiculous to entrust the education of children to an oligarchy of scientists."
William Jennings Bryan (p. 105)

The actual courtroom drama in Dayton lasts for less than 50 pages. Half of the book is the lead-up to the jury trial, including the ACLU's premeditated solicitation of a case to challenge anti-evolution statues. Unlike the loose adaption in "Inherit the Wind" (1960), John Scopes was a willing participant to this planned ACLU challenge to the Butler Act of 1924. He was a math and physics teacher who was unmarried, not tied to Dayton, TN, and willing to go through the ordeal.

The aftermath of the trial was both heartening and dispiriting. The appeal of Scopes' "conviction" was neither overturned nor upheld (there was deft maneuvering by 3 of 5 judges). This was the depressing part: no judge wanted to take responsibility. Such decisions are the mainstay of our modern Supreme Court. Furthermore, a poorly researched history text of the 1920s, Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the 1920's, led to widespread misinformation about the trial, its players, its outcome, and later popular adaptions in theatre and film.

The discussion of the aftermath is the most enriching. Most of us have a conception of the events in our mind, and unless we have read deeply, these ideas are certainly misapprehensions about Darrow smashing Bryan, which is not what occurred. This has motivated me to read the transcript itself. WGN broadcast the trial live (the first such trial to undergo such dissemination), but no recording was made.

One unmistakable difference from modern legal controversies is laid bare: we play rough today. This was a light-hearted episode by modern standards. William Jennings Bryan, for all of his bombast and primitive thinking, offered to pay John Scopes' $100 fine. Contrast to the 1950s, when authoritarian conspiracy theorists like McCarthy were locking Americans up for contrary opinions. Contrast to today, wherein any discussion of this magnitude would be all bile and venom, death threats and promises of political or actual annihilation. Here is a rare instance where I pine for an attitude of the past...

[Matt McCormick · Rating 5 out of 5]

A interesting and often dramatic account of not only the Scopes Trail but the belief systems which ultimately contended in small town of Dayton Tennessee in 1925. In the build-up to the trail Larson describes the rise of Fundamentalist Christianity, the populist and, more importantly, majoritarian movements lead by William Jennings Bryan and finally the advent of groups like the ACLU advocating for individual rights.
Larson remains objective throughout the narrative while conveying a description of time, place and people that makes the reader feel that they are sitting in Dayton's courthouse. My one criticism is that after enjoying the cut and thrust of the Dayton events we are left with forty pages that are mostly an academic summary of how the Scopes event was treated/viewed in the following years.
One may be saddened to consider that even after ninety years we retain a strand in our culture of politics that mimics those that wanted to deny science and preach to children in public schools a biblically literal creation of humankind. The braying of Billy Sunday has been replaced with the slick but false marketing of "teach the controversy".

[Jacob Hudgins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really well-done history. I was interested to learn about the origins of the ACLU and the individual liberty concerns of the ‘20s, which seem to recur in each generation with new issues.

Most notable is the fact that contemporary observers interpreted the trial much differently than its subsequent legacy in American thought. Larson attributes this revisionism to a book called “Only Yesterday,” which recounted the 20s as a casting off of Victorian traditions, including fundamentalism. The other is the play/movie “Inherit the Wind,” which grossly misrepresents the facts and tenor of the trial, but was wildly successful.

There is much here to explain the vehemence of opposition to evolutionary thinking among modern fundamentalist Christians, especially given that there are at least somewhat viable reconciliations between the two positions. Neither side is interested in common ground. This clash helps explain why.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

An excellent historical account of the first modern media spectacle, when rapid far-reaching communication was young and conservative intolerance was at its most unknown peak, the 1920s (unless today counts). Told in a dry, academic tone, this book isn't for the casually interested looking for entertainment - that would have been the event itself. Yet Larson does a fantastic job researching the event, its causes and effects of its times, and how 80 years later this trial is still being fought in various iterations.

3.5 stars (5 stars for research, 3 for tone, 3 for the narrator was soooo boring). Probably would have been better as a book, rather than audiobook, but then I would have **squirrel!!!** gotten distracted and never finished.

[Mandy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Authoritative, comprehensive, detailed and excellently researched account of the 1925 Scopes Trial. All you could ever want or need to know about the trial itself, the people involved, the politics, and the still ongoing controversy and battle between evolution and creationism. An entertaining, accessible and informative read.

[Leezie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm genuinely surprised that this won the Pulitzer in history. It felt very disjointed, like a bunch of essays were thrown together yet none were ever really explored to their natural end. The discussion of the trial itself was possibly the biggest victim of this which is a shame because as shown by the book it has been twisted so much in the 100 years since it occurred.

[Emmanuel Boston · Rating 5 out of 5]

Larson’s Pulitzer Prize winning work is careful, clear, and revealing.

Book thesis: A book solely about the [Scopes] trial and its place in American history; America’s continuing debate over science and religion.

This book does precisely what it sets out to do: take a look at the Scopes trial and evaluate what it has meant for American society since that time. In fact, as one reads the book, one finds that Larson accomplishes exactly what he intends to with each chapter. Is it written so clearly that the reader never has to wonder where Larson will be going in the respective chapter—the chapter thesis is almost always placed at the end of the first paragraph, and summarizes to the reader the happenings during the chapter. Of course, the remainder of the chapter is not redundant, but merely substantiates the initial claim. Although one might determine the first section (“Before…”) to be a bit dry, this section is crucial to understanding the remainder of the book and the significance of the trial even at the onset. Truly, the way Larson sets up the arguments for both sides of the case (chapters 2 and 3), create an immense amount of tension within me as I wrestled with the validity of both claims. It really does make sense for the majority to determine what is taught to their children, but it also makes sense to have the experts determine what should be taught in their field. So, even though the first section may be a bit dry, it is essential to understanding what this trial represents.

Of course, it represents different things to different peoples—to some it merely means money. Larson does an excellent job of pulling back the curtain to reveal the actual events that occurred; he is not influenced by later recapitulations of the trial (but in fact devotes a whole chapter to explain these and why they are misguided). His recounting is measured and accurate, and he does not allow subjective interpretation or framing of the events (indeed, throughout one is hard pressed to find evidence for which side they believe Larson himself agrees with!). The interpretation which he eventually does offer is merely more historical recounting—what people thought and believed about the trial after it was over. Larson is a careful historian who is truly interested in clearing up the dust surrounding one of America’s most famous and influential trials.

For those who grew up hearing the legends of the Scopes trial, this is for you.
For those of a younger generation who have never heard “Scopes” except in passing reference, this is for you too—it helps not only understand history, but understand today and our trajectory.

(Responding to what another reviewer has said regarding Intelligent Design, Larson answers in the new Afterword.)