The novel “Ringside 1925” invites the viewer in with allusions to a circus and a cover photograph of a chimpanzee, Joe Mendi, borrowed (in real life) by the drugstore owner Fred Robinson as a means of advertising his Dayton, Tennessee, business during the Scopes Trial. The advertising ruse took from the trial’s nickname as “The Great Monkey Trial,” which itself was influenced by the misinterpretation that Darwin claimed we evolved from monkeys. It is amid this historical and highly publicized trial that the novel is set, narrated by 9 fictional characters who have diverse roles, backgrounds, and viewpoints.

Often offering fictional commentary about the actual events of 1925, each character narrates his or her part through poems. I did not enjoy this aspect of the book and do not understand why this format was chosen for the presentation of a story surrounding the subject matter of a trial about teaching evolution in schools. I thought it broke up the story and made it more difficult to read. I suspect this is highly subjective and I just didn’t “get it,” but another person could likely take delight in a historical novel of poems. The only prose in the book came when Paul Lebrun, a reporter to the “St. Louis Post-Dispatch,” wired his reports to his boss. We learn in the Author’s Note that his emotional and personal style is consistent with the actual reporting of the period that she studied in preparation for writing this book. Also in the Author’s Note, Bryant relates other ways she strives to recapture the feeling of the era. For example, she uses now-passé terms like “colored” and “Negro.” I strongly disliked her use of dialects, though. I found racism evident in the way Willy Amos, a black twelve-year-old boy, was the only character who was not presented using perfect English. On page 42, he says “I ain’t believin’ things can get much better.” But Jimmy Lee Davis, a high school student, says “That’s when we stopped arguing & started swinging & Mr. Robinson came running” (p. 86). So, white folks in rural Tennessee were highly articulate and only the black kid couldn’t pronounce a final “g” sound? I also found the book highly biased regarding views on evolution. This is perfectly acceptable in a fictional book, but I was still annoyed at how the characters completely in disbelief of evolution were presented. Betty Barker, member of the ladies’ Bible study group, is downright mean and vindictive. She became villainous instead of ignorant.

In addition to reading many primary sources, the author actually witnessed the annual reenactment of the Scopes trial at the Rhea County Courthouse in Dayton, Tennessee. I would love to see that, for the facts that I read in Arthur Blake’s non-fiction book “The Scopes Trial: Defending the Right to Teach” certainly support Bryant’s interpretation that this debate – controversial both then and now – was a circus-like spectacle. In fact, Part 5 begins with a quote from the prosecution lawyer and one from the defendant, John Thomas Scopes, from whom Bryant gleaned the title of her novel when he said “I sat speechless…a ringside observer at my own trial, until the end of the circus” (p. 107). In addition to the quotes from historical figures involved in the trial that open every new part and section of the book, I liked other ways Bryant was consistent with fact, based on my earlier study of the trial in the aforementioned book. On page 134, one character observes that “some of the smartest men in the country tried to decide what this trial is about.” It was true that often the focus of the trial seemed to be on whether or not evolution was a fact rather than whether or not Mr. Scopes had violated the Butler Act by teaching evolution in his classroom. In another scene, one character asks where to find a clothing store and is directed to Darwin’s. The novel acknowledges the coincidental name in the characters’ conversation on page 157: “I gave her the strangest look. ‘Really, sir, that’s the owner’s name.’” I learned from Blake’s book that this was true; there was a clothing store in tiny Dayton, Tennessee, called “J.P. Darwin’s Everything to Wear Store.”

While I very much enjoyed Blake’s non-fiction book about the Scopes trial, the juxtaposition with Bryant’s book did call my attention to an important absence: Blake’s book does not mention the students. I was embarrassed that this glaring absence was not noticed by me until well into Bryant’s book. Are students not, essentially, among the most important elements of such a trial? The trial was all about what they were being taught in school. I was annoyed with myself for not thinking about what the kids involved then might have had to say about the trial until I read about the feelings of the fictional characters in “Ringside 1925.”

Despite its problems, the novel ends nicely with an Epilogue that relates the real stories of what happened to the key figures after the trial. Then, following the Author’s Note, the book closes with a list of resources for further research about the Scopes trial and controversies about teaching evolution, Acknowledgments, and About the Author. Overall, it was a decent book from which I learned some things, gleaned some insights, and experienced amusement. ( )

"Ringside, 1925" was quite an entertaining book. It's a historical fiction novel detailing the events of the John Scopes Monkey Trial in Dayton, Tennessee. A brief synopsis:

Tennessee passes the Butler Act, making it illegal to teach evolution in public schools. Some local bigwigs in Dayton come together and decide to try and have a cooperating teacher fight the act, likely as a marketing strategy to bring tourists (and their money) to the town. Scopes was chosen because he was young, well liked. single, new to the town, and willing to take the fall.

The trial brought not only the ACLU, but two famous lawyers to each side. For the prosecution it was William Jennings Bryant, former Presidential candidate, US Representative, and Secretary of State - also a Fundamentalist Christian. And for the defense, Clarence Darrow, a lawyer famous for defending the rights of all people, including two men recently found, clearly, guilty of murder, and accused African-Americans, which, unfortunately for the time, could actually be a comparison. Regardless, both men were considered fantastic orators and practitioners of the law.

However, a fundamentalist judge essentially crippled the defenses stance that the law was unjust. They were not allowed expert witnesses (who were scientists who found a way to reconcile their beliefs in God and evolution), nor was Clarence Darrow's examination of W.J. Bryant - showing his lack of worldly knowledge and the logical incongruities in a literal belief in the Christian Bible - was deemed inadmissible. In fact the jury only witnessed less than a few hours of the week long trial.

This, easily led to a guilty verdict and a fine of $100 dollars for Scopes.

Now, quite different from most historical fiction that I'm used to reading. And not just mildly different, radically different. Firstly, the book is written almost entirely in free verse poetry. This would be a bit different. But, there is also nine different narrators, each created by the author of the book, Jen Bryant. Each of them are close to the Scopes trial, whether it be personally, philosophically, or even just in proximity at some points. They all provide their own perspective of the trial and how it is affecting their lives. Though, it is crafted in a way that overwhelmingly supports the defense (Dang!). The book is separated into eight different parts, containing the first person accounts of the narrators.

I love this style, as Bryant is using multiple narrators as her characters, all with their distinctive style in regards to the poetry. For example, there's the narrator/character of Jimmy Lee Davis. His sections of poetry all use short lines, about 3-4 words long. He is also quite adept at relating things back to his love of fishing and baseball. Then there's Betty Barker, the fanatical Christian Fundamentalists, whose observations seemed to be frantic and sometimes a bit rambling. In stark contrast there is Ernest McManus, a tourist/slash minister with a more progressive view on Darwinism. His portions of narrations are both intelligent and thoughtful in regards to the situation. Bryant definitely skews her narrative in favor of Darrow and Scopes. But, being that is was published in 2008 I can hardly blame her. It's just about undeniable science.

Funny thing is, even though it is completely different from "The Scopes Trial: Defending the Right to Teach" with regards to narration, style, and genre, many of the main points of the trial still remain. Even though none of the narrators were actual people, they still provide essential details, and their responses. Like when the judge disallowed all of the defenses the narrator Constable Fraybel - a Christian - states "To me, the judge's decision seemed/ridiculous/Most of us here in Dayton wanted to hear more/about evolution..."(143). This is quite a plus for me, as, it is quite a compelling - if not sometimes a bit scattered - narrative, and the key points of the trial remain historically true.

As for its companion, "The Scopes Trial: Defending the Right to Teach," there are very few similarities outside of the factual events and mention of actual people - which is another point for "Ringside" as all of the characters outside of the narrators are actually based on the nonfictional players in the circus trial. They follow the same plot, and basically have the same structure - Set-up/Charges, Pre-Trial, Trial, and Post-Trial, Epilogue. However, "The Scopes Trial" is a more straightforward account, detailing key trial figures and their backgrounds. Though, it's a brief book that provides more of a brief overview of the events.

Though I do have one complaint. Every once in a while - I believe about 3-4 times throughout the novel - the narrative takes the form of Paul Lebrun's news articles. And while they take place during key moments of the trial, and I suppose was intended to lend an aura of legitimacy, but was really just jarring. Going from dozens of pages of poetic form to an immediate switch to prose for two pages was an odd choice that I didn't like. ( )

Told in poems, Ringside, 1925 is the retelling of the Scopes Trial from the view of many of the townspeople. I enjoyed the poem format more than I was expecting to. It ended up working a lot like a novel in dialog- with the different people telling vignettes from their experiences. The prose was lively and often funny. I was impressed by the detail and respect in the characterization. What could have easily been caricatures were all well thought out and realized people on all sides of the issue. It is not often that a book makes me truly think about what I believe and why I believe it, but this one did so without any perceivable effort.

Reviewed by Natalie Tsang for TeensReadToo.com

Jen Bryant's RINGSIDE 1925 explores the Scopes Trial, one of the most controversial trials in American history, through nine diverse characters and is told through vivid verse.

One memorable summer, the sleepy town of Dayton, Tennessee, population 1,800, is turned upside down by the trial of a well-liked high school teacher. His crime is teaching evolution, a subject that the state of Tennessee had forbidden in the newly passed Butler Law.

William Jennings Bryan, a talented orator, preacher, and three time presidential nominee, will speak against evolution,
and Clarence Darrow, a brilliant lawyer, comes to defend Mr. Scopes.

News of the trial spreads quickly and, almost overnight, the town fills with news reporters, scientists, religious leaders, and tourists. Many residents, such as twelve-year-old Willy Amos and drugstore owner Mr. Robinson, see it as an opportunity to make some quick easy money. Since Darwin's theory of evolution suggests that man evolved from monkeys, Dayton begins selling everything from paper monkeys to Simian Sodas.

At first, the atmosphere is friendly and fun. Though they are on opposing sides of the "monkey trial," W. J. Bryan and Mr. Darrow are friends and share a dinner together at Tillie Stackhouse's boarding house. But as the trial drags on in the muggy summer weather, tensions rise. Not only do the two men's friendship become strained, but many of the residents become embroiled in the increasingly bitter God vs. science debate.

Many young readers may have learned about the Scopes Trial in school, but Bryant brings a new level of relevance by telling the story primarily through the eyes of Dayton's residents and observing the smaller but no less significant changes to a small town in addition to the broad historical significance.

Jimmy Lee Davis and Peter Sykes have been fishing buddies and best friends for years, but their personal beliefs lead them to support opposite sides of the trial. Marybeth Todd is a smart but restless teenager. When several professors come to stay at the boarding house she works at, they ask her to participate in their discussions of geology, anthropology, and other unfamiliar and wonderful topics. The influx of visitors brings in money, but also new ideas and opportunities.

Readers who usually dislike historical fiction will find Bryant's characters fresh, familiar, often insightful, and sometimes silly. The story feels real and full-fleshed, but never gets bogged down by its research. ( )

This short and highly readable book is about the Scopes "monkey trial" held in Dayton, TN in 1925 in which a high school teacher is accused of breaking a TN law forbidding the teaching of evolution. Scopes was defended by the great lawyer, Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryant prosecuted the case. The story is told through the eyes of many of the townspeople in short chapters, from various points of view.

The author includes a bibliography at the end, revealing the level of research she performed in order to write this book. This book was written for "tweens"/young teens and Bryant's writing style is engrossing and easy to follow. It made me want to either watch the movie, "Inherit the Wind" or read the book to learn more about the story. It is especially pertinent today given that states and school boards are still fighting the battle over whether to teach evolution, creationism, or intelligent design in public school science classes. ( )