Kirksey Croft
3L at the University of Tennessee College of Law
Hardwick Fellow for the Institute of Professional Leadership

Inherit the Wind, written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee in 1955 dramatizes the famous 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial” here in Tennessee, where a schoolteacher was prosecuted for teaching the theory of evolution. The courtroom drama pits two legendary attorneys against each other: Henry Drummond (based on Clarence Darrow) defending the teacher, and Matthew Harrison Brady (inspired by William Jennings Bryan) prosecuting. Though fictional, the play masterfully captures the tension between tradition and progress, faith and science, and community standards and individual freedom—themes that continue to resonate in our society today.

Experiencing Inherit the Wind at the Clarence Brown Theatre for Professor Cornett’s Law and Literature class here at UT Law transformed my understanding of legal leadership beyond what I had originally anticipated. The dynamic between the defense attorney, Drummond, and the prosecutor, Brady, illuminated how principled advocacy can coexist with mutual respect, while Cates’ (Scopes’) quiet conviction demonstrated that leadership often emerges in small, authentic moments of standing one’s ground. This theatrical immersion prompted deep reflection on the lawyer and leader I aspire to become—one who balances intellectual rigor with moral courage, embraces complexity rather than certainty, and recognizes that our professional identity is shaped not merely by legal expertise but by our own values and strengths that we uphold when facing resistance. 

1. The Courage to Stand in the Unpopular Corner

As I reflect on this classic courtroom drama, I’m struck by how deeply it speaks to the essence of authentic leadership in the legal profession. Drummond’s willingness to defend an unpopular client—knowing it would invite public criticism and professional isolation—exemplifies a core leadership quality: the courage to stand by one’s principles even when facing tremendous opposition. In our legal careers, we’ll inevitably confront moments that test our resolve. The path of least resistance often beckons promising comfort and collegial approval. Yet true leadership emerges precisely when we choose the difficult path because it aligns with our deeper values and understanding of justice. This isn’t merely about being contrarian; it’s about having the inner strength to follow your moral compass when external pressures push strongly in the opposite direction.

2. Vision Combined with Strategy 

Drummond’s masterful cross-examination of Brady reveals another essential leadership quality: strategic vision. When he calls Brady, the very attorney who is prosecuting the case, to the stand himself, it initially appears reckless, perhaps even desperate. Yet as the examination unfolds, we witness a meticulously constructed approach designed not just to win a legal point but to illuminate a larger truth. This strategic depth transcends mere tactical brilliance. Effective legal leaders understand the difference between winning individual skirmishes and advancing broader principles. They see beyond immediate victories to consider how their actions shape precedent, public understanding, and the evolution of legal thought. They approach each case as part of a larger narrative about justice and society.

3. Everyday Courage in Ordinary Moments

The schoolteacher Cates reminds us that leadership often begins in small, seemingly unremarkable decisions. He did not set out to become a symbol or martyr—he simply taught what he believed was true and stood by that truth when challenged. His quiet courage offers a powerful counter-narrative to more dramatic conceptions of leadership. In our daily practice, leadership manifests in these moment-by-moment choices: the decision to ask difficult questions, to challenge assumptions (including our own), and to maintain intellectual honesty even when expedience suggests otherwise. These seemingly small acts of integrity accumulate over time, shaping not just our professional reputation but our character.

4. Embracing the Adversarial Nature of Our Profession

What fascinates me most about the Brady-Drummond dynamic is their history as former allies. This dimension adds profound depth to their courtroom confrontation, reminding us that leadership in law is not about maintaining rigid positions but about engaging genuinely with opposing viewpoints. The play subtly suggests that these legal titans aren’t simply adversaries—they’re engaged in a necessary dialogue about America’s future. Their relationship embodies a leadership truth often overlooked: that principled opposition can be a form of deep respect. As leaders in our own legal communities, we might find ourselves opposing former mentors or colleagues when our principles diverge, yet this need not diminish our respect for their journey or contributions. Perhaps the most profound leadership lesson from “Inherit the Wind” is its comfort with tension and complexity. The play doesn’t resolve the fundamental tensions it explores—between tradition and progress, community standards and individual freedom, faith and science. Instead, it invites us to hold these tensions thoughtfully, recognizing that our legal system exists precisely to navigate such complex intersections. As legal leaders, we serve our clients and society best when we resist simplistic solutions and embrace the inherent complexities of human affairs. This means cultivating both conviction and humility, advocating passionately while remaining open to new understanding.

Conclusion: Leadership as Continuous Dialogue

What stays with me most after the play is how it portrays leadership not as a position or achievement but as an ongoing dialogue—with opposing viewpoints, with our communities, with our own values and limitations. The greatest legal leaders aren’t those who merely win cases or achieve prominence, but those who advance our collective understanding of justice and humanity through their work. As I continue developing my own leadership practice, I’m inspired to cultivate both the courage of my convictions and the humility to recognize their limitations. In the evocative tension between Drummond and Brady, I see an invitation to embrace complexity rather than flee from it—and in that embrace lies the heart of authentic leadership in our noble profession.