Set against the backdrop of Harvard University in 1956-57, "The Kistiakowsky Play" brings to light the true story of Professor George Kistiakowsky's crusade to expose and eliminate Harvard's discriminatory admissions practices. The play opens as Kistiakowsky, a Ukrainian-born physical chemist and Manhattan Project veteran, faces complaints from undergraduate students who find his rigorous academic standards unreasonable. Dean McGeorge Bundy mediates a conflict with Travis Tyler, a privileged student who mocked Kistiakowsky's accent and was publicly called out for his lack of preparation.

The central catalyst arrives when Kistiakowsky's daughter Vera introduces him to Joel Rosenstein, a brilliant 17-year-old from Bronx Science who dreams of studying nuclear physics at Harvard. Joel's revelation about Harvard's Jewish quota system opens Kistiakowsky's eyes to an institutional injustice he had been blind to despite decades on the faculty. This discovery explains why his classes are filled with unprepared students like Tyler while genuinely gifted scholars like Joel are systematically excluded.

When Joel is interviewed by Dean of Admissions Wilbur Bender, the encounter exposes the prejudiced evaluation process. Despite Joel's exceptional academic credentials and passionate knowledge of nuclear physics, Bender dismisses him based on stereotypical assumptions about Jewish students. Joel receives an unprecedented "early rejection" letter, a fabricated policy designed specifically to crush his hopes.

Kistiakowsky confronts both Bundy and Bender about the quota system. While Bundy equivocates with administrative doublespeak, Bender openly defends the policy, arguing that Harvard must maintain its tradition of producing "cultured gentlemen" rather than "neurotic eggheads." He warns that admitting more Jews would lead to an influx of other undesirable minorities and destroy Harvard's character.

Refusing to accept this injustice, Kistiakowsky rallies faculty colleagues to form a petition demanding an end to the Jewish quota. He hires Joel as his research assistant on nuclear policy proposals, defying administrative pressure. The conflict escalates when alumni donor Jotham Rogers visits to threaten both Kistiakowsky's position and his recent appointment to President Eisenhower's Science Advisory Council. Rogers warns that faculty who signed the petition could face investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee, using McCarthyism as a weapon to silence reform efforts.

The play reaches its climax when Kistiakowsky, subpoenaed to appear before HUAC, refuses to be intimidated, turning the hearing into an indictment of the committee's own un-American activities. His testimony about Harvard's discrimination becomes part of his broader critique of institutional prejudice and intellectual persecution.

Meanwhile, Dean Bundy secretly supports Kistiakowsky's cause while maintaining plausible deniability. He orchestrates the creation of the Ford Committee to study admissions policies, with the understanding that its findings will be strategically leaked to force public accountability. The play demonstrates how social change often requires both public confrontation and behind-the-scenes maneuvering.

The historical moment proves crucial as the Soviet launch of Sputnik in October 1957 shifts American priorities toward scientific excellence. Suddenly, the "gentleman's C" tradition that favored well-connected mediocrity over academic merit becomes a national security liability. Dean Bender recognizes this paradigm shift and announces his resignation, acknowledging that Kistiakowsky's vision of merit-based admissions has become inevitable.

The play concludes with Joel's acceptance to Harvard under the reformed admissions process, representing not just personal triumph but institutional transformation. Kistiakowsky's fight has succeeded in opening Harvard's doors to students previously excluded by prejudice, fundamentally changing the character of American higher education.

Through this deeply personal story, Alan Brody explores themes of courage, prejudice, academic freedom, and the moral obligation to fight injustice. The play shows how individual acts of conscience can challenge powerful institutions and create lasting social change, while also examining the complex intersection of academia, politics, and social justice during the Cold War era.