The theme of evil destroying innocence is key and it is simplistically demonstrated in almost every significant scenario that includes the main characters in the story. The idea is that childish innocence is being stripped from Scout and Jem-- but Atticus is a grown man and he already knows what evil the world is capable of, he just chooses to have hope in the good. But what threw me off was Atticus believing that Bob Ewell wouldn't do anything too rash; there is a difference between hope for good and oblivion to evil. Yes, it's fine to believe that there's good in everyone, but everyone knows that Bob is racist and irrational (Alexandria and the kids were both still worried) and I'm sure it'd be fine for him to assume the worst from Bob if it meant keeping his family and himself safe.
On a totally different note, can I just say that I'm so glad that Bob was killed? I disliked him with a passion.
This novel is narrated by Scout, a young girl with a limited perspective.
ReplyDeleteWe are not provided with any insight in to the internal thoughts of Atticus, we are only given Scout's perception of his words and actions. This leads me to believe that Atticus purposefully choose to act unaffected by Bob's bold statements because he was trying to protect his family on an emotional level. Although he knew the threat was eminent, he choose to "hope for the good" in order to ease the fears of his children. Do you think that his oblivion to evil was a mask or a reality? Based on your interpretation, how does that coincide with his character development?
Honestly I'm sure it was just a mask. Atticus is a very intelligent man and is methodical in the manner that he teaches his children and handles dire situations (as evident by his response to the lynch mob). As far as character development, he's is drawn as a soft-spoken, disciplined humanitarian and his actions in those final chapters support that.
DeleteOmar, to make a comment on Atticus's character development, I actually felt as though he was pretty static throughout, especially in contrast with Scout and Jem's dynamism. Atticus remained rational, empathetic, and wise throughout. He put a brave face on for his kids, always. He did what he believed to be the moral thing to do, and he never wavered or compromised. Atticus was a constant in the children's lives.
ReplyDeleteYes! Just because a character is static doesn't mean they aren't a good character. Scout and Jem are both dynamic characters.
DeleteOn the concept of Atticus regarding Bob Ewell with what seems less seriousness than deserved;sometimes we have to choose to see things we know not to be the truth as the truth, because what we perceive to be our truth is not the same as someone else's idea of the truth. When we label things and continuously use that label to describe them, in Ewell's case "trash," "dishonorable," etc., we sometimes make them develop in a way which allows them to fit their label. Ewell may have at one point been a completely different person, but because people chose to see the worst he became the worst when at first he was not. Maybe in denying Ewell's intention Atticus was trying to refrain from labeling another person since our society is already bogged down by such labels. It isn't always naive to give someone the benefit of the doubt, by demonstrating to them you believe they can make the right choice, you never know they could surprise you one day and do exactly that. Or I'm an optimist, there's always that possibility.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the students may be growing up quickly, I feel like they are becoming more wise and mature. On the contrary, the other kids in Maycomb are still enjoying their childhood but are likely to be a product of their parents conservative and racist views.
ReplyDeleteNice insight Zach.
Delete