Atticus Finch as a Hero and Role Model for Lawyers

Is the figure of Atticus Finch in “To Kill a Mockingbird” better understood as representing an ideal for liberal lawyers or a “slick hired gun” willing to accommodate the prejudices of the world he inhabits?

Lawyers are widely considered to be self-serving, devious, callous and to some extent indifferent to truth, public good and also justice, A lawyer’s profession often calls for a hero and Atticus Finch (played by Gregory Peck), the protagonist of Harper Lee’s to Kill a Mockingbird  is often cited as one such example.  The way in which Flinch represented an innocent African-American  man Tom Robinson (played by Brock Peters) who was accused of rape by a white Southern woman Mayella Violet Ewell ( played by Collin Wilcox), in the Depression-era in Alabama during the 1930s tends to represent the consummate portrayal of the way in which a lawyer performs his ethical duty.  The plot of the film is very akin to the real prosecution of Black defendants in the celebrated case of “Scottsboro Boys”, otherwise known as Powell v. Alabama, and again in Norris v Alabama. Here an all-white jury convicted young black males of raping who young white women. In the film, very, unfortunately, young Robinson, the beautifully scripted dialogues of Finch along with his closing arguments failed to pursue the jury who turned in the innocent man because he expressed pity for Mayella Ewell, his accuser.  

There have been numerous debates regarding the suitability of Atticus as a role model.  Lecturer Monroe Freedman has argued that Atticus should not be considered as a role model as much as both the novel and the movie have tried to make him, despite being a counsel for an unpopular defendant. He always hoped to get through his life without a case of such complexity (p.98).  He made excuses for the leader of the Lynch mob by stating that he is “basically a good man” and his actions may be justified “just has his blind spots along with the rest of us” (p. 173) pointing towards the fact that he may be categorized as an individual who was too willing to accommodate the prejudices of the world where he inhabited.  However, others like Thomas Shaffer have argued in Atticus’ favor by stating that Atticus has portrayed that it is the presence of character, rather than professional ethics that is what is essentially valued in professional ethics.  

Debating Atticus’ Suitability as a Role Model

It is undeniable that Atticus had character.  When we say that a person has good character, we do not necessarily mean that said a person only believes in the discernable moral principles and makes better judgments solely based on those principles.  That he is a good character is also very closely related to who the person is and also to their good decisions.  

When appointed to defend Robinson, Atticus Finch, gets serious with his job despite exposing himself as well as his children to the taunts, slurs and disapproval of the neighbors.  During the trial, Atticus clearly proves that Robinson could in no way have had raped Mayella because the evidence pointed to the deed having been done by someone who was left handed with two arms whereas Robinson clearly didn’t fit the bill as he had lost the use of his left arm in a cotton-gin accident.  Nevertheless, Robinson gets convicted, and neither does the verdict against him surprise Atticus.  He states that Racism, that is Maycomb’s “Common disease: made this a foregone conclusion in the first place.  Shortly after this, Tom is shot while climbing the prison fence. Tom death, while completing the story of the innocent black man who was falsely accused, wrongly convicted and mercilessly killed.  

Atticus’ character speaks neither of racial hatred nor or prejudice, two aspects that were very deeply be imbibed he sentiments of the ordinary people of the society of Alabama in the 1930s.  Contrary to the general feelings as portrayed by the town, Atticus chooses to look in to the depths of a person’s character as opposed to judging them by their skin color.  At the very beginning, he tells Scout that it is never possible to understand another individual unless things are considered from their point of view.   That he went against most of his family members, neighbors and community members to stand up for what he believed. When questioned by his children about his choice to defend Robinson despite the very slim chances of winning, Atticus said that had he done otherwise he would no longer believe in himself.  

Atticus Finch is clearly portrayed as a character of stability in an unbalanced society.  He is balanced to a degree that he has the power to cope up with the highly emotional as well as unreasonable people surrounding him.  He among the prejudices of the white populace but still tried to bring justice to the underprivileged black population of Maycomb. He chose to defend Robinson for fairness and equality that is reflected in his closing speech of “There is one place all men are created equal, that place is in a court” (p 205). It shows that Atticus as an individual believed not only in social equality but also in race, sex, class as well as religion.  His staunch beliefs are the reflection of his personal psychological stability.  His morals are amalgamated with his sense of self-respect and thus, he knows that unless he does what is believed by him is right; he will lose his moral authority over other around him.  He only cares about his individual judgement of himself and staunchly accepts the open criticisms of his community members, the disrespect of his children and the repercussions of being voted out of the legislations.  

Atticus’ Character and Belief in Fairness and Equality

The paradigm of a clinical trial as well as a legal process lies at the centre of the narrative.   The formal mechanisms of law are up to the task it entrails.  The story shows how the busy lives and staunch belief in racism diverts the ordinary people from the essential functions under the law.  However, these diversions are far from being encompassed as hindrances for the principal authorized agents, namely the sheriff, the trial judge and Atticus himself.  In the narrative, fatally enough, Tom takes matters into his hands, being impatient about Atticus’ chances of winning the appeal. However Atticus’ methodological practitioner’s expertise does not distort his ideas of a radical reformation, rather it allows him to see clearly that Tom’s case is very ordinary.  The story shows that if the jurors basically provided the Black individuals the equality they deserved, the innocents, like Robinson would not remain scapegoats in trials.  His son, Jem who was wounded by the injustice of the trial insisted upon the need for radical reforms, but Atticus quite patiently rebuts citing his practical justifications that came with his years of experience practicing law.  Atticus could not avoid condensations, even when faced with young Jen’s wounded sense of adolescent idealism.  When Jen pointed out that the jury system should be abolished, Atticus quite clearly barbed out that it was the inherent sense of racism that was at fault and not the jury system in totality.

Atticus is somewhat condescending when he portrays the idea of women in the jury as laughable as in his mind they would disrupt the proceedings rather than bring about any sense of justice that rather goes against is a sense of equality that he had been trying to portray so far.  However, the issue that Atticus sees is not the exclusion of women from the juries but the fact that educated civilians refused to take up their civic responsibilities seriously. Atticus recognized that here business is the victim in a narrower and fundamental sense that empathetically would not include himself.  He stated that in different conditions someone virtuous as well as bourgeois like the employer of Tom Robinson would not be afraid of servicing on the jury in this case. They would not then consider that in doing their duty to save an innocent man’s life, they would end up losing customers.  In this scenario, the anonymity of the jury’s vote also does not prove to be enough.  Atticus says that when a person serves on a jury, after that it forces him to make up his mind and declare himself openly.  Most often than not, people refuse to do this because it van end up being very unpleasant.  In tom’s case, as Atticus pointed out, business and trade posed to be the biggest issues that went against him, other than the fact that Tom was black.   Upright individuals neglect to stand together with experienced legal professionals like Atticus, against the subversion of law’s certain certification of equality. The act of law, apparently because that it is a calling and not only a business, uncovers to Atticus both the fundamental substance of the law, equality, and its fundamental procedural righteousness, tolerance. What the law needs is for its appropriate operators in the general people, illuminated male urbanites, to have civic virtue as much as Atticus, the perfect legal advisor.

Atticus’ Psychologically Stable Moral Authority

The centerpiece of the film and the book is Tom Robinson’s trial. Our first prologue to the real members for the situation happens when Atticus’ children surge down to the courthouse and, remain on one another’s shoulders so they can see and identify with us the arraignment going ahead inside. Everything about the trial has resonances of a “primal scene” in its perplexity of sexuality and viciousness, in the scandalized grown-ups, and especially in the way that kids are banned from the procedures. Jem and Scout are available at the trial on account of the generosity of an elderly black priest who gives them a chance to sit with him in the place saved for blacks.

Despite the fact that it is recognized that the dark skinned litigant can’t win for a situation that relies on upon his oath against a white woman’s, Atticus is capable through round of questioning to set up that Mayella was beaten by somebody who was left-handed, along with the fact that that her dad Bob Ewell was left-handed, and that, as both principals affirm, Tom Robinson was in her home when her dad discovered them together. In regular protection used in rape cases, she said he assaulted her, he says she assaulted him.

Atticus’ summation to the jury builds up his position on social equality, as well as principally on the law “Now gentlemen, in this country our courts are the great levelers, and in our courts all men are created equal. I’m no idealist to believe firmly in the integrity of our courts and of the jury system—that’s no idea to me that is a living, working reality.”

Thus, it may be concluded that In Atticus’ system, the law does not stand to be castrating oppressive nor does humanity depend upon individual weaknesses.  Rather than envisioning the aspect of the law to be harsh as well as ubiquitous, in the given vision, the law that was exercised by the father (of a white woman) proved to be a tool of accomplishing justice.  It is in this aspect that Fundamentally Atticus becomes a liberal lawyer.  For him, if the justice can get accomplishes through the deliverables of the law lies somewhere in the distant future then he was ok with it.  He knows the faults of the legal system; however, he still upholds the fact that law should be maintained to safeguard against sexuality, darkness and impulses. However, Atticus was neither a revolutionary nor a drastic man.  But he was just. Despite knowing the norms of the society and the way of the world, he fought for what is right despite knowing that his chances to truly bring Tom Robinson justice were extremely slender. 

References

Atkinson R, “Liberating Lawyers: Divergent Parallels In “Intruder In The Dust” And “To Kill A Mockingbird”” (1999) 49 Duke Law Journal

Dare T, “Lawyers, Ethics, And To Kill A Mockingbird” (2001) 25 Philosophy and Literature

Lawrence A, Echo And Narcissus: Women’s Voices In Classical Hollywood Cinema (University of California Press 1991)

Lee H, To Kill A Mockingbird (Lippincott 1960)