At the end of class yesterday, the point was raised among the last three left in the room that some people believe the ending with Boo and the death of Bob Ewell more or less eclipses the Tom Robinson tragedy, taking away from the book's message about race and tolerance. I, however, disagree with this view, as the book is not about race, nor is it about Boo Radley.
The book is about mockingbirds.
But seriously. The book isn't simply a morality play meant to challenge our ideas of racial tolerance. If it was, the Tom Robinson business would enter the story earlier, and the trial would last just a tiny bit longer. The novel is rather a commentary on the flexibility of morality.
Because the story is told through the eyes of a child, we are able to see a young, fairly untouched view of morality, and we see how it develops through her experience. We see Scout learn the existence of class divisions and how to treat those less fortunate than her. We see Scout learn the complexities of social persecution based on race and other factors that make one an outsider. Finally, we see Scout witness the destruction of human life in two very different contexts, and through her eyes we ourselves begin to understand that some lives and some causes are more valuable than others.
The other aspects of the novel do not eclipse the Tom Robinson story. All parts of the story work together to challenge and reinforce the reader's views of morality and justice. The reader comes to realize that busting up chiffarobes and stabbing terrible men can both be as beautiful as a mockingbird's song.
No comments:
Post a Comment