Critical Analysis of Harper Lee’s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’

Q – 1) As lawyers, Atticus Finch and Portia from The Merchant of Venice are similar

yet far different from each other. Compare and contrast their character, circumstances
and motivations. 

Ans – 1) As lawyers, Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird and Portia from The
Merchant of Venice are similar yet far different from each other. Atticus is intelligent, has a
calm wisdom and an exemplary behaviour and hence is respected by everyone, including the
poor. He never took advantage of his social standing to retaliate or rebuke the people who
criticised him. He remained calm even when he was provoked. He is like the moral backbone
of Maycomb, a person to whom others turned in times of doubt and trouble. Portia is a quick
witted, wealthy and a beautiful human being. She is intelligent and a girl with high standards
who followed the rules of her father’s will and was also in love with Bassanio, Antonio’s
friend. She has a great reasoning power. She is the rarest of combinations – a free spirit who
abides rigidly by the rules.
Atticus always tried to do what he felt was right. He took Tom Robinson’s case even though
he did not want to because he thought it was his duty. Where on one hand, some lawyers
going through the motion and realising the case is a lost case, wouldn’t have taken up the
case, Atticus on the other hand, believed that he should at least try to save Tom Robinson and
hence he took up the case. Despite living in a racist and sexist society, he chose to fight the
case for a black man. He asserts that all citizens must be able to find justice in the legal
system, where race should not be a factor. He respected women and people of every colour
and never discriminated against anyone. Atticus practiced the ethic of sympathy and the
understanding that he preached to Scout and Jem is to never hold grudges against the people
of Maycomb. Despite their callous indifference to racial inequality, Atticus always saw much
more to admire in them. He felt that people have both bad and good qualities, and he was
determined to admire the good while trying to understand and forgive the bad. He is even
seen instructing Jem to truly look at a person as a whole, not just for one’s skin colour or
even actions (good or bad). Atticus is characterized throughout the book by his absolute
consistency. He stood rigidly committed to justice, even when everyone went against him. He
thoughtfully and willingly heard matters from the perspective of others.
Portia pleaded the case of Antonio. She was very intelligent. Dressed in men’s clothes and
playing the part of a young lawyer in the courtroom where Antonio’s life was in danger, a
heroic speech given by Portia managed to save the day. She began the case by trying to
convince Shylock to forgive Antonio and to show some mercy on him. She told Shylock the
qualities of mercy and proved that mercy is a divine quality and that the man who shows
mercy is remembered and worshipped like a god. However, Shylock did not move a little and
was adamant on his demand of a pound of flesh, as mentioned in the bond. Then very
skilfully and confidently Portia allowed him to take the flesh and asked Antonio to be ready.
When Shylock went to pierce the knife into Antonio’s chest Portia warned him with a
condition, “According to the Bond you have full right to take the flesh, but without shedding
even a single drop of blood otherwise all your wealth will be confiscated by the state.” On
hearing this, Shylock was helpless. He reconciled and asked for mercy. He was pardoned by
the Duke conditionally. Thus, it can be seen that it is the skill, virtue and intelligence of
Portia which saved the life of Antonio and taught a lesson to Shylock. She emerged as the
antidote to Shylock’s malice.

Q – 2) Atticus tries to protect his children from the ugly realities of adult life. Atticus
did not want his children to be in court, but they manage to see most of the trial. Do you
think that it was good or bad for them to be there? Discuss whether you think it right
for children to be able to witness criminal trials. 

Ans – 2) Atticus did not want his children to be in court in order to protect them from the
ugly realities of adult life, however, he let them stay because he wanted them to be aware of
the truth, he wanted them to know what’s going on. He knew, he was honest, so there was no
need for him to be afraid. He wanted his children to respect him. He wanted to treat his
children maturely. He wanted them to be aware of the situation so that they have the strength
to fight with it.
I feel it was good for Jem and Scout to be there in the court and see most of the trials. One
thing they would have definitely learnt after seeing the trials is that the world is not all that
beautiful and always fair and just. By letting them watch most of the trials, he thought the
kids never to give up, especially when you are fighting for the right cause and to be fair.
Seeing the trials taught them how they should always stand their ground when they know that
they are right, even when the whole world is against them.
I think the witness of children at trials, particularly trials addressing adult situations depends
upon the children, their maturity, and their relationship to the case. These decisions should be
taken very carefully. I think it would be bad for the kids to witness trials as the kids are too
young to understand the ugly realities of life. It would frighten them, scare them and
eventually result in them losing their innocence. I don’t think children should witness
criminal trials. Children should always be kept away from witnessing any case. It is very
painful and stress full for adults to witness criminal trials so one can definitely imagine the
amount of stress and pain the kids would have to go through. Kids might not lose their
innocence, but they would get lost. I completely agree that everyone should be aware of the
present situation they are in, but children are too small for this awareness. They are too small
to handle these kinds of situations.
Children’s subconscious mind is very active at this age, once something goes into their
subconscious mind, it is very difficult to remove it. Whether one agrees or not, we must not
forget that children at this age are very innocent, full of life and things like this i.e.,
witnessing a case in a room full of unknown strangers might have a negative impact on their
subconscious mind. One can’t even imagine the amount of stress and worry a child has to go
through while attending a trial. It could traumatize the child which might result in them
facing mental problems, depression etc. Witnessing a criminal trial is a very stressful process
for adults, so imagine how stress full it would be for children to go through the trials in a
room full of strangers. They are not mature enough to handle or even understand the
situation. There could be a lot of psychological and physiological consequences of children
witnessing or appearing in court. If possible, children should be avoided from witnessing the
trials. In an unavoidable situation, when there is no other option but to witness the trial,
provisions should be made, so that the child is less exposed to mental and emotional pressure.
Children are often considered to be tender and at this volatile age certain instances like these
could make a lasting impact on the child’s memory. The court needs to take into account
various factors before making the testimony admissible, such as, making sure that the child
clearly understands the nuances of the circumstance, what led to the occurrence of those
circumstances. Children often tend to be submissive due to the pressure and the tension
surrounding the entire scenario, and the entire judicial proceedings can take a toll on a
sensitive mind, leading to breakdown and change in testimony. Hence, the court needs to take
care of intricate aspects, making sure that the child’s testimony is not affected in any way.
Q - 3) What, if any, prejudices do African-Americans face in today’s USA? Have the
issues that Lee discusses in To Kill a Mockingbird been resolved or are they ongoing?

Ans – 3) The issues discussed by Lee in To Kill a Mockingbird has not been completely
resolved in the present day. Racism still exists, and there is a lot of inborn prejudice that
prevails in society in spite of us living in a comparatively modern world.
These days, many African-Americans are blamed for crimes that they might have not even
committed and as a result, they either get arrested or killed with merely little or no evidence.
Though today there are many more people who are not prejudiced than there were in the time
when To Kill a Mockingbird was originally written, but institutional racism still subsists and
suppresses African Americans. In recent years, African Americans have been
disproportionately catcalled and targeted by acts of terrorism and by acts of undue violence
from members of law enforcement. One of the recent incidents of the same would be the
George Floyd’s case which led to widespread protest in the US followed by Rayshard Brook,
another black who was killed by a white officer in Atlanta, US. The sad reality is that
America is a country steeped in racism and there doesn’t seem to be an end to police brutality
and selective injustice against African Americans. Apart from this some of the other
prejudices faced by African Americans in today’s USA includes them facing higher
unemployment rates than whites. There are several explanations for this, one being blacks
often face outright discrimination in the labour market, they are also less likely to attend and
graduate from college, which stems from the fact that African Americans face greater
financial barriers to getting a college education, ending up with more debt than white
graduates and paying more for their loans. Yet even among college graduates, African
Americans often face greater job instability and higher unemployment rates. The African
Americans tend to deal with a lot of inequality in the country and many a times they justice is
also not served to them. The discrimination against individuals based on their race, colour,
etc. was a common phenomenon in the 1930s and the sad truth is that it still exists to a great
extent today.