Statements and Themes of To Kill a Mockingbird
Harper Lee makes some direct statements about the thoughts of the public during the mid-nineteen thirties. The simplest way to make a statement in the novel is through the thoughts of Scout. Scout shapes her character from her father's advice. One of the principle values Scout attains from Atticus appears at the end of the novel when she states, "Atticus was right. One time he said you never really know a man until you stand in his shoes and walk around in them" (279). Lee demonstrates the difference between an adult's understanding of the world around him and a child's understanding of his environment by creating the character Dolphus Raymond. Dolphus states: "'Secretly, Miss Finch, I'm not much of a drinker, but you see they [adults] could never, never understand that I live like I do because that's the way I want to live'" (201). Scout does not understand why Dolphus trusts two children with his secret over an adult and he replies, "'Because you're children and you can understand it'" (201). Dolphus teaches that it is not until one loses his innocence that he looks on things with prejudice. Stating facts proves to be beneficial when one is trying to express a point; however, the best way to learn is through experience.
Atticus gains respect from his children and is capable of teaching them good values because he allows them to experience some of life for themselves. For example, both Jem and Scout are allowed to walk into town on their own, play by themselves in the yard, and cavort around the neighborhood with Dill during the summer. Atticus allots this freedom and in turn, Jem and Scout gain a sense of independence and responsibility. Atticus' encouragement of Jem's visits to Mrs. Dubose, which proves to be an excellent learning environment for Jem. Not only does he learn how to behave in a gentleman-like manner, but he learns of a courage that exists without physical violence. Atticus also permits the children to watch the trial of Tom Robinson. Bob Ewell's testimony exhibits poor language and a low value system. His mannerisms are contrary to those of Tom Robinson, who portrays himself as a helpful and respectful man. The trial of Tom Robinson proves to be the most beneficial experience the children could have. Not only do they see their father in a different setting, but they are able to define what constitutes a decent human being and what amounts to human trash.
3. My teacher gave a test a week; a predilection that most of the class disliked.
...reinforcing the idea that the roles are now switched. Atticus keeps calm during most of the situations, but lets others boss him around and take control while he mainly sits and waits nearby. Scout and Jem begin to stand up for their father when he will not stand up for himself and act caring as if they were in charge of Atticus’ actions, protecting him from the evils of others. Scout supports this idea when she begins to talk very adult-like with Mr. Cunningham, especially showing her thoughtful wisdom when speaking of “entailments”. Atticus later shows that he is proud of his children for sticking up for him when he did not himself by massaging Jem’s hair in his “one gesture of affection.” So while Atticus often is being the best father figure he can to Scout and Jem, they are also very helpful to him by taking control of situations that he would not be able to.
You know Dasher and Dancer and Prancer and Vixen. You know Comet and Cupid and Donner and Blitzen. But do you recall the most famous reindeer of all? Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer was misperceived at first. All of the other reindeer used to laugh and call him names, but after he led Santa’s sleigh, they loved him. Misperceptions like this happen all throughout Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird. As you read the novel you see original judgments made about characters transform into new conceptions and new understandings. Some characters twist your views of them on purpose, others do it involuntarily. To Kill a Mockingbird shows this happening over and over again. All you have to do is look for it.
One of the most controversial laws in the efforts to reduce crime has been the "three-strikes" laws that have been enacted. This law, which is already in twenty-seven states, requires that offenders convicted of three violent crimes be sentenced to life in prison without chance of parole. The law is based on the idea that the majority of felonies are committed by about 6% of hard core criminals and that crime can be eliminated by getting these criminals off the streets. Unfortunately, the law fails to take into account its own flaws and how it is implemented.
Today there is a growing awareness of repeat offenders among society in reference to crime. Starting around 1980 there was noticeable increase in crime rates in the U.S.. In many of these cases it was noted that these individuals were in fact repeat offenders. So, on March 7, 1994 California enacted the Three-Strikes and You’re Out Law. This laws and other laws like it are currently being utilized today all around the Untied States. This law was first backed by victim’s rights advocates in the state to target habitual offenders. The reason California holds the most importance on this law is due to the fact that it has the largest criminal justice system in America, and it has the most controversy surrounding this law in particular.(Auerhahn, p.55)
Some unusual scenarios have come about due to these laws, particularly in California; some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life for such petty crimes as shoplifting golf clubs or stealing a slice of pizza from a child on the beach or a double sentence of 50 years to life for stealing nine video tapes from two different stores while child molesters, rapists and murderers serve only a few years. As a result of some of these scenarios the three strikes sentences have prompted harsh criticism not only within the United States but from outside the country as well (Campbell). Many questions have now arisen concerning the “three strikes” laws such as alternatives to incarceration for non-heinous crimes, what would happen if the state got rid of “strikes” and guaranteed that those convicted of a serious crime serve their full sentence? It is imperative to compare the benefits and the costs and the alternatives to incarceration when de...
First, the trial of Tom Robinson is an eye-opening experience for Jem and Scout; there they discover hatred, child abuse, and lying. Seeing pure hate is new and strange for Jem and Scout. They know that prejudice does exist, but listening to and watching Bob Ewell during the trial is astounding to them because Bob Ewell abhors all blacks, especially Tom Robinson. Bob’s daughter, Mayella, makes an advance on Tom, which is absolutely unspeakable and shameful at that time. In addition, Bob Ewell’s hate grows (especially for Atticus) because after the trial his reputation and respect is ruined, even though he does not have a high degree of integrity to begin with. Also, through the
In 1994, California legislators and voters approved a major change in the state's criminal sentencing law, (commonly known as Three Strikes and You're Out). The law was enacted as Chapter 12, Statutes of 1994 by the Legislature and by the electorate in Proposition 184 (Mullin, 1998). As its name suggests, the law requires, among other things, a minimum sentence of 25 years to life for three-time repeat offenders with multiple prior serious or violent felony convictions. The Legislature and voters passed the Three Strikes law after several high profile murders committed by ex-felons raised concern that violent offenders were being released from prison only to commit new, often serious and violent, crimes in the community.
First the deterrent effect of the three strikes laws is that it keeps repeat offenders in prison for a long time. After a person’s second conviction if they do not refrain from criminal activity the person will receive their third strike. This law ensures that repeat offenders stay in jail and protect law abiding citizens. The law also sends a stern me...
Above all else, Julia de Burgos’ poem and Rosario Ferré’s story show the other side of self overcoming the societally approved shell. Unity against the enemy in society and false representation creates a common bond between the pieces. Regardless of their differences, they are similar in the tactics used to establish how empowering a changing identity can be. For Isabel Luberza and Isabel la Negra and Julia de Burgos’, the empowerment came from recognizing this need to explore what existed beyond the restriction.
The new phrase in research on gender differences was the use of mental testing and the creation of standardized ability tests. French p...
Among it's primary focuses were enhancing further onsite capabilities in the workplace, meeting the diversified needs of society, and creating value and building society.
Long, Tom. “Great geek portrayals save “Dynamite” from its clichés.” Rev. of Napoleon Dynamite, by Jared Hess. The Detroit News on the Web 2 July 2004. 20 October 2004 < http://www.detnews.com/2004/screens/0407/07/e01-201089.htm>.
Through the evolution of the Humanism religion, changes have been brought about to maintain an updated version of thinking for those identifying as Humanists. Whether members identify as Christian Humanists, Secular Humanists, or Modern Humanists, they all agree on the idea that we are here on this Earth to serve humanity and leave Earth better than as we found it.
The ancient period had been of a great interest to today’s scientists, mathematicians, and even archaeologists. What we use or see now: the formulas in sciences and mathematics, some structures such as the pyramids, and even the calendar may be the products of the olden time. To find the birth of these, let us trace back time starting from 3000 BC: