The enduring presence of Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird in school curricula is a topic of ongoing discussion. While celebrated for its poignant exploration of racial injustice and childhood innocence, the novel also faces scrutiny for its dated perspectives on race and social hierarchy. This article delves into one of the book’s most resonant symbols – the mockingbird – to understand why its metaphorical significance is both powerful and, for some, increasingly problematic.
At the heart of To Kill a Mockingbird lies a simple yet profound piece of wisdom imparted by Atticus Finch to his children: “It’s a sin to kill a mockingbird.” This sentiment is echoed by Miss Maudie, who elaborates, “Mockingbirds don’t do one thing but make music for us to enjoy. They don’t eat up people’s gardens, don’t nest in corncribs, they don’t do one thing but sing their hearts out for us.” This seemingly straightforward statement carries significant weight, serving as a moral compass for the narrative and prompting readers to consider who these “mockingbirds” are within the story and in a broader societal context.
But what exactly does this metaphor signify? Mockingbirds are known for their beautiful songs and their ability to mimic other sounds. They bring joy without causing harm. In the context of the novel, the mockingbird metaphor is applied to characters who are innocent and vulnerable, those who offer goodness to the world but are ultimately defenseless against cruelty and prejudice.
Identifying the Mockingbirds in Maycomb
Several characters in To Kill a Mockingbird embody the essence of the mockingbird. Boo Radley, the reclusive neighbor shrouded in mystery and misconception, is a prime example. Feared and misunderstood by the community, Boo is ultimately revealed to be a gentle soul who acts as a silent protector of the Finch children. He, like a mockingbird, is harmless and even benevolent, yet faces societal prejudice and isolation.
Another character often associated with the mockingbird metaphor is Mrs. Dubose, the elderly and cantankerous woman battling morphine addiction. Despite her initial harshness towards Jem and Scout, her struggle reveals a hidden strength and a desire to overcome her demons. She represents a different kind of vulnerability, one battling personal hardship, and her eventual dignity in the face of suffering aligns with the mockingbird’s innocent suffering.
However, the most prominent “mockingbird” in To Kill a Mockingbird is undoubtedly Tom Robinson, the young Black man falsely accused of assaulting Mayella Ewell. Tom’s innocence is starkly contrasted with the racial prejudice he faces in Maycomb. He is kind, helpful, and utterly defenseless against the ingrained racism of the community. His wrongful conviction and tragic death underscore the senseless destruction of innocence, mirroring the act of killing a mockingbird. The local newspaper editor’s comparison of Tom’s death to “the senseless slaughter of songbirds by hunters and children” explicitly connects Tom to the central metaphor, highlighting the tragic injustice he endures.
The Condescension in the Metaphor: A Critical Perspective
While the mockingbird metaphor is intended to evoke empathy and highlight the sin of harming the innocent, some critics argue that it carries a subtle yet significant condescension. By equating marginalized characters to songbirds, it risks portraying them as passive recipients of goodwill, rather than agents of their own destinies.
This perspective suggests that the metaphor, while well-intentioned, inadvertently reinforces a paternalistic view. It positions characters like Tom Robinson, Boo Radley, and Mrs. Dubose as deserving of protection primarily because they are harmless and “sing for us,” rather than because they are inherently deserving of respect and justice as human beings. The emphasis shifts from their fundamental rights to their perceived utility or lack of threat to the dominant social order.
Paternalism and the Plot: Examining Key Events
This paternalistic undercurrent is further explored when analyzing key plot points within To Kill a Mockingbird. Atticus Finch, the embodiment of moral righteousness, dedicates himself to defending Tom Robinson. His efforts are valiant and intellectually brilliant, yet they ultimately fail to save Tom from a prejudiced system. Tom, depicted as incapable of effectively aiding his own defense (“doesn’t have the resources (financial or intellectual) to help himself”), becomes a figure reliant on Atticus’s paternalistic protection. Tom’s desperate escape attempt and subsequent death further solidify this image of helplessness and tragic passivity.
Similarly, the subplot involving Boo Radley and Bob Ewell presents another instance of this paternalistic theme. Boo, the mentally ill recluse, intervenes to save Jem and Scout by killing Bob Ewell. Instead of subjecting Boo to the complexities of the legal system, Sheriff Tate and Atticus conspire to protect him, framing Ewell’s death as an accident. This “virtuous fix behind closed doors,” while intended to protect Boo, reinforces the idea that the “well-meaning white establishment” can and should manipulate the justice system to manage situations involving marginalized individuals.
These narrative choices, viewed through a critical lens, reveal a pattern of paternalism. The novel, while advocating for kindness and empathy, doesn’t fundamentally challenge the existing social hierarchy. It focuses on protecting the “mockingbirds” within the cage of the established “caste system,” rather than questioning the cage itself.
Rethinking To Kill a Mockingbird in the Modern Classroom
The question then arises: why does To Kill a Mockingbird remain a staple in school curricula? While the novel’s historical context is undeniable and its exploration of empathy remains valuable, its paternalistic undertones and potentially outdated messages about race and social justice warrant critical examination.
Many educators defend its continued use by asserting they teach it as a “historical text,” prompting discussions about the limitations of Atticus Finch’s perspectives and the societal norms of the time. However, the impact on young readers is debatable. The powerful narrative and the heroic portrayal of Atticus Finch often overshadow the intended historical critique. Students may internalize the story’s overt messages of kindness and the tragedy of injustice without fully grasping the subtle yet significant limitations of its social commentary.
Furthermore, the continued prominence of To Kill a Mockingbird in the curriculum often means it serves as the primary, and sometimes only, text addressing race relations for an entire academic year. This limits the opportunity to introduce students to a broader range of voices and perspectives, particularly contemporary works that offer more nuanced and empowering narratives about race and social justice.
Expanding the Literary Canon: Alternatives to Consider
It’s not about banning To Kill a Mockingbird. Rather, it’s about recognizing its limitations and considering its place within a more diverse and inclusive literary canon. Numerous powerful and relevant books can offer students richer and more contemporary understandings of race, justice, and social responsibility.
Authors like Maya Angelou (I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings), Zora Neale Hurston (Their Eyes Were Watching God), and Richard Wright (Black Boy) offer crucial perspectives from the African American experience. More recent works, such as Angie Thomas’s The Hate U Give, Jacqueline Woodson’s Hush, Walter Dean Myers’s Monster, and Jason Reynolds and Brendan Kiely’s All American Boys, directly address contemporary issues of racial injustice, police brutality, and identity with greater immediacy and relevance for today’s students.
By diversifying the curriculum and including these alternative texts, educators can provide students with a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of social justice issues. This approach moves beyond the paternalistic framework of To Kill a Mockingbird and empowers students to engage with diverse voices and critically analyze complex societal structures.
Conclusion: Moving Beyond Paternalism
To Kill a Mockingbird remains a significant work of American literature, prompting important conversations about empathy, justice, and prejudice. However, its central metaphor, while intending to highlight the sin of harming the innocent, carries a subtle condescension that can reinforce paternalistic views of marginalized individuals. As educators and readers, it is crucial to engage with the novel critically, acknowledging both its strengths and limitations. By doing so, and by embracing a broader range of literary voices, we can foster a more nuanced and empowering understanding of social justice for future generations.
