It’s time for To Kill a Mockingbird to give up its treasured place in American culture.

[Boiler 43,393]

The 1960 novel by Harper Lee was published to instant acclaim, has sold more than 30 million copies, and is ubiquitous in high-school curricula. The 1962 movie version, starring Gregory Peck, is a classic in itself and won three Academy Awards. A play based on the novel is about to open on Broadway.

 

This is quite the résumé for a book that, prior to the publication of a sequel in 2015 that was really the first draft of To Kill a Mockingbird, was Harper Lee’s only work. But nothing is forever, even for a book commonly called “timeless.” Lee’s novel is deeply out of sympathy with a moment when on college campuses, and in the culture more broadly, due process isn’t what it used to be, when it is often thought to be a hateful act to insist that allegations of sexual misconduct be proven.

 

Story continues here:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/atticus-finch-was-on-the-wrong-side/

Edited October 3, 2018 by TBoneTX
taboo to copy entire articles

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I need to read the book. Watched the movie for the first time a couple of months ago.  I am a tad behind on my “suggested reading” list.

[jg121783 3,907]

We need to ban that book and burn all copies in existence.

[TBoneTX 43,019]

Original post edited to remove bulk of entire article -- can't reproduce entire pieces, per Captain Ewok.

[lierre 224]

What that news article forgot to say is that the book was about racism and racial injustice. And the fact that the accused was a black man.

 

Quite an astonishing feat — to twist the essence of “To Kill A Mockingbird” to defend victim-blaming and sexism.

[Boiler 43,393]

They are both victims and sexism, well would the Dems do the same if he was a she?

 

Well perhaps they would, or something similar.

[jg121783 3,907]

14 hours ago, ivyanddan said:

What that news article forgot to say is that the book was about racism and racial injustice. And the fact that the accused was a black man.

 

Quite an astonishing feat — to twist the essence of “To Kill A Mockingbird” to defend victim-blaming and sexism.

It may have been about racism but it was also about being presumed innocent until being proven guilty and not basing the punishment of someone on emotions but instead facts. That is a lesson that could certainly be learned even if the character was white rather than black. I don't see anything being "twisted" in the article.

[lierre 224]

29 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

It may have been about racism but it was also about being presumed innocent until being proven guilty and not basing the punishment of someone on emotions but instead facts. That is a lesson that could certainly be learned even if the character was white rather than black. I don't see anything being "twisted" in the article.

 

 

Have you read this book at all?

 

Do you know about Emmett Till? You can’t just pick a detail from this book and run with it to fit an “argument”. You can’t separate racism from To Kill A Mockingbird.

 

Ignoring the racism criticized by this book to fit in victim-blaming and sexism prevalent in society is TWISTING the essence of this book.

 

Edited October 3, 2018 by ivyanddan

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 minutes ago, ivyanddan said:

 

 

Have you read this book at all?

 

Do you know about Emmett Till? You can’t just pick a detail from this book and run with it to fit an “argument”. You can’t separate racism from To Kill A Mockingbird.

 

Ignoring the racism criticized by this book to fit in victim-blaming and sexism prevalent in society is TWISTING the essence of this book.

 

A man was accused of a sexual crime, and a lawyer fought to prove his innocence.  And won.

 

Yes, it was written in a time where blacks were often treated as 3rd class citizens with no rights,  and illustrated that.  But if you cannot see both elements in the story (false accusations against an innocent man, and the dangers the lawyer took on by rightly defending the poor black guy against practically the whole town), I think you aren't getting the full intent of the author.

[lierre 224]

13 minutes ago, Satisfied said:

A man was accused of a sexual crime, and a lawyer fought to prove his innocence.  And won.

 

Yes, it was written in a time where blacks were often treated as 3rd class citizens with no rights,  and illustrated that.  But if you cannot see both elements in the story (false accusations against an innocent man, and the dangers the lawyer took on by rightly defending the poor black guy against practically the whole town), I think you aren't getting the full intent of the author.

 

False accusations against colored people were not just a thing of the 50s and 60s. It still happens now.

 

You can’t just talk about To Kill A Mockingbird without the racism. That’s like saying I wanna talk about the Holocaust’s lack of due process without mentioning the racial discrimination that drove the Holocaust in the first place.

 

Clearly, the article strove to pick the theme that aligned most with its agenda. 

 

 

[jg121783 3,907]

1 hour ago, Satisfied said:

A man was accused of a sexual crime, and a lawyer fought to prove his innocence.  And won.

 

Yes, it was written in a time where blacks were often treated as 3rd class citizens with no rights,  and illustrated that.  But if you cannot see both elements in the story (false accusations against an innocent man, and the dangers the lawyer took on by rightly defending the poor black guy against practically the whole town), I think you aren't getting the full intent of the author.

Let me rephrase that to illustrate a point.

 

"A black man being persecuted by racists was accused of a sexual crime, and a lawyer fought to prove his innocence.  And won."

 

Clearly there is a message about racism in that statement. It isn't that much of a stretch to say there is also a message about due process there. A writer is capable of injecting more than one message into their stories. I think the writer if the article was right on point.

 

1 hour ago, ivyanddan said:

False accusations against colored people were not just a thing of the 50s and 60s. It still happens now.

It does still happen now. There are also men and women of all other races including white who have false allegations against them. It is a problem we all face.

[lierre 224]

The writer of the article refused to explicitly acknowledge that the fight for justice told in this book was not just a fight for criminal justice, but a fight against racism. 

 

That the legal battle in this book only existed BECAUSE of RACISM. If Tom Robinson was white, the woman & the accusers would have been called a liar right away... exactly how it’s playing out in current news these days. 

 

The clear-as-day agenda of this article is to decry “lack of due process” only if it aligns with their conservative, sexist, racist rhetoric.

[Boiler 43,393]

It was a fight against discrimination. Happened to chose one very relevant to the time situation.

[Sonea 138]

19 hours ago, ivyanddan said:

The writer of the article refused to explicitly acknowledge that the fight for justice told in this book was not just a fight for criminal justice, but a fight against racism. 

 

That the legal battle in this book only existed BECAUSE of RACISM. If Tom Robinson was white, the woman & the accusers would have been called a liar right away... exactly how it’s playing out in current news these days. 

 

The clear-as-day agenda of this article is to decry “lack of due process” only if it aligns with their conservative, sexist, racist rhetoric.

I agree. There is an element of due process in the novel but thats not the primary driving theme of the book. I'm just glad the article didn't try to claim Ms. Lee wasn't the author lol.