Moral icons: a comment on Steven Lubet's reconstructing Atticus Finch.
| Publisher | Michigan Law Review Association |
| Publication | Michigan Law Review |
| Subject | Law |
| Format | Magazine/Journal |
| ISSN | 0026-2234 |
| Issues per Year | 8 |
| Volume | 97 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Published | 1999-05-01 |
| Role | Type | Name |
| Person | Criticism and interpretation | Steven Lubet |
| Author | n/a | William H. Simon |
| Related Content | Type |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Lesson Plan |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | eNotes |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | quickNotes |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Puzzle Pack |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Activity Pack |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | AP Teaching Unit |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Multiple Perspectives |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Power Pack |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Teaching Unit |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Response Journal |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Vocabulary from Literature |
| To Kill a Mockingbird | Salem on Literature |
Atticus Finch's conduct would have been justified by the bar's conventional norms even if he had known Tom Robinson to be guilty. That fact, however, is not the source of the admiration for him that To Kill a Mockingbird has induced in so many readers. That admiration depends on the clear premise of the novel that Finch plausibly believes that Tom Robinson is innocent. Thus, the bar's invocation of Finch as a sympathetic illustration of its norms is misleading. The ethics of the novel are quite different from those of the bar.
Steven Lubet does a good job of showing that the...
[This journal article is 762 words long]
Join eNotes
The above is a free excerpt. Get complete access to our library of journals with the:
