Dudek 1
Alexis Dudek
Professor Andy Lautensehlager
ENGL 2614
24 March 2015
To Kill A Mockingbird and Questions of Legal Integrity
Harper Lee published her novel To Kill A Mockingbird on July 11, 1960. Her work
received national acclaim and sold over thirty million copies worldwide. Lee was also awarded
the 1961 Pulitzer Prize for literature. Much of the novel’s success can be attributed to one of the
most renowned characters in literary fiction, Atticus Finch. Atticus, an attorney assigned to
defend an African American client, garners respect and prominence for his fervent attempt to
challenge racial prejudice. Lee’s characterization of Atticus contradicts the portrayal of attorneys
as “callous, self-serving, devious, and indifferent to justice, truth, and the public good” (Dare
127). His character embodies the essential virtues of an attorney: strength, valor, and integrity.
Most critics regard Atticus as a hero and a role model for any participant in the legal system;
however, others argue that Atticus merely accepts his role in a segregated society as opposed to
seeking moral reform. Both supporters and critics of Atticus Finch agree that his actions are
guided by stringent moral and ethical beliefs. Primarily, the debate over Atticus’s morality
focuses on whether or not character-based ethics could influence legal ethics. One critic in
particular, Tim Dare, argues that “the character- based appeal to Atticus is misplaced” (127).
This paper serves as a reference for scholars who seek to analyze Atticus Finch’s character,
ethics, and morality from a legal viewpoint in order to determine if he truly serves as a role
model and promotes legal integrity.
Dudek 2
Most attorneys idolize Atticus for his unwavering defense of Tom Robinson. Andrew W.
Eichner, an associate at the law firm of Nix, Patterson & Roach, extols Atticus’s firm belief in
equality of the law. Eichner praises Atticus for his ability to put his client’s needs before his
own:
Atticus Finch, from Harper Lee’s classic novel To Kill A Mockingbird, is the
perfect example of what a legal professional should aspire to be. At the core of the
novel is Atticus’s defense of Tom Robinson, an innocent black man who has been
charged with raping a white woman. Fighting against the social pressure of
suffocating racism in 1930s Alabama, Atticus shows staunch resolution in seeking
justice for the innocent while pursuing truth and the rule of law, all at the risk of
suffering both personal and professional harm. Atticus’s passionate defense of his
client demonstrates his belief that the rule of law should not only be driven by
reason, but should be essential to how we live together as a society (“Lessons
from Atticus”).
Atticus’s willingness to defend Tom accentuates his developed sense of legal integrity. No other
defense attorney in Maycomb accepts the challenge of representing Tom Robinson due to a fear
of the social repercussions. Atticus overcomes substantial criticism and judgement from his
neighbors. As one of the characters, Mrs. Maudie, explains, “There are some men in this world
who are born to do unpleasant jobs for us. Your father’s one of them” (Lee 227-28). The view of
Tom Robinson’s defense as an “unpleasant job” reflects how Maycomb’s prejudice corrupts the
legal process. Despite the guilty verdict, Atticus achieves success by upholding the legal
principles of equality under the law. Therefore, Atticus Finch embodies legal integrity by
upholding the fundamental belief in equality under the law.
Dudek 3
Atticus also embodies legal integrity by implementing a bold defense during the trial. In
order to defend Tom Robinson, Atticus has to overcome social mores and prejudices. Tom stands
accused of raping a young white woman named Mayella Ewell. Mayella and her father, Bob
Ewell, assert that Tom viciously beat and raped Mayella. Atticus challenges their testimony by
applying certain circumstantial evidence. Mayella’s injuries were inflicted to the right side of her
face, which means that her attacker had to be left handed. However, Tom Robinson is incapable
of attacking with his left arm due to a cotton gin accident that caused permanent damage. Atticus
suspects that Mayella’s father abused his daughter instead of Tom. Consequently, Atticus proves
that Bob Ewell writes left-handed and could possibly be the perpetrator of the crime. Atticus
forms his defense by speculating that Mayella seduced Tom and her father punished her with
physical violence. Atticus’s accusations violate the fundamental division between African
American and White citizens.
Thomas Shaffer supports this view by declaring, “It is not clear, however, that Judge
Taylor expected Atticus to his client as vigorously as he did, and it is unlikely that the judge
expected a defense which would make the remarkable charge that a white woman had tried to
seduce a black man and then had lied about it” (183-84). Atticus’s legal integrity allows him to
remain objective and disregard social mores. His “vigorous” defense of Tom distinguishes him
from his colleagues and his prejudiced neighbors. Atticus acknowledges Mayella’s violation of
the social hierarchy, “She has committed no crime, she has merely broken a rigid and timehonored code of our society, a code so severe that whoever breaks it is hounded from our midst
as unfit to live with” (Lee 216). Atticus’s zealous attempt to disrupt the “time-honored code of
society” reveals his determination give Tom Robinson a fair trial. Thus, Atticus utilizes bold
legal tactics in order to defy socially ingrained racial prejudices.
Dudek 4
Atticus also functions as a role model while defending his client in the courtroom. He
demonstrates tenacity and unadulterated courage while fighting a losing battle. Atticus
accentuates the necessity of determination by stating, “Courage is not a man with a gun in his
hand. It’s knowing that you’re licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it
through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do” (Lee 121). He recognizes the
futility of his case; however, he gives it his best effort despite the obstacles.
Atticus provides an emotionally compelling argument for Tom’s innocence and
underscores the impurity of Maycomb’s legal system. In his defense of Tom Robison, Atticus
asserts, “The one place where a man ought to get a square deal is in a courtroom, be he any color
of the rainbow, but people have a way of carrying their resentments right into a jury box” (Lee
233). Atticus does not fear the jury, even though it has been tainted by resentment and hatred.
Atticus recognized the futility of his case; however, he still defended Tom Robinson to the best
of his ability. The jury’s flagrant racism and prejudice do not deter Atticus from fulfilling his
duties to his client. Atticus never shirks his obligations to Tom, even when the final verdict reads
guilty. He desires to continue the fight and seeks to appeal the case and overturn the verdict.
Atticus embodies loyalty to his client while embracing the courage necessary to fight against an
inevitable defeat.
When analyzing character-based ethics, critics especially value Atticus’s emphasis on
honesty. According to Shaffer, “Atticus insisted on, and lived by, telling the truth. He is
remarkable not because others in Maycomb were liars or because they lived in an especially
dishonest culture” (188). Atticus employs honesty to question Maycomb’s social mores. His
character draws strength from the ability to disregard prejudice in pursuit of the indisputable
truth. Atticus views honesty as a necessary component for living a moral life. According to
Dudek 5
Atticus, “The one thing that doesn’t abide by majority rule is a person’s conscience” (Lee 114).
Atticus represents a morally sound character by honoring the virtues of honesty and integrity.
Moreover, Atticus maintains his individuality and upholds his morals by disregarding an
overwhelming prejudice. He respects everyone’s ability to make their own decisions while
upholding his own moral standards. Atticus demonstrates his superior morality by stating,
“…before I can live with other folks I’ve got to live with myself” (Lee 114). Hence, Atticus
epitomizes a moral character by refusing to compromise his morals as opposed to conforming to
societal prejudices.
Although Atticus continually emphasizes the intrinsic value of honest, disregards his
morals to protect Boo Radley. Shaffer associates Atticus’s decision to protect Boo Radley with
“something about truth telling rather than something about some other moral value” (193). Scout
describes Boo as reclusive and mysterious. The citizens of Maycomb often spread rumors about
him that incite fear in the neighborhood. The neighbors believe that Boo is dangerous and
violent. However, Boo acts as a hero at the end of the novel by saving Jem and Scout’s lives.
Bob Ewell attacks Jem and Scout while they are walking home alone at night. Boo kills Bob
Ewell to protect the children. When Atticus and the sheriff arrive, they realize that Boo
committed the murder. Atticus and the sheriff conclude that Boo would not be able to handle the
public attention of a trial. As a result, the two men agree that “Bob Ewell fell on his knife” to
protect Boo Radley from social injustice. Atticus’s willingness to alter the truth causes the
audience to reexamine the application of honesty. Shaffer asserts that, “truth telling was for
Atticus something more than a matter of principle” (194). Atticus’s decision to alter the truth
causes the audience to question whether or not he embodies a genuinely moral man. However, I
believe that morality is so complex and flexible that there is no certain way to define Atticus’s
Dudek 6
actions as “right” or “wrong.” Atticus’s decision to protect an innocent man does not constitute a
“wrong” decision morally. Nevertheless, I will reexamine this decision from a legal standpoint to
determine whether or not Atticus serves as a model of legal integrity.
Atticus’s position as a moral role model originates in his paternal teachings. Time Dare
describes Atticus as a “loving, patient, and understanding father who guides his children to virtue
while respecting them as individuals capable of judgment and decision” (129). Atticus displays a
serious devotion to his children, Scout and Jem, by teaching them to adopt his own moral code.
Atticus urges his children to never fight, reject the racial prejudices of their hometown, and adopt
an objective view of the world. Atticus encourages his children to “step into the shoes” of both
the victims and the accusers. According to Atticus, “You never really know a person until you
consider things from his point of view… until you climb into his skin and walk around in it”
(Lee 36). This perception helps the children better understand Tom Robinson, Boo Radley,
Mayella Ewell, and Walter Cunningham. Atticus demands that the children sympathize with
Tom Robinson and Boo Radley, victims of racial prejudice, as well as Mayella Ewell and Walter
Cunningham, victims of extreme poverty. Although Mayella and Walter are white citizens, they
are considered society’s “trash” and remain equally as oppressed as Tom Robinson.
Atticus establishes empathy toward Mayella during the trial. Although it is strongly
implied that Mayella is lying, Atticus treats her with respect and courtesy. He recognizes that
Mayella is victimized by her family and society. The supposed attraction she feels for Tom
would ostracize her from the community. Moreover, Mayella is already isolated from society by
her father. He expects Mayella to work, take care of her siblings, and keep the house in order.
Mayella has no more escape from her situation than Tom Robinson. Consequently, Atticus
Dudek 7
recognizes Mayella’s struggle and feels sorry for her. Lee describes the empathy and
compassion that Atticus shows Mayella while she testifies:
Then she burst into real tears. Her shoulders shook with angry sobs… I guess if
she hadn’t been so poor and ignorant, Judge Taylor would have put her under the
jail for contempt she had shown everyone in the courtroom. Somehow, Atticus
had hit her hard in a way that was not clear to me, but it gave him no pleasure to
do so. He sat with his head down, and I never saw anybody glare at anyone with
the hatred Mayella showed when she left the stand and walked by Atticus’s table
(Lee 200).
Atticus genuinely shows remorse for causing Mayella emotional stress. He puts his head down to
avoid witnessing her pain and ignore the hatred she expresses toward him. Lee’s characterization
of Mayella as “poor and ignorant” aptly demonstrates Mayella’s suppression. Her lack of
education, socioeconomic status, and lack of independence prevent her from escaping
victimization. Atticus’s ability to show Mayella compassion and empathy underscores his desire
to seek justice for all the weak and suppressed individuals. Thus, Atticus develops compassion
for both the plaintiff and the defendant in order to expose the various forms of social injustice.
Atticus also demonstrates empathy toward Mr. Cunningham, a poor and one of the many
victims of the Great Depression. Mr. Cunningham first appears in the novel while paying for
Atticus’s legal services with an entailment. An entailment allows poor workers to pay for their
legal services with produce instead of money. However, Mr. Cunningham appears later in the
novel as part of a lynch mob that seeks to kill Tom Robinson. The mob targets Tom after he has
been transferred to a new jail. Atticus, sensing Tom’s vulnerability, guards the door and meets
the mob when they arrive. Scout, Jem, and their friend Dill follow Atticus to the jail and witness
Dudek 8
the mob attempting to kill Tom. Scout, unaware of the danger, begins to talk to Mr.
Cunningham. She asks him questions about his son and the entailment. Scout appeals to Mr.
Cunningham’s empathy and humanizes him. By speaking to him directly, Scout forces him to
see the danger of the situation and he disbands the mob. Scout does not fully understand the
complexity of the situation. She asks Atticus why Mr. Cunningham would want to harm him and
Tom. Atticus responds by saying, “Mr. Cunningham is basically a good man… he just has his
blind spots along with the rest of us” (Lee 168). Atticus extends empathy toward all people,
even those who seek to commit atrocities. Atticus argues that any evil action can be halted by
appealing to humanity. He declares that “a gang of wild animals can be stopped, simply because
they’re human” (Lee 168). Atticus’s appeal to humanity augments his morality; he can even see
the inherent goodness in members of a lynch mob. Therefore, Atticus establishes empathy for
Mr. Cunningham and the rest of the lynch mob in order to demonstrate Atticus’s unwavering
morality.
Lee reflects Atticus’s morality through the image of the mockingbird. The
mockingbird’s innocence and purity is evident in the statement, “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. That’s why it’s a sin to kill a
mockingbird.” Tom Robinson, an innocent man facing the death penalty, and Boo Radley, the
social pariah of the novel. Atticus fervently defends Tom because he recognizes Tom’s
innocence and purity. He looks past Maycomb’s racial prejudice and recognizes that all men are
created equal. Boo Radley represents the mockingbird because he suffers from a similar social
injustice. Like Tom Robinson, Boo Radley is ostracized by his community. The color of his skin
does not protect him from the prejudices of rumors and slander. Atticus’s desire to protect Tom
Dudek 9
and Boo reveals his significant empathy toward the innocent. His empathy translates into a
fervent defense for Tom and the alteration of moral standards to protect Boo. Therefore, Atticus
Finch serves as a prominent moral figure in Harper Lee’s novel, To Kill A Mockingbird, because
he recognizes innocence and does everything in his power to prevent suffering.
Atticus Finch serves as a role model for other attorneys because he assumes an “activist
role.” However, the Harvard Law Review questions the effectiveness of Atticus’s overwhelming
empathy in a professional setting. According to the Harvard Law Review: “By implication,
uncontrolled empathy may cause one to recoil from reality and its frequent ugliness and may
prove a liability rather than an asset in professional settings.” Atticus does establish empathy for
multiple characters. He understands Mayella’s suffering, protects Tom Robinson with his life,
and spares Boo Radley the plight of a murder trial. Atticus’s ability to empathize with his others
raises questions of whether he should be more detached from his cases. Yet, the Harvard Law
Review article also maintains that Atticus possess a seemingly “unflappable posture of cool,
reasoned detachment” (“Being Atticus Finch: The Professional Role of Empathy in "To Kill a
Mockingbird"”).
Atticus’s “detachment” does not make him unfeeling; rather, his ability to balance
empathy and detachment allows him to become a successful attorney and inspiring father figure.
Atticus maintains a balance between power and control through continuous ritual. Ritual “carries
both connotations of meaningfulness and mindlessness.” Additionally, “ritual does not
necessarily suppress empathy but may serve to internalize and channel it into a controlled,
constructive form.” (“Being Atticus Finch: The Professional Role of Empathy in "To Kill a
Mockingbird"”). Ritual allows Atticus utilize his empathy without becoming completely
overwhelmed. Balancing empathy and detachment enables Atticus to defend his clients
Dudek 10
passionately while still being able to detach himself from the case. Therefore, the use of rituals
enable Atticus to perfectly embody legal integrity.
According to Monroe H. Freedman: “Throughout his relatively comfortable and pleasant
life in Maycomb, Atticus Finch knows about the grinding, ever-present humiliation and
degradation of the black people of Maycomb; he tolerates it; and sometimes he even trivializes
and condones it” (479). Atticus refers to racism as “Maycomb’s usual disease” (Lee 97). The
use of the word “usual’ implies that Atticus has become complacent and does not seek true
reform. As mentioned before, refers to Mr. Cunningham as a good man with blind spots (Lee
168). Critics consider Atticus’s reference to blatant, unhindered racism as a “blind spot” to be
more than mere tolerance of Maycomb’s prejudice. Some would argue that Atticus does not truly
persevere against futility and succumbs to Maycomb’s beliefs. Moreover, Atticus did not
actively seek to defend Tom Robinson. Judge Taylor appointed Atticus to the case, even though
Atticus asserts that he had “hoped to get through life without a case of this kind” (Lee 97). Thus,
it is difficult to label Atticus a civils rights activist or an advocate for social change because he
actively avoided any cases pertaining to racism. Malcom Gladwell supports these claims by
asserting, “Finch will stand up to racists. He’ll use his moral authority to shame them into
silence... What he will not do is look at the problem of racism outside the immediate context of
Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Levy, and the island community of Maycomb, Alabama.” (“The
Courthouse Ring”). Atticus’s unwillingness to pursue social change challenges the description of
his unwavering morals.
Catherine Parnell questions Atticus’s legal integrity through his agreement to lie about
Bob Ewell’s death. Despite his desire to protect the innocent, “Finch demonstrates a willingness
to singlehandedly decide when the law works and when it does not” (Literature and the Legal
Dudek 11
Profession: Ethics, Morality, and the Lawyer in Great Expectations and To Kill a Mockingbird).
Laws are not meant to be disregarded or ignored to support one man’s actions. No man is above
the law; yet, Atticus blatantly overlooks murder to protect one man. Although Boo Radley would
not be able to handle a public trial, he should have to face the consequences of his actions. Bob
Ewell may have intended to harm Jem and Scout but no action justifies murder. Atticus acts very
hypocritically because “his decision undermines the very rule of law that he has sworn to
protect” (Literature and the Legal Profession: Ethics, Morality, and the Lawyer in Great
Expectations and To Kill a Mockingbird). Hence, Atticus jeopardizes his legal integrity by
obstructing justice.
The RMN Agency views Atticus as a literary hero with “a lasting impact on the legal
world and society” (“The Significance of Atticus Finch in the Legal World”). Additionally,
Thane Rosenbaum ardently declares, “If there were a Mount Rushmore for American fiction,
Atticus Finch would surely be on it, in the same way that To Kill a Mockingbird is virtually
carved into most bookshelves” (Atticus Finch Is My Law Students’ Hero”). Critics
overwhelmingly recognize Atticus Finch’s stringent moral compass. Atticus promotes empathy,
tenacity, and courage both in the courtroom and at home. Atticus also attains the perfect balance
empathy and detachment to perfect his legal professionalism. Although Atticus does not
intentionally seek out a civil rights case, he defends Tom Robinson to the best of his ability.
Atticus also protects Boo Radley from being arrested for murder. Some critics argue that this
action constitutes obstruction of justice; however, others support his actions because subjecting
Boo Radley to a trail would be comparable to shooting a mockingbird. Therefore, Atticus Finch
does in fact serve as a model for legal integrity because he fervently seeks equality under the
law, seeks to protect the innocent, and selflessly fulfills his duties.
Dudek 12
Work Cited
"Being Atticus Finch: The Professional Role of Empathy in "To Kill a Mockingbird"" Harvard
Law Review 117.5 (2004): 1682-702. JSTOR. The Harvard Law Review Association.
Web. 1 May 2015.
Dare, Tim. "Lawyers, Ethics, and To Kill a Mockingbird." Philosophy and Literature 25.1
(2001): 127-41. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Web. 1 May 2015.
Eichner, Andrew W. "Lessons from Atticus Finch." Texas Paralegal Journal. Paralegal Division,
State Bar of Texas. Web. 1 May 2015.
Freedman, Monroe H. “Atticus Finch—Right and Wrong” 45 Ala. L. Rev. 473 (1994).
<http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/220>.
Gladwell, Malcom. "The Courthouse Ring." New Yorker 10 Aug. 2009. Print.
Lee, Harper. To Kill A Mockingbird. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1960. Print.
Parnell, Catharine. "Literature and the Legal Profession: Ethics, Morality, and the Lawyer in
Great Expectations and To Kill a Mockingbird." A Regional Law Review 3.2 (2010).
Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney. Web. 2 May 2015.
<http://www.smsm.com/filebin/publications/Volume03Issue02Spring2010/mockingbird.
html>.
Rosenbaum, Thane. "Atticus Finch Is My Law Students’ Hero." Slate, 9 Feb. 2015. Web. 3 May
2015. <http://www.citationmachine.net/mla/cite-a-website/copied>.
Shaffer, Thomas L., "The Moral Theology of Atticus Finch" (1981). Scholarly Works. Paper
597. <http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/597>.
Dudek 13
"The Significance of Atticus Finch in the Legal World." The RMN Agency, 5 Aug. 2013. Web.
3 May 2015.