In class, we have begun to discuss if Atticus can be called a hypocrite. Let's push this further. In failing to arrest Boo Radley at the end, Sheriff Tate is breaking the law, as is Atticus, who knows the truth of Ewell's murder. Do you agree with some critics that Atticus's actions are hypocritical, immoral, as well as illegal? Support your position.
I think Atticus was being smart by not exposing Boo to be the hero/murderer. If this happened things would just remain the way they were, maybe even get worse. No one can say justice hadn't been served because if Boo was put in the spotlight for killing Bob, Mr. Nathan would find out and probably punish Boo. So if anyone was going to punish Boo for being Bob's murderer, Boo has already been punished, for about thirty years and probably at least another 20 in the future. Mr. Nathan would not allow Boo to go to jail, but would just continue to keep him locked up with abuse. Thats enough penalty for murder. If anyone was going to praise and reward Boo for his heroic actions, they would be hurting him more than helping him. By leaving him alone to not be found out by Nathan and to keep him out of the pressures of society, they would be helping him plenty. Atticus knows this, and is not a hyppocrite. Any bold decisions about Boo would end him up in the same exact place.
ReplyDeleteI think that there are two ways of looking at this. Atticus did the right thing morally because he knew that Boo would not be able to handle the limelight if he was exposed as a hero. Atticus also decided that because Boo does not want nor need attention or praise for his act of herosim it does not make sense to force Boo to be a hero in the eyes of Maycomb. On the other hand Atticus is sort of a hypocrite because he goes agaisnt the law. He knows that he would be lying to the town and this would go against everything that he belives in. Atticus studies law and by letting this be an exception he is letting his more judgement get in the way of the law. Although he is outnumbered in the end he decides to agree with Heck Tate and Scout and prevent Boo from the stress of being attacked by gossiping women like Miss. Stephine.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe Atticus is a hypocrite, because everything he does is almost always the right thing. Atticus tries never to lie to the children, but in some cases he must go against this just because they are too young to understand and comprehend. By not telling about Boo, Atticus is just looking out for the feeling of a man who had already been punished for years upon years. He knows that if Boo became the center of attention it would harm and scare him, and Boo had always been an innocent man who didn't deserve that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lauren, Atticus is not a hypocrite. When Mr. Tate finds Bob Ewell dead he has to make a decision. He chooses not to tell anyone that Boo killed Bob and I completely agree with Tate. Announcing the truth wouldn't help anyone. Boo would be arrested and on the trail he would not be found guilty because it was clearly self defense. At the same time Boo would feel very uncomfortable, surrounded by people such as Miss Stephanie. Therefore as Mr. Tate said, exposing the truth about Boo's involvement would be a sin.
ReplyDeleteThe other person that breaks the law is Atticus. Atticus knows the truth and due to the law has the responsibility to announce it. However, this reminds me of a similar situation that Atticus explains to Scout in the begginging of the novel. Atticus says that everyone knows and allows Bob Ewell to hunt on Sundays even though it is against the law. However no one does anything about this because they feel bad for Bob's kids and the town would not begrudge the kids any food that Bob brings. In the same way as Atticus, the whole town is breaking the law by knowing the truth and not doing anything about the problem. So, how is it posible to call Atticus a hypocrite witout calling everyone in Maycomb who knows about Bob a hypocrite? Atticus and Maycomb are simply trying to save mockingbirds-Boo and those kids. I don't think this is depicting the actions of a hypocrite.
I agree with Lauren and Annette in saying that Atticus is not a hypocrite. I can understand how the critics believe that he is because he is a lawyer, and all about justice, yet he does not turn Boo in to the police. On the other hand i feel he is not a hypocrite because if I was in his shoes, i would have done the same thing. What he did showed concern and compassion for Boo, and he is not being hypocritical but rather sypathetic and mindful to Boo's unusual situation.
ReplyDeleteI think that Atticus could be seen as a hypocrite. I do agree with everything he does and I would probably do the same thing if I was in his situation but, I still think that covering up the murder is a little hypocritical since he is a lawyer. He is supposed to make sure the law is abided by and argue for those who break it to be punished or not. In this case, he is breaking the law which makes him a hypocrite. Eventhough it is morally the right thing to do, according to the law Boo should be arrested and then tried in court where he would most likely be found not guilty and become a hero. Which, I understand would be a bad thing for a person like Boo but that is still the way that according to the law, it should be done. Seeing as Atticus is a lawyer and he believes the law should be followed, covering up Boo murdering Bob is hypocritcal but morally it's the right thing to do.
ReplyDeleteAtticus is not a criminal or a hypocrite. First of all, Boo would have been aquited of all charges because of self defense, he saw someone hurting a child and that was reason to take action. Also, They are breaking the law, but for a morally correct reason, Boo could never satnd in front of a jury or his whole town, and what would his brother to do to him then, abuse him more? Finally, Atticus does hypocritcal things but so does everybody,if anything the whole town of Maycomb is hypocritcal, as we see throughout the book in the Missionary Circle, Scout's teacher, etc.
ReplyDeleteAtticus's actions may seem hypocritical to many people in that he is a lawyer who helpes give justice to those who deserve it yet he is covering up a murder. As the book comes to an end, I realized that Atticus is actually preventing furture "nightmares" from occuring. If he did expose that Boo was the murderer of Boo Ewells, people will laud him to the point that he would not understand how to accept their appreciation because he has not spoken to many people his entire life. By covering up this crime, Atticus is making Boo seem like the underdog of the book as that he saves the Finch kids by killing Bob Ewells without being rewarded for it.
ReplyDeleteI think Atticus could be considered a hypocrite by breaking the law and lying about what happens even though Heck Tate officially tells what happens. But I think if Atticus had told the truth he would still be considered a hypocrite because he would be morally doing the wrong thing and he always tries his best to be fair. The truth is I think that Bob Ewell did kill himself in a way. If he had not wanted to get revenge on the children and tried to kill them, Boo Radley would have never had to protect them and stab Bob. It is Bob's own fault because he caused the events leading to his death. And if you want to go all the way back, he was the one who beat Mayella and came up with the idea Tom Robinson raped her leading to the trial. He put his own death on himself even though Boo physically killed him. So Atticus can be justified to not be a hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteAtticus is not immoral by letting Bob Ewell's death slide. It is a sin to "kill" a mockinbird, and if they told everyone Arthur Radley killed Bob Ewell, Boo would be put in the spotlight. Boo would hate the spotlight since he has been alone for so many years. It was right of Heck Tate and Atticus to pretend Bob Ewell fell on his knife.
ReplyDeleteteacher note: end tally here
ReplyDeleteI think Atticus is saving Boo because if he had said Arthur did it, Arthur would have died from the attention of people and he could have been convicted of manslaughter where he probably would have died in prison or died in the electric chair if sent. It is against the law to kill someone and Atticus would have indirectly killed Boo by making it public just as Bob Ewell indirectly killed himself. By saving Boo, he saved a life than having to make him like Tom Robinson. Boo is also always innocent even after he kills Bob Ewell, even though I believe Bob caused his own death, because he is a mockingbird so he is not guilty no matter what. Atticus would have killed Boo if he said he killed Bob and that would have been hypocritical and breaking the law.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I agree with Danielle that Bob Ewell led himself to his own demise. Additionally, it says a lot about a person when he is willing to hurt and potentially kill anyone, nonetheless children (and Tom Robinson, who is a mockingbird). What does that say about how much he values human life?
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I do not believe that Atticus Finch is a hypocrite. Boo would have to be a dead mockingbird if he were to be put on trial. Not just the rewards or praise that might come would do this to him... It is difficult for Boo, a recluse, to even stay for a very small amount of time at a house three doors down from him, in only a few people's presence. Now take that and imagine how Boo would handle having to sit, handcuffed, in front of a court full of people while his life rested in a defense lawyer's hands. This situation would be even worse, because he has not been in public for so long that all eyes would be on him for a vast majority of the amount of time the trial goes on for. That is what I call injustice. Since justice is the principle that one's crime should fit the punishment (legally), and also legally and outside of the field of law that one should get what one deserves, there is no way that an innocent man who put his life in danger to save two young children would deserve to receive something he clearly would not want--unwanted attention.
Some things just need to be preserved.
I disagree with the critics that believe that Atticus's actions are hypocritical and immoral. On the other hand, I believe that it could be proven that Atticus's actions can be considered illegal. Judging by Atticus's religious beliefs and morals, it is not hypocritical of him to allow the murder of Bob Ewell to slip through the cracks. Heck Tate had the right idea when he said to let the dead bury the dead. It would be completely wrong if they exposed Boo Radley to Maycomb as a murderer. All Boo did was that he protected Jem and Scout as if they were his own children. Although it involved the killing of Bob Ewell, it was not something that was done maliciously or purposefully. I believe that two children's lives are worth more than that of an abuser and a drunk. If Jem and Scout had been killed, it would be an immoral act on all sides. Atticus did the right thing by allowing Bob Ewell's murder to be left alone. As Scout said, it would be like shooting a mockingbird. Boo was pretty much a child like them and did what any father would do if his children were in danger. Like Erin said, "Some things just need to be preserved". In this case, Boo Radley's well-being needs to be saved.
ReplyDelete3rd q tally
ReplyDelete