AN ANALYSIS OF PREJUDICE IN HARPER LEE’S
TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD
A THESIS
BY:
ABRINA SIMANJUNTAK
REG. NO. 070705033
UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA
FACULTY OF LETTERS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to praise and give Heavenly Father the Almighty
God in the name of Jesus Christ the greatest honour who always gives me his
blessings, guidance and spirit to finish this thesis.
I am very thankful for the precious learning which I got through the
struggle of thesis process. However, I realize that the thesis could not be done
without any favors given to me by many individuals and institution, particularly
those with the deep foundation of friendly and caring love. In this memorable
moment, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the very adorable:
1. Dr. Syahron Lubis M.A. as the Dean of Faculty of Letters in University of
Sumatera Utara.
2. Dr. Muhizar Muchtar M.S., as the Head of English Literature Department
in University of Sumatera Utara.
3. Dr. Nurlela M.Hum. as the Secretary of English Literature Department in
University of Sumatera Utara.
4. Dra. Martha Pardede, M.S. as my Supervisor and Dra. Syahyar Hanum,
DPFE as my Co-Supervisor for the precious advices, supporting assistance
and understanding that motivated me to finish this thesis.
5. All lecturers of English Department for the patience in giving knowledge.
6. My beloved father, B. Simanjuntak for giving me inspiration and
encouragement to live my life and mother D. Tambunan, for love, care,
support, and also pray they deliver every single time. I dedicate this thesis
7. My lovely brother, Anthonichy Reynaldo, S.Th. and my sweetest sisters,
dr. Dewi (congratulation for your new job sista), Bertua Novita (thanks for
always reminds me to eat three times a day), and Betty Marsaulina (be
nice and good luck for the UAN). Just keep fighting in making our parents
proud of us!
8. The happy family of Manurung, dr. Tota my brother in law, my dearest
sista Eva Simanjuntak, S.E., and also my two little nephews, Arist
Dominggo Hotasi and Joan Guardiola. I will always love you all forever
more.
9. My pals, Mita ‘Tong’ (ghamsahamnida Tong!), Nuri ‘Nunu’ (big girls
don’t be l.a.b.i.l). Thanks for the girl’s chit-chat, shares and all four years
beyond of togetherness we passed in university.
10.The lovely friends in English Department 07, Windy, Elisa, Debora,
Bania, Andric, Eva, Bancin, and the others who are not written here, I do
not mean to forget you guys, keep spiritful....”two thousand and
seven...Fighting!!!!”
11.All individuals and institution contributing the thesis process that I cannot
mention one by one, thanks for the support. May God bless you all.
After all I have tried to do my best in writing of the thesis, but I realize
that this thesis is far from being perfect.
Medan, 2011
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1Background of Analysis
1.2Statement of Analysis
1.3Objective of Analysis
1.4Scope of Analysis
1.5Significance of Analysis
1.6Theoretical Approach
1.7Theoretical Riview
1.8Review of Related Literature
CHAPTER II METHOD OF ANALYSIS
2.1 Data Collecting Procedure
2.2 Data Selecting Procedure
2.3 Data Analyzing Procedure
CHAPTER III A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PREJUDICE
3.3 Comparison of Theories
CHAPTER IV AN ANALYSIS OF PREJUDICE IN HARPER
LEE’S TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
5.2 Suggestions
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABSTRACT
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of Analysis
To Kill A Mockingbird is Harper Lee’s realistic novel. It was published in
July 11, 1960. The plot and characters of this novel are based on the author's
observations of her family and neighbors, as well as on an event that occurred
near her hometown in 1936, when she was 10 years old. The story seemed to be
set in the middle of 19th century in Alabama. To Kill a Mockingbird was written
and published amidst the most significant and conflict-ridden social change in the
South since the Civil War and Reconstruction. (Quoted from
This novel focuses on two major events: the first part, introduced on page
one and occupying roughly the first half of the book, deals with the progression of
Jem and Scout Finch from the innocence of childhood toward the moral
awareness of adulthood. Their family situation and Atticus’ role as a single parent
with two young children dominate this plot. The second part, developed in the
second half of the novel, addresses the prelude to the trial of Tom Robinson, the
trial itself, and the aftermath. The entire story is told from the perspective of
Scout, and her perceptions and judgments about the trial are largely formed by her
Prejudice is an unfair, intolerant, or unfavorable
people. Prejudice as the possession of negative attitudes targeted against members
of a particular
attitudes give rise to negative or unfavorable evaluations of individuals seen as
belonging to that group. Individuals that have a prejudice against specific groups
will tend to experience intense negative feelings when they come into contact with
these groups, either directly or indirectly (Baron, 2007:177).
The characters of To Kill a Mockingbird are full of prejudice. The whole
town of Maycomb is based on stereotypes of its inhabitants, that are passed down
from generation to generation. Rumors run rapidly and usually has a very little
truth. The prejudice in this story is mostly about blacks and whites, but the other
forms of prejudice are just as bad and just as common. Prejudice among all
citizens of Maycomb whether it is race, gender, social class is clearly visible in it.
The town of Maycomb has pre-formed ideas and rigid codes of behaviour. These
codes of behaviour are imposed by the town’s people on each other.
According to the explanation above, my reasons for choosing Harper
Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird to be analyzed because, this novel was instantly
successful, winning the Pulitzer Prize in 1961, and has become a classic of
modern American literature. This novel also takes me to the important message
from the author that the important thing in life is to appreciate the good qualities
and understand the bad qualities of others by treating them with sympathy and
trying to see life from their perspective. Lee cries out to her readers to not look at
Literature has been widely known and used by many people all around the
world. Broadly speaking, literature is used to describe anything from creative
writing to more technical or scientific works, but the term is most commonly used
to refer to works of the creative imagination, including works of poetry, drama,
prose fiction, and nonfiction. Novel as a work of prose fiction concerned with the
ordinary people and their problems in the societies in which they find themselves.
1.2 The Problem of Analysis
In relation to the background of analysis, the problem is centered on
prejudice in novel of Harper Lee titled To Kill a Mockingbird. The statements of
problems are formulated as follows:
1. Is it true that To Kill a Mockingbird deals with prejudice?
2. How is prejudice reflected in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird?
1.3 The Objective of Analysis
Related to the statement of problem, the objectives of this analysis are:
1. To prove that To Kill a Mockingbird deals with prejudice.
2. To show how is prejudice reflected in Harper Lee’s To Kill a
1.4 The Scope of Analysis
Every analysis needs limitation in order to make the analysis does not go
far from the topic of discussion and make the analysis focus on what being
discussed. Most of the story in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird deals with
prejudice and in this thesis, my analysis is going to be focused on prejudice
against individuals in many forms and also its consequences.
1.5 The Significance of Analysis
The result of this thesis is expected to enrich students’ knowledge about
novel. Hopefully, it becomes one of the source of information for students who
are interested in analyzing the novel. It is also expected that through this thesis,
the readers get some information about prejudice in Harper Lee’s To Kill a
Mockingbird. The finding of this analysis might be useful to attract the readers to
continue and find pleasure in reading other literary works.
1.6 The Theoretical Approach
Wellek and Warren state that there are two approaches in analyzing
literary works. They are intrinsic and extrinsic approach. Intrinsic approach is a
kind of approach which analyze literary works based on the text and the structural
the content and the other discipline of knowledge such as history, religion,
psychology, sociology, biography, etc.
I use extrinsic approach by connecting the story with other knowledge, in
this case I connect my analysis with social psychology. Social psychology is the
study of the connection of what people say and do is influenced by social
interaction. Social psychology helps me get the deeper understanding about
prejudice.
1.7 The Theoretical Review
M. H. Abrams in his book The Mirror and the Lamp in 1953 (Quoted from
literature into four kinds. They are mimetic theory, pragmatic theory, expressive
theory, and objective theory. Mimetic theory is the most primitive approach of the
four categories. Mimesis is the idea tha
back to Aristotle who argued that the universal can be found in the concrete.
Mimetic theory defines literature in relation to life, seeing it as a way of
reproducing or recreating the experiences of man’s life in words. This theory
focuses on the relation between the literary text and the extra-textual “universe”
which provides the source and stimulus for what the literary text actually
represents.
Pragmatic theory focuses on the relationship of literary text and the reader
result to its readers, and is sometimes called affective since literature may give
emotional effect to its readers. Pragmatic theory is used to reveal the functions of
literary work in the middle of society, the spread, and the development. Pragmatic
deals with the comptence of the readers.
Expressive theory focuses on the relationship of literary text and the writer
of the literary text. This kind of critical theory of literature, makes sense of the
meaning and significance of literature by focusing upon what the literary text
expresses about the thoughts and feelings of its writer or, in cases where it is not
clear what the writer thinks and feels, about those of the speaker or the narrator in
the text.
Objective theory focuses on the literary work itself, its language, forms,
and devices. This kinds of critical theory of literature, makes sense of the meaning
and significance of literature by focusing upon the literary text in deliberate
abstraction from its relations to its writer, its readers, and surrounding
social-historical and political-ideological contexts; the aim here is to understand the
literary work. Each work is to be judged by its own criteria for internal
consistency, its intrinsic rather than extrinsic qualities.
In analyzing this thesis, I use mimetic theory. Mimetic theory defines
literature in relation to life, seeing it as a way of reproducing or recreating the
experiences of man’s life in words. Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird is a
The term of literature and sociology are two fields of knowledge that
cannot be separated from each other. Literature and sociology are two studies that
are different from each other but they have close relation. Sociology derives from
Greek ‘socious’ (society) ang ‘logos’ (science) which means the study of all the
aspcets of human and their relation in community (Ratna, 2004:1). Literature
derives from Latin ‘littera’ which primarily refers to the written or printed words
(Kasim, 2005:1). The relationship between literature and society is usually
discussed by starting with the phrase, derived from De Bonald, that ‘literature is
an expression of society’ (Wellek, 1967:95). Some relations between literature
and society are: literary works absolutely is the part of society and it uses
language which is the part of social institution, literary works is for the readers
who are the members of society, and literary works is a picture of society.
1.8 Review of Related Literature
In supporting my analysis, I use some related references which are listed
below:
Saragih (2010)
This thesis explains social picture of American’s life, social class
stratification and racial issues that appear in To Kill a Mockingbird. It
helps me to understand more about society of Maycomb and how this
2. To Kill Innocence in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird by Emma
Gutiérrez (2009)
This essay gives me some information and quotation about prejudice. It
tells about the idea of how innocence or goodness is killed. The
controversy of human beings among the society, their thoughts and their
acts are facts that kill the innocence of the little girl, Scout. She learns that
things are not always as they should be. She is also confronted with the
CHAPTER II
METHOD OF STUDY
In this thesis, I apply library research by searching and collecting the
references that contain and support the topics from the library. I use books for my
primary and secondary source of data. To Kill a Mockingbird is the main source
of my analysis. My secondary source is from other books that related to prejudice.
I also find suitable references from the internet to complete my analysis.
In doing this thesis, I use some steps as follows:
2.1 Data Collecting Procedure
The first procedure, I collect data by reading the novel thoroughly. I read
the novel in English version and the translation version in order to have full
understanding about what is being told about and to find out the prejudice that is
contained in the novel. I underline and collect the important information from the
novel such as the information about the characteristics of each character, the way
the characters interact to one another, and the ideas how they face some events. I
do the same thing with the related books and references. I mark the important
information from those sources which has parallel anologies with the problems I
2.2 Data Selecting Procedure
The second procedure is data selecting. All the information that had been
collected were being selected, and only the data that very significant were used in
the process of making the analysis of this thesis.
2.3 Data Analyzing Procedure
The last procedure is data analyzing. I apply analytical descriptive method.
The analytical descriptive method is done by describing facts and continued by
analyzing those facts. Etymologically, description and analysis means to
elaborate. Nevertheless, analysis that have been given another meaning, not only
to elaborate, but also to give the understanding and clarification sufficiently. The
data analyzed by describing and continued by giving the sufficient understanding
(Ratna, 2004:53). I analyze all the selected data to prove what has been planned in
CHAPTER III
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PREJUDICE
3.1 Components of Prejudice
Prejudice is exhibited when members of one group called the ingroup,
display negative attitudes and behaviour toward members of another group called
outgroup. Such group antagonism have three interrelated but distinguishable
elments. Stereotypes are beliefs about the typical characteristic of group members;
prejudice refers to negative feelings toward an outgroup; and discrimination refers
to behaviour that disadvantages individuals simply because of their group
membership.
Prejudice is an attitude. An attitude is a distinct combination of feelings,
inclinations to act, and beliefs. This combination is the ABC of attitudes: affect
(feelings), behavior tendency (inclination to act), and cognition (beliefs). A
prejudiced person might dislike those different from self and behave in a
discriminatory manner, believing them ignorant and dangerous (Myers,
1996:390).
The negative evaluations that mark prejudice can stem from emotional as
sociations, from the need to justify behavior, or form negative beliefs, called
stereotypes. To stereotype is to generalize. Stereotypes suggest that all persons
belonging to social groups possess certain traits, at least to a degree. Stereotypes
about groups usually contain much inaccuracy because they are
overgeneralizations about many quite different individulas. Even when
applied to groups members for whom they may not fit at all. We can distinguish
the stereotypical traits from prejudice, but in fact the two tend to go together
(Baron, 2000:177). Since the overriding fact is that prejudice against a group is
likely to be accompanied by negative stereotypes about it.
Whereas prejudice is an attitude, discrimination involves actions or
practices of ingroup member (or their representatives) that harmful impact on
members of an outgroup. Prejudice attitudes do not always lead to discriminatory
behavior. They are also not always consistent. Today, this kind of inconsistency is
quite common because of the many laws that forbid discrimination based on race,
gender, and national origin. Sociologist Robert Merton (1949:318) identified four
combinations of attitudes and responses. Unprejudiced nondiscriminators are not
personally prejudiced and do not discriminate against others. For example, two
players on a professional sports team may be best friends although they are of
different races. Unprejudiced discriminators may have no personal prejudice but
still engage in discriminatory behavior because of peer group pressure or
economic, political, or social interests. For example, the coach may feel no
prejudice toward African American players but believe that white fans will accept
only a certain percentage of people of color on the team. Prejudiced
nondiscriminators hold personal prejudices but do not discriminate due to peer
pressure, legal demands, or a desire for profits. For example, a coach with
prejudiced beliefs may hire an African American player to enhance the team’s
ability to win. Finally, prejudiced discriminators hold personal prejudices and
prejudiced against African Americans may intentionally call a play incorrectly
based on that prejudice.
3.2 Theories about the Origins of Prejudice
There are number of theories about the origins of prejudice, they are:
social learning theory, motivational theories, cognitive theory, and social identity
theory (Baron, 2000:179-192).
3.2.1 Social Learning Theory
According to this social learning view, children acquire negative attitudes
towards various social groups because they hear such views expressed by parents,
friends, teachers, and others, and because they are directly rewarded (with love,
praise, and approval) for adopting these views. In addition to direct observation of
others, social norms—rules within a given group suggesting what actions or
attitudes are appropriate are also important. Most persons choose to conform to
most social norms of groups to which they belong. The development and
expression of prejudice toward others often stems from this tendency. “If the
members of my group dislike them,” many children seem to reason, “then I
should too!”
The mass media also play a role in the development of prejudice.until
recently, members of various racial and ethnic minorities were shown infrequently
in movies or television. And when they did appear, they were often cast in
low-status or comic roles. Fortunately, this situation has changed greatly in recent
years in the United States and elsewhere. Members of various racial and ethnic
in the past—as heroes or heroines and as persons holding high status positions,
such as those physician, scientist, or president, it seems reasonable to suggest that
they are much less likely to play this role at the present time.
3.2.2 Motivational Theories
These theories focus on the motives of individuals and on the incentives
that induce individuals to adopt prejudiced attitudes. There are two main versions
of such theories.
a. Psychodynamic Approaches
Theories that analyze prejudice as an outgrowth of the particular dynamics
of an individual’s personality are sometimes called psychodynamic theories. One
such theory treats prejudice as displaced aggresion. When a person is angry or
frustated, he normally will try to express his aggresion toward the source of his
unhappiness. However, if the source of annoyance cannot be attacked because of
fear or simple unavailability, he may displace the aggresion to another target.
Another psychodynamic theory treats prejudice as a presonality disorder.
The best known example is the theory of the authoritarian personality. The
authoritarian personality syndrome was originally described in terms of
exaggerated submission to authority, extreme levels of conformity to conventional
standards of behaviour, self-righteous hostility, and punitiveness toward deviants
and members of minority groups. People with the most authoritarian personalities
were also highly ethnocentric, and that in turn was reflected in high levels of
b. Intergroup Competition
A second motivational idea is that prejudice stems from intergroup
competition, it begins with the asumptions that society is composed of groups that
differ in power, economic, resources, social status, and other desirable attributes.
It is sad that true that the things people want and value most—god jobs, nice
homes, high status are always short in supply. This fact serves as the foundation
for what is perhaps the oldest explanation of prejudice—Realistic group conflict
theory. According to this view, prejudice is an inevitable consequence of
competition among groups for resources and power. Members of groups label
each other as “enemies”, view their own group as morally superior and draw the
boundaries between themselves and their opponents more and more firmly. The
result is that what starts out as simple competition relatively free from hatred
gradually develops into full-scale, emotion-laden prejudice.
3.2.3 Cognitive Theory
The potential sources of prejudice involve the possibility that prejudice
stems, at least in part, from basic aspects of social cognition–the ways in which
we think about other persons, store and integrate information about them, and
later use this information to draw inferences about them or make social
judgements. Because the influence of such factors has been at the very center of
recent research on the origins of prejudice, we have to examine the nature and the
operation of stereotypes–a key cognitive component in prejudice.
Stereotypes are cognitive frameworks that strongly influence the
belonging to social groups possess certain traits, at least to a degree. Stereotypes
exert strong effects on how we process social information. Information relevant to
an activated stereotype is often processed more quickly than information unrelated
to it. For instance, reserach findings indicate that when we encounter information
about someone who belongs to a group about which we have a stereotype and this
information is inconsistent with the stereotype, we draw tacit inferences
(conclusions and ideas not contained in the information) that change the meaning
of this information to make it consistent with the stereotype.
Recent studies suggest that stereotypes are indeed linked to prejudice.
High and low prejudiced persons would differ in their responses to the
stereotype-related words. Specifically, highly prejudiced person toward race would respond
more quickly to stereotype-related words following the prime “Black” but more
quickly to non-stereotype-related words following the prime “White”. In contrast,
no differences of this type would occur among low-prejudiced persons.
In other words, negative attitudes we hold toward various social groups
can serve to activate negative stereotypes about them. Beacuse these stereotypes
then tilt our processing of new information about such groups toward confirming
the stereotypes, an especially vicious circle in which prejudice activates
stereotypes and stereotypes strengthen prejudice can occur with dire consequences
for the targets of prejudice
3.2.4 Social Identity Theory
favorable treatment from them, and find them more persuasive than outgroup
members. In other words, once people feel they belong to a group, they tend to
favor fellow group members at the expense of members of other groups. Social
identity theory incorporating three basic assumptions: (1) People categorize the
social world into ingroups and outgroups. (2) People derive a sense of self-esteem
from their social identity as members of an ingroup. (3) People’s self-concepts are
partly dependent on how they evaluate the ingroup relative to other groups. We
are likely to have high self-esteem if we belong to a superior ingroup, and to have
lower self-esteem if the ingroup is inferior. Social identity theory, then, is mixture
of cognitive and motivational theories: It is cognitive because the mere act of
categorization in a group is sufficient to trigger these effects, and motivational
because social identity fulfills self-esteem needs.
3.3 Comparison of Theories
We have now considered four main theories of prejudice: social learning,
motivational, cognitive, and the mixture that is found in social identity theory.
Each of these broad theoretical approaches points to different factors as causes of
prejudice. There is some truth in all of them. Presumably cognitive processes
increase stereotyping in all societies. The perceptual categorizations people
routinely make may facilitate the formation of stereotypes and help to maintain
prejudices. These differences may reflect a need to simplify life cognitively but
they also are the result of specific social norms. Social learning plays the major
role in defining in which groups are targeted for prejudice in each culture, what
other groups. The cultural framework determines how much prejudice exists,
when it can be expressed, and toward whom. The major disagreement among
researchers is whether or not those cultural differences stem primarily from
competition between groups for real resources or from other sources such as early
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF PREJUDICE IN HARPER LEE’S TO KILL A
MOCKINGBIRD
Prejudice is a bad thing that should not happen in our life. But yet, because
of hatred, it happens through out the world. Prejudice is also a feeling and action
of oppression and discrimination against the minority. This is what Harper Lee
wants to show in To Kill a Mockingbird. She brings up prejudice in term of
racism. Lee uses each character to expose each type of prejudice and how they
correspond with the story line of the novel.
There are lots of reasons why racism happens. A person discriminates
because it is his/her nature or character to oppress and discriminate others. One of
the reasons is, it is the culture of particular society that prejudice against other
races. They have a bad perception towards the black, a black people must be an
evil person. In this novel, the black is the minority and the white is the majority.
Atticus Finch is a
Alabama, and the father of Jeremy Atticus “Jem” Finch and Jean Louise “Scout”
Finch. Atticus is a central character in the novel. Atticus is appointed by the court
to defend Tom Robinson, a black man who has been accused of raping a young
white woman, Mayella Ewell. Although many of Maycomb’s citizens disapprove,
defending Tom, and toward Tom for just being black.
“Do you defend niggers, Atticus? I asked him that evening.
“Of course I do. Don’t say nigger, Scout. That’s common.”
“s what everybody at school says.”
“From now on it’ll be everybody lees one—“ (Lee, 1982:99)
Scout is confronted by her classmate, Cecil Jacobs, by calling Atticus a
“nigger-lover.” Scout does not know what this term means, and asks Atticus one
evening. Atticus then describes how he is defending a Negro, and tells Scout of
how the term “nigger” is inappropriate. Atticus also tells Scout not to fight, and
gain the courage to walk away. This passage of the novel portrays Atticus’ beliefs
and values, and how much they differ from that of the other people of Maycomb.
Do all lawyers defend n-Negroes, Atticus?” “Of course they do, Scout.”
“ Then why did Cecil say you defended niggers? He made it sound like you were runnin’ a still.”
(Lee, 1982:100)
Cecil Jacobs also added his comment on Scout’s father by saying:
“My folks said your daddy was a disgrace an’ that nigger oughta hang from the water tank!”.
(Lee, 1982:102)
Despite her extreme aggravation at Cecil’s comments, Scout remembers
what Atticus told her and has the strength to walk away. The quotation from Cecil
Jacobs reminds us of the prejudice and racism portrayed in the South; and by
generations, and that Atticus is doing his part to help end this situation by setting a
good example.
Many times people of Maycomb are prejudiced against Atticus. They
mock him with the word to be more insulting or intimidating. Francis, Scout and
Jem’s cousin, yells to Scout that Atticus is running the family that noone of
Finch’s family will be able to walk the streets of Maycomb again because he turns
out as nigger-lover.
“If Uncle Atticus lets you run around with stray dogs, that's his own business, like Grandma says, so it ain’t your fault. I guess it ain't your fault if Uncle Atticus is a nigger-lover besides, but I'm here to tell you it certainly does mortify the rest of the family—“
“Francis, what the hell do you mean?”
“Just what I said. Grandma says it’s bad enough he lets you all run wild, but now he’s turned out a nigger-lover we’ll never be able to walk the streets of Maycomb again. He’s runnin’ the family, that’s what he’s doin’.”
(Lee, 1982:110)
Mrs. Dubose Atticus’ neighbour also mocks him by defending the black
man. Mr. Dubose, the white, consider black as “trash”, regard blacks to be
socially inferior. Not only those who are black, but also those who affiliates with
blacks, are considered inferior. Atticus, a lawyer, who defends blacks in court is
considered inferior too.
“Your father’s no better than the niggers and trash he works for!”
(Lee, 1982:135)
The trial itself is the major controversy at Maycomb at that time. To the
people of Maycomb, Tom Robinson is just a nigger, who committs an unthinkable
crime. In the novel, Tom represents the black race in American society. Tom
being accused of rape, most of the people see him as an evil beast. During the trial
while Bob Ewell testifies, he stands up and points his finger at Tom Robinson.
“I seen that black nigger yonder ruttin’ on my Mayella!” (Lee, 1982:231)
Mr. Ewell may be barely literate, but he comes with offensive language
when he use the phrase black nigger. He doesn’t use Tom’s name, or even the
pronoun “he”, it dehumanizes Tom. He emphasizes Tom’s race over everything
else (the redundancy of “black nigger”). The way he phrases his accusation forces
the reader to believe that it is not a simple misunderstanding caused by seeing
Tom and Mayella, but that there is racial prejudice involved. Prejudice and hate
only worsen the effect of these misunderstandings and To Kill a Mockingbird
shows this perfectly.
they even hear the case.
How could this be so, I wondered, as I read Mr. Underwood's editorial. Senseless killing – Tom had been given due process of law to the day of his death; he had been tried openly and convicted by twelve good men and true; my father had fought for him all the way. Then Mr. Underwood's meaning became clear: Atticus had used every tool available to free men to save Tom Robinson, but in the secretcourts of men’s hearts Atticus had no case. Tow was a dead man the minute Mayella Ewell opened her mouth and screamed.
(Lee, 1982:323)
The unfair trial here is due to prejudice. It isn’t a matter of what is right
townspeople the sole excuse to accuse and prove his guilty of raping
incapable of committing this crime for he could not have caused those injuries on
Mayella for reasons stated. The town of Maycomb is a typical racist, small,
southern town, full of people afraid to stand up for what is right.
Atticus’ closing statement talking to the jury about equality shows how
serious prejudice and discrimination are during that time.
He starts with this statement,
“I Shall be brief, but I would like to use my remaining time with you to remind you that this case is not a difficult one… To begin with, this case should never have come to trial. This case is as simple as black and white. The state did not produce one iota of medical evidence to show or prove in any way that Tom Robinson’s case ever took place.”
(Lee, 1982:271)
Without any medical or, reliable source for that matter of fact, the case is
simply relied upon the testimony of two witnesses whose evidence has not only
been called into serious question on cross examination, but has been flatly
contradicted by the defendant.
Later, Atticus points out the faulty moral logic of racism that goes in the
trial. Tom is black, black is bad, therefore Tom is bad, and tries to transform it
into Tom is a man, some men are bad, some men are good, look at Tom and
decide which group he falls into. Convicting Tom because he is black, Atticus
argues, would be a silly as convicting him because he is a human being. So, why
do the citizens of Maycomb (or at least some of them) prefer to believe that a
word “tempted” seems kind of strange here. “Tempted” does suggest that
Mayella’s not only being a “bad white person” here, but also a “bad woman” in
being sexual at all, let alone choosing a forbidden object of desire. For her to
desire a black man goes against the accepted order of things in both race (white is
desirable, black is not).
[Atticus says] What was the evidence of her offense? Tom Robinson, a human being. She must put Tom Robinson away from her. Tom Robinson was her daily reminder of what she did. What did she do? She tempted a Negro. She was white, and she tempted a Negro. She did something that in our society is unspeakable: she kissed a black man. Not an old Uncle, but a strong young Negro man. No code mattered to her before she broke it, but it came crashing down on her afterwards.
(Lee, 1982:272)
Atticus is implying here that the real violation here is Mayella’s breaking
of the code that says she can’t do anything sexual with a black man. Accusing
Tom of rape is the closest the law can get to dealing with this transgression of
society’s unwritten code. But Mayella is not really to blame. Being attracted to
Tom is not in itself wrong, though her society thinks it is, but perhaps what is
wrong is acting selfishly without any concern for the situation she is putting Tom
in, and the consequences it would have for him.
But discrimination does not end here,
[Atticus says] “The witnesses for the state, with the exception of the sheriff of Maycomb County, have presented themselves to you gentlemen, to this court, in the cynical confidence that their testimony would not be doubted, confident that you gentlemen would go along with them on the assumption—
Putting forward a innocent black man in a trial on a case which he does
not commit of with success in mind that the testimony would not be doubted. This
is clearly prejudice and discrimination. And this time, not just one young white
girl but it is rather all the white people who go to the court. In their mind, there is
just that ‘evil assumption’:
the evil assumption—that all Negroes lie, that all Negroes are basically immoral beings, that all Negro men are not to be trusted around our women, an assumption one associates with minds of their caliber.
“Which, gentlemen, we know is in itself a lie as black as Tom Robinson’s skin, a lie I do not have to point out to you. You know the truth, and the truth is this: some Negroes lie, some Negroes are immoral, some Negro men are not to be trusted around women—black or white. But this is a truth that applies to the human race and to no particular race of men. There is not a person in this courtroom who has never told a lie, who has never done an immoral thing, and there is no man living who has never looked upon a woman without desire.”
(Lee, 1982:273)
Atticus appeals to a common humanity over divisive racial stereotypes,
and argues that Tom’s blackness is itself evidence of his guilt. Arguing that crime
isn’t limited to one race, that black men aren’t the only ones who lie or rape or do
immoral thing. I think Harper Lee choose to use Atticus’ closing statement to talk
about equality, discrimination and prejudice because not only does it show that
Atticus is trying to change the Jury’s unfair decision, but also, Atticus is trying to
change the view of white people who have prejudice in that court during that time.
His final appeal to the jury to acquit the defendant and show moral
In this country our courts are the great levelers, and in our courts all men are created equal.
“I’m no idealist to believe firmly in the integrity of our courts and in the jury system—that is no ideal to me, it is a living, working reality. Gentlemen, a court is no better than each man of you sitting before me on this jury. A court is only as sound as its jury, and a jury is only as sound as the men who make it up. I am confident that you gentlemen will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to decision to his family. In the name of God, do you duty.”
(Lee, 1982:274)
Several hours later, the jury returns to the courtroom. Despite a convincing
defense, the case is hopeless from the start, the accused black man is convicted by
the prejudiced white jury. Atticus proves Tom to be innocent but yet, he is still
convicted because he is black. Although Tom is convicted, the jury took a while
to come to their decision, showing that they actually think about stating him
innocent.
As the trial through, Dill, Scout’s friend also picks up on the subtle cues
Mr. Gilmer uses to influence the jury against Tom, and recognizes that they aren’t
fair play. He sees that Mr. Gilmer isn’t acting that way because Tom is inferior,
but because he wants to remind the jury every second to think Tom is inferior and
a likely criminal. That’s the prejudice against Tom for just being black.
“It was just him I couldn't stand,” Dill said. […] "That old Mr. Gilmer doin' him thataway, talking so hateful to him— […] It was the way he said it made me sick, plain sick. […] The way that man called him ‘boy’ all the time an’ sneered at him, an’ looked around at the jury every time he answered—“
“Well, Dill, after all he’s just a Negro.”
Dill’s sensitivity to Maycomb’s intolerance gives Scout, and the reader, a
different model of how to respond to what’s happening. The contrast between
Dill’s angry tears and Scout’s justification of Mr. Gilmer’s attitude with the
surprisingly statement “he”s just a Negro” suggests that Scout has already been hit
with Maycomb’s ugly racism, that neither being a child nor being Atticus’s
daughter has been enough to shield her entirely from her community’s prejudices.
Or maybe she’s just trying to comfort Dill.
The jury’s unfair decision upsets Jem so much. He says to Atticus that
Tom isn’t guilty in the first place and the jury say he is. Atticus replies that when
a white man’s word against a black man’s, the white man always wins. The one
place where someone ought to get a square deal is in a coutroom, but in fact the
jury couldn’t be fair, that’s the facts of life.
“If you had been on that jury, son, and eleven other boys like you, Tom would be a free man,” said Atticus. “So far nothing in your life has interfered with your reasoning process. Those are twelve reasonable men in everyday life, Tom’s jury, but you saw something come between them and reason. […] There’s something in our world that makes men lose their heads – they couldn't be fair if they tried. In our courts, when it’s a white man's word against a black man’s, the white man always wins. They’re ugly, but those are the facts of life. […]
“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, 1982:295)
In this society black people are almost thought of as completely different
creatures in comparison to white people, but Atticus treats them all equally with
respect and fairness, like they should have been. When talking to Jem about how
“As you grow older, you’ll see white men cheat balck men every day of your life, but let me tell you something and don’t you forget it—whenever a white man does that to black man, no matter who he is, how rich he is, or how fine a family he comes from, that white man is trash.” Atticus was speaking so quietly his last word crashed on our ears. I looked up, and his face was vehement. “There’s nothing more sickening to me than a low-grade white man who’ll take advantage of a Negro’s ignorance.”
(Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird, 1982:295)
Atticus’s words suggest that cheating someone who’s already systemically
screwed over is even worse than just plain old cheating. This statement is made all
the more powerful by Atticus’s general mild-manneredness and refusal to, well,
trash people throughout the novel, showing just how important this principle is to
him, or at least how much he wants to impress it on his kids.
Calpurnia is also an example of racial prejudice in Maycomb. Calpurnia is
a strict disciplinarian and Finch’s black housemaid. She is like a mother to the
children, as she is the one who takes care of them when their father is off doing
business. As Calpurnia is a black woman, much prejudice is shown against her
and her friends from the racist members of Maycomb County. Especially when
she takes Jem and Scout to First Purchase African M.E. Currch. In this adventure
to a “black church” for the first time Scout, Jem and Calpurnia are confronted by
Lula; a big black woman who is offended when Calpurnia brings the two white
children to their black church.
When Lula came up the pathway toward us Calpurnia said, “Stop right there, nigger.”
I agreed: they did not want us here. I sensed, rather than saw, that we were being advanced upon. They seemed to be drawing closer to us, but when I looked up at Calpurnia there was amusement in her eyes. When I looked down the pathway again, Lula was gone. In her place was a solid mass of colored people.
(Lee, 1982:158-159)
The conversation between Calpurnia and Lula, shows that there is much
tension when two white children are brought into a black church. The children do
not feel wanted and would have rather gone home until they are welcomed by the
Reverend. Later during this experience, Scout realizes that many things done at a
“black church” are the same as a “white church”. Scout is starting to learn that
blacks are no different from whites, but because they are a different colour they
are treated differently. There is a bit of irony in that statement because that takes
place at church. The one place where everyone is supposed to love everyone no
matter what, but, it isn’t like that. They aren’t equal even in church.
Calpurnia indirectly teaches Scout another experience with prejudice when
Scout realizes that Calpurnia talks differently to her black friends than she does
around the Finch’s. At home Calpurnia doesn’t talk like the rest of black people,
but she talks like them in church. Calpurnia explains how she needs to talk
different in front of whites because it gives a different mood and idea that the
whites think about her, but at church a more accustomed voice is well accepted.
“Cal.” I asked, “why do you talk nigger-talk to the—to your folks when you know it’s not right?”
“Well, in the first place I’m black—“
“That doesn’t mean you hafta talk that way when you know better,” said Jem.
with my neighbors? They’d think I was puttin’ on airs to beat Moses.”
“But Cal, you now better,” I said.
“It’s not neccessary to tell all you know. It’s not lady-like—in the second place, folks don’t like to have somebody around knowin’ more than they do. It aggravates ‘em. You’re not gonna change any of them by talkin’ right, they’ve got to want to learn themselves, an when tehy don’t want to learn there’s nothing you can do but keep your mouth shut or talk their language.”
(Lee, 1982:167)
This portion of a conversation between Scout, Jem and Calpurnia teaches
Scout more about prejudice. Calpurnia does not want to make it seem like she is
better than anyone else; if she talked normally, like a white person, at church or to
her friends, she would be looked down upon and people would most likely dislike
her. However, if Cal talked like a black person in the Finch’s home, the children
would most likely pick up on it and start talking like a black person and be looked
down upon at school. Calpurnia and offers different models to Jem and Scout of
how to deal with a world that often can’t deal with who people really are.
Another victim of racial prejudice in Maycomb County is Dolphus
Raymond. He is a white secretive man who separates himself from the Maycomb
society and the white community as well. Dolphus marries a
criticized by the rest of
majority of time by carrying a Coca-Cola bottle with “whiskey” inside to give the
county something to make up for the fact that he is with a
community put such an emphasis on segregation that Dolphus Raymond pretends
to be a drunk to give people a reason as to why he lead his life the way that he
passed down through generations. It would torture the ordinary people that a
white man wants to live with a black woman because he loves her.
“You little folks won’t tell on me now, will you? It’d ruin my reputation if you did.”
“You mean all you drink in that sack’s Coca-Cola? Just plain Coca-Cola?”
“Yes ma’am,” Mr. Raymond nodded. I liked his smell: it was of leather, horses, cottonsedd. He wore the only English riding boots I had ever seen. “That’s all I drink, most of the time.”
“Then you just pretend you’re half—? I beg you pardon, sir,” I caught myself. “I didn’t mean to be—“
Mr. Raymond chuckled, not at all offended, and I tried to frame a discreet question: “Why do you do like you do?” “Wh—oh yes, you mean why do I pretend? Well, it’s very simple, he said. “Some folks don’t—like the way I live. Now, I could say the hell with ‘em, I don’t care if they don’t like it. I do say I don’t care if they don’t like it, right enough—but I don’t say the hell with ‘em, see?”
(Lee, 1982:267)
Dolphus is explaining to Jem that people search for reasons to persecute
those who seem different to them. Dolphus thinks it is just as easy to give them
something to talk about, than to try to deny it. People just aren’t accepting of the
things they couldn’t or don’t understand, so they judge them without trying to
understand. Like Calpurnia’s speaking one language at home with the Finches and
another at the black Church, Mr. Raymond’s double life shows Scout the
compromises people have to make in order to live in communities where they
don’t quite fit in.
“I try to give ‘em reason, you se. It helps folks if they can latch onto a reason. When I come to town, which is seldom, if I weave a little and drink out of this sack, folks can say Dolphus Raymond’s in the clutches of whiskeys— that’s why he won’t change his ways. He can’t help himself, that’s why he lives the way he does.”
“It ain’t honest but it’s mighty helpful to folks. Secretly, Miss finch, I’m not much a drinker, but you see they could never, never understand that I live like I do because that’s the way i want to live.”
(Lee, 1982:267)
Dolphus also has several kids with the woman but they kids are also
criticized because they are different than everyone else, they are mixed child. The
white society don’t acccept them because they are half black and the black society
don’t accept them because they are half white. Jem and Scout later try to figure
out how society divides people up into races, and what happens when those
divisions break down.
“Jem,” I asked, “what’s a mixed child?”
“Half white, half colored. You’ve seen them, Scout. You know that red-kinky-headed one that delivers for the drugstore. He’s half white. They’re real sad.”
“Sad, how come?”
“They don’t belong anywhere. Colored folks won’t have ‘em because they’re half white; white folks won’t have ‘em ‘cause they’re colored, so they’re just in betweens, don’t belong anywhere. . . Yonder’s one of ‘em.”
A small boy clutching a Negro woman’s hand walked toward us. He looked all Negro to me; he was rich chocolate with flaring nostrils and beautiful teeth. Sometimes he would skip happily, and the Negro woman tugged his hand to make him stop.
Jem waited until they passed us. “That’s one of the little ones,” he said.
“How can you tell?” asked Dill. “He looked black to me.” “You can’t sometimes, not unless you know who they are. But he’s half Raymond, all right.”
“But how can you tell?” I asked.
“I told you, Scout, you just hafta know who they are.” “Well how do you know we ain’t Negroes?”
“That’s what i thought,” said Jem, “but around here once you have a drop of Negro blood, that makes you all black.”
(Lee, 1982:215-216)
There are three things in the passage above that I find extremely powerful.
One is Jem saying that the ‘mixed’ children are sad. When Scout asks why, he
says that it is because they don’t fit anywhere, because neither the white people
nor the coloured people want them. The fact that it is the truth.
The second thing that makes the passage so memorable that when Dill and
Scout ask Jem “how you can tell if a person is mixed, since the mixed boy that
Jem points out to them looks like a ‘pure’ Negro.” Jem says that you just have to
know the person, and their history, since there’s often no way of telling physically
whether or not they have mixed bloodlines. It’s bad enough that racial prejudice
affect people so much and that people are discriminated against because of the
colour of their skin, but at least people have some tangible reason for
discrimination.
And lastly, especially coming from a child as young as Scout, is the
question “…how do we know we ain’t Negroes?” A simple, logical question, but
so amazingly thought-provoking. How do they know they don’t have Negro blood
in them. It would be very possible, as Scout mentions: “…if we came out durin’
the Old Testament it’s too long ago to matter”, but Jem also points out that
“…around here, once you have a drop of Negro blood, that makes you all black.”
So, how can blood have a racial identity. It’s quite possible that some of the most
prejudiced, negro-hating members of Maycomb could easily have negro blood in
Another type of prejudice which exists in the novel is prejudice based on
social class. Social class prejudice is based strongly on financial standing, and
social acceptance and family status. There is a definite separation between those
who are higher and those who are lower on the social ladder.
The society of Maycomb County has a definite structure. This structure
contained four classes. The first or the upper class, the second class is the white
workers, the third class is the “white trash”, and the lowest class is black citizens.
The first or upper class consists of white collar, the white, educated
“wealthy” families. Characters who fit into this class are Atticus Finch, a well-off,
highly respected lawyer and citizen in town, and Judge Taylor, the justice of
Maycomb County and presiding judge at the Robinson trial. Other characters who
belong to this upper class are Alexandra Finch, Scouts and Jems’s aunt, Miss
Maudie Atkinson, an open- minded, kind woman, and Miss Stephanie Crawford,
the renown gossip of the town.
The most prejudiced person towards social class is represented by Aunt
Alexandra. She is the main character who highlights the stereotypes of the various
families, and when she comes to live with Atticus, Scout, Jem and Cal, all of this
is brought to the notice of Scout.
Mrs. Grace Merriweather sips gin out of Lidya E. Pinkham bottles it’s nothing unusual–her mother did the same.
(Lee, 1982:175)
According to Aunt Alexandra, family is destiny in Maycomb. While on
the one hand this is limiting, there’s no way for a person to be different from their
parents on the other, it allows people to indulge themselves without being judged
because general opinion is that they can’t help themselves. Either the parents raise
their kids to be like them, for good or ill, or the pressure of community
expectations that a person live up, or down, to their family is too much to resist.
The way that this society is set so strongly in stone means that it isn’t moving
forward as the rest of the world is; it is set in old superstitions and stereotypes
without thinking of moving on to a more open minded way.
Aunt Alexandra stands plays the greatest role in reinforcing these notions
within the Finch family. Aunty sees the Finch name like an exclusive brand. In
Scout’s ears, Aunty often speaks in capital letters Of Doom, is part of her more
general way of classifying people by family heritage. Her obsession with Family
Streaks suggests an underlying belief that family is destiny, and that Finches are
destined to be superior.
Aunt Alexandra, in underlining the moral of young Sam Merriweather's suicide, said it was caused by a morbid streak in the family. Let a sixteen-year-old girl giggle in the choir and Aunty would say, "It just goes to show you, all the Penfield women are flighty." Everybody in Maycomb, it seemed, had a Streak: a Drinking Streak, a Gambling Streak, a Mean Streak, a Funny Streak.
(Lee, 1982:172)
Alexandra believes that because the Finch family comes from a long line
respect than do other people and they must comfort themselves according to their
status. She refuses to associate with both black and white citizens alike because
they do not fill the same social position. Atticus, on the other hand, urges his
children to sympathize with others and to see everything from their point of view
before they judge or criticize others. For example, Scout cannot understand why
Aunt Alexandra refuses to let her consort with young Walter Cunningham.
If they’re good folks, then why can’t I be nice to Walter?” (Lee, 1982:300)
Aunt Alexandra introduced Jem and Scout to social prejudice is how she
wouldn’t let Scout play with Walter Cunningham. Although the Finches and the
Cunninghams are both white families.
“Jean Louise, there is no doubt in my mind that they’re good folks. But they’re not our kind of folks.”
(Lee, 1982:299)
Aunt Alexandra dislikes them because the Cunninghams are poor farmers
that lives out of town, Aunt Alexandra regards Walter to be socially inferior, and
said she would only let him in the house on business. Aunt Alexandra’s excuse of
not allowing Scout to play with Walter since he is trash proves how prejudice
does not only happen with racial prejudice but also from the family status or
social class.
“Aunty,” Jem spoke up, “Atticus says you can choose your friends but you sho’ can’t choose your family, an’ they’re still kin to you no matter whether you acknowledge ‘em or not, and it makes you look right silly when you don't.”
She had said Indeed Not, but this time she would give her reasons: “But I want to play with Walter, Aunty, why can’t I?”
She took off her glasses and stared at me. “I’ll tell you why,” she said. “ Because—he—is—trash, that’s why you can’t play with him. I’ll not have you around him, picking up his habits and learning Lord-knows-what.”
(Lee, 1982:300-301)
In the quotation above, Aunt Alexandra has distinguished herself as a
higher class, and is making it seem okay to act, talk and think the way she does,
when really it is very rude and obnoxious towards others. Here Atticus’s and Aunt
Alexandra’s opinions appear to be switched. Atticus, as Jem quotes him, says that
family is something you can’t help, while Aunt Alexandra comes down on the
side of choice. But in another sense their views haven’t changed: Atticus is still
concerned with keeping people in the family, while Aunt Alexandra wants to kick
out the unworthy.
Aunt Alexandra clearly wants to kick out the unworthy things by making
Cal out of the family. Calpurnia has established a respected place in the Finch
family through years of dedicated service and through the love she has shown the
Finch children. Aunt Alexandra senses the family’s closeness to Cal, and fears the
bond the family has with Cal. Any relationship with a black person that goes
deeper than employer and employee causes scandal in Maycomb, and Aunt
Alexandra fully understands gossip and scandals. Aunt Alexandra’s attempt to get
rid of Cal results from her understanding of the matter. Shortly after her arrival,
Aunt Alexandra councils Atticus. Alexandra sees the respect and love that Scout
feels towards Cal and fears Scout will learn to love what she considers “trash”.
Aunt Alexandra’s label of it does not only classify blacks, but any group or person
Alexandra regards herself and the rest of the Finches as the royalty of Maycomb
and she tries to make Scout understand this notion.
Atticus’s voice was even: “Alexandra, Calpurnia’s not leaving this house until she wants to. You may think otherwise, but I couldn't have got along without her all these years. She’s a faithful member of this family and you’ll simply have to accept things the way they are.” (Lee, 1982:182)
Atticus directly counters Alexandra’s wish to get rid of Cal, showing the
high value he puts on Calpurnia. Atticus even goes as far as to say he regards Cal
as a faithful member of the family which goes against all that Alexandra has tried
to teach Scout. While Aunt Alexandra’s idea of family is based on exclusivity,
kicking out those who aren’t worthy of being counted in, Atticus’s is much more
inclusive. Aunt Alexandra arranges family by blood, while Atticus considers
affection and loyalty. Once again Aunt Alexandra thinks of family as what a
person’s born into, while Atticus thinks about whom that person connects with.
The second class in Maycomb County included the blue collar, white
workers, primarily farmers who struggle to make ends meet. Dolphus Raymond,
and The Cunninghams represent this group.
Dolphus Raymond is a white secretive man who separates himself from
the Maycomb society and the white community as well. Prejudice leads his way
as he lives with a black woman and has mixed children. The white society don’t
accept them because they are half black and the black society don’t accept them
because they are half white. It is also torture the ordinary people that a white man
pretends to be a drunk to give people a reason as to why he lead his life the way
that he does.
The Cunninghams are poor farmers that lives out of town. They are poor,
and people sometimes treat them that way, even if the people are not aware that
they are. One day Scout asked Walter Cunningham over for dinner because she
feels bad for him. Calpurnia notice Scout talking about how Walter eats and told
him that most folks don’t eat as well as they do and Scout replied unknowingly,
“He ain’t company Cal, he’s just a Cunningham–“ (Lee, 1982:33)
This single statement shows how Scout is not knowledgeable about what
she says, that’s prejudice. She is prejudiced because she knows Cunningham is
poor.
Although the Finches and the Cunninghams are both white families Aunt
Alexandra wouldn’t let Scout play with Walter Cunningham. The Cunninghams
are considered lower class, because of their financial standing. They have less
money than most other people of Maycomb, so they are looked down at, and seen
as lower class. Aunt Alexandra regards Walter to be socially inferior, and said she
would only let him in their house on business.
The third class of Maycomb County are the “white trash”. The Ewells,
who lives at the dump, and relied on welfare for survival, are members of this
group. It is important to note that the difference between the second and third
class is not a financial one.
The Ewells, and the Cunninghams are farmers, so the crash of the stock
are considered lower class, because of their financial standing. They have less
money than most other people of Maycomb, so they are looked down at, and seen
as lower class. Both are poor. The difference, however, is in the way they
interacted in society. The Cunninghams, unlike the Ewells, refuse to accept
charity and pay back their debts with what little they have. The Cunninghams are
also different from the Ewells because they don’t take advantage of Negroes. The
Cunninghams are looked at as being above the Ewells in social class.
The Cunninghams never took anything they can’t pay back–no church baskets and no scrip stamps. They never took anything off of anybody, they get along on what they have. They don’t have much, but they get along on it.” (Lee, 1982:26)
Atticus said the Ewells had been the disgrace of Maycomb for three generations. None of them had done an honest days work in his recollection
(Lee, 1982:40)
People sometimes categorize entire families such as those labels because
they feel that if you related to someone who may be poor, or weird, or mean that
automatically makes you poor, weird or mean. It is simple to see why the people
of Maycomb respect the Cunninghams, more than the Ewells. While the
Cunninghams never take anything they cannot pay back, the Ewells are people
who will lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want. For this reason, the
Cunninghams are higher in social class than the Ewells, but they are both lower in
social class than the rest of Maycomb’s people, and are both victims of social
prejudice.
between classes. These stereotypes come to surface when Tom Robinson, a black
man, is brought to court on charges of raping Mayella Ewell, a white girl. During
the trial, Mayella Ewell gives evidence of the way other people treat her due to
her social standing in the town by telling Atticus that she won’t answer Atticus’s
question as long as he keeps mocking her by calling “Miss Mayella”.
“Won’t answer a word you say long as you keep on mocking me,” she said.
(Lee, 1982:243)
In fact, Atticus is not mocking her, but trying to be polite, Mayella is not
used to politely talks, unless the politeness in question is sarcastic.
Mayella looked from under lowered eyelids at Atticus, but she said to the judge: “Long’s he keeps callin’ me ma’am and sayin’ Miss Mayella. I don’t hafta take his sass, I ain’t called upon to take it.”
(Lee, 1982:243)
Because Mayella is unused to polite treatment from others, she believes
that the only reason Atticus is treating her nicely is because he’s making fun of
her. This isn’t true, but it’s a stereotype that Mayella has towards all of the people
who are in higher social classes than she is, even though not all of the people are
like that.
Finally, the fourth and lowest class in this hierarchy is the black citizens.
Prejudice runs deep in Maycomb County. Although many classes exist within the
black community, the black community must always be in the lowest class. And
although they may be as educated and economically stable as those in the second
or even first rank, because of their skin they are immediate outcasts and can
their own section of town and seems to have a society separate from the whites.
This specific structure has influence in certain events in this novel.
Segregation exists in the town of Maycomb base
th
from the proceedings while the
is taking place, they could get a better view of the trial.
The Negroes, having waited for the white people to go upstairs, began to come in. “Whoa now, just a minute,” said a club member, holding up his walking stick. “Just don’t start up them there stairs yet awhile.”
(Lee, 1982:218)
The whites are given a better seat than the blacks because the whites in
Maycomb are considered more superior to the blacks. They are expected to have
better treament than the blacks, as the whites are the first to enter the room, later
on the blacks could enter too. The blacks are thought to be the lower class while
the white the upper class. The only people who sits with the blacks are Jem,
Scout, Dill, and Mr. Dolphus Raymond. Noone go outside their race or class if
they did they would called “white trash” or “nigger lover.” As with when Atticus
defends Tom Robinson a black man falsely accused of rape, many people say that
Atticus is a disgrace to his family and that he is a “nigger lover.”
The whites live with the whites and the blacks live with the blacks. Blacks
couldn’t go to the same school as whites and public rest rooms have separated
facilities for blacks and whites. The most evident example of segregation in the
novel is before the trial begins, when black and white people sit separately, where
