Skip to main content

In To Kill a Mockingbird, what is the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law?

A great example of the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law can be seen in chapter 30 after Boo Radley saves the Finch children from Bob Ewell's attack on their lives. Atticus is a proponent of upholding the law even if it means that his son has to take responsibility for killing Bob Ewell in self-defense. Heck Tate tells him that it wasn't Jem who killed Ewell, but Boo Radley. As sheriff, Tate represents law enforcement, so what he determines in the case can be analyzed by the state. If anyone is to be held responsible for Ewell's death, which would be based on self-defense, it would all be determined from Tate's report. Tate tells Atticus the following about his decision:



"To my way of thinkin', Mr. Finch, taking the one man who's done you and this town a great service an' draggin' him with his shy ways into the limelight--to me, that's a sin. It's a sin and I'm not about to have it on my head. If it was any other man it'd be different. But not this man, Mr. Finch" (276).



Heck Tate is basically saying that the spirit of the law overrides the letter of the law when it comes to Boo Radley. He's making the point that it is better to honor Boo for his good deed by allowing him to keep his right to privacy over reporting everything to the police, town, and state. Tate also seems to allude to the title and theme of the book as stated by Atticus in chapter 10:



"Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird" (90).



This seems to be the spiritual law discussed in the book. It's a sin to hurt people who are less-fortunate, or who have fewer privileges or opportunities based on race or social ability. Atticus realizes that Tate's decision is better for Boo Radley, who is like an innocent mockingbird, and tells Scout to support it as well.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more