As I watched American Masters biography of Harper Lee last night, I thought about “To Kill a Mockingbird” and how I really needed to rewatch it. Each period of my life that I see this remarkable movie brings yet another dimension to understand. Then low and behold, guess what I see this afternoon?
President Obama will introduce a new restoration of the 1962 courtroom drama “To Kill a Mockingbird” on April 7 on the USA Network.
Based on the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel by Harper Lee, “To Kill a Mockingbird” tells the story of white Southern lawyer Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck), who defends a black man accused of rape, Tom Robinson (Brock Peters).
The airing on USA marks the first national broadcast of the movie since it was digitally remastered and restored by Universal Pictures and the American Film Institute in conjunction with Universal’s centennial this year.
“I’m deeply honored that President Obama will be celebrating the 50th Anniversary of ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ by introducing it to a national audience,” Lee said in a statement. “I believe it remains the best translation of a book to film ever made, and I’m proud to know that Gregory Peck’s portrayal of Atticus Finch lives on — in a world that needs him now more than ever.”
USA is broadcasting “To Kill a Mockingbird” as part of its “Characters Unite” public-service campaign, a bid to combat discrimination through on-air programming, digital content and events.
“To Kill a Mockingbird” won Peck an Academy Award for best actor. The film also won Oscars for adapted screenplay and art direction.
I am particularly reminded of some of the “old ways” when I read about Harper Lee or see Mockingbird. I don’t come from bomb throwers or klansmen. Far from it. My parents and grandparents were educated people. However, they fit in to their world and there were ways of doing things and not doing things. I never played with any black children. They didn’t live in my neighborhood and I didn’t go to school with any. There were just 2 separate worlds.
One of the most difficult things to explain to younger people, in particular my own children, is how a person can grow up in such an insular world and not think it is wrong. There really isn’t an answer because there just aren’t answers to some things. You question when you are small and then you grow to accept.
There has to be some sort of awakening within each person or group that tells either the individual or individuals that some things just aren’t right and that change must take place. It is wrong for one group of people to have dominion over another. All the conditions that allow those feelings to live and survive were adopted by the dominate culture and they seemed to live on, often in the form of Jim Crow and occassionally crueler behaviors. Those who questioned paid the social consequences, whether it was an especially stern look from your mother that said SHUT UP (when I asked in one of those childish staccato voices that would pierce the air why some unknown woman of color had to ride in the back of the bus) or someone who perhaps ignored social conventions that weren’t part of the drill. Until the Civil Rights Movement, breaking the rules was a quick way to embarrass one’s family and bring disgrace on one’s self. The Civil Rights movement didn’t make it easier for white people with a conscience to do anything differently but many did. Most people didn’t in the south. From what I have read, it was dangerous to do so. I was too young to know first hand.
Harper Lee’s smartest move was writing that novel through the eyes of little Scout. Children can ask those questions with far less social consequence than adults. Children aren’t naturally prejudice. What prejudices they acquire are learned. “To Kill a Mockingbird” is usually read by the young, although I was not so young when I first read it. I missed it as a kid. I was either too young or too southern. It would not have been a book we were encouraged to read in school. Too racial! Harper Lee, while being one of us, was seen as a traitor or at best, misguided by many southerners.
Today, the book is still being challenged but for other reasons. Tom Robinson’s character is not developed satisfactorily, according to some. He is the man accused of rape. The language in the book is rough. The N word is said a time or two. Actually, the critics of the novel today are almost a mirror image of the criticism from the 60s.
If you get a chance, catch the Harper Lee biography on PBS. You will also be able to watch it online on PBS. Then re-watch Mockingbird on April 7. Its probably good to dipstick our own tolerance levels every once in a while.
Good luck finding “To Kill a Mockingbird” on Kindle or Nook.
Definitely one of my all time favorites and the likely reason I became an English major. Getting credit for reading and analyzing classics? What could be better than that?
I guess the roles are sort of reversed today what with the black community rallying to figuratively lynch George Zimmerman. Think about it.
I don’t think most blacks are calling for Zimmerman to be lynched. I think they would be real happy if he were just arrested and had his day in court.
I don’t consider the black panthers representative of the black community.
I see a distinction between saying that after a homicide charges should be brought and actually trying to hang a man falsely accused of rape. “To Kill a Mockingbird” would have lost some of its punch had it been about Sheriff Heck deciding not to charge or closely investigate Tom Robinson following the allegations against him.
Totally agree, Scout. However, there is nothing like Mockingbird to make us think about our inner feelings on race. I wish I could remember a few good lines.
I need to re-read and re-watch.
Say what you will, but the basic idea is a rush to judgement based on race, not any proven facts. That, is basis of this movie, and it can be equally applied to the Martin case. Granted the offense is different, but the attitudes and reasons behind it are the same just reversed. Otherwise race wouldn’t even be a part of the Martin discussion. The only focus would be the investigation, and the likes of uncle Al and Jesse would have no say in the matter.
SA, so you would have just sent Zimmerman home, regardless of what the lead investigator thought?
You are aware that without Jesse and Al, there would be no story? I guess if there is no story then we have nothing to talk about. Everyone but the Martin family can just pretend it didn’t happen.
Before we go too far down the road with reverse parallels, I want to commend MH for being willing to explore some of the inconsistencies of southern life back in the day. I do think it is gutsy of her to open up old wounds, try to place herself in the context of what was going on around her and then try to come to some accommodation. It may also help to explain the quick, over reaction to the Martin shooting and the rush to judgement by those who are already hyper sensitive to past injustices (never again) and, perhaps, even the willingness of those who were directly or indirectly a part of those injustices as to why they too are now predisposed to question the prejudices of a rural southern police force when faced with a multi-cultural incident.
Thank you, Blue. I am not sure if it was gutsy or foolish.
People who haven’t lived through those times spometimes feel that the path should have been clearer. I guess I am trying to say that it getting from point A to point B evolved. It wasn’t always a direct route.
Part of my journey involved an elderly black gentlaman who was a bartender in a private club in Fredericksburg. What a source of wisdom! Its hard to know where to begin.
This movie would be so much better if it was directed by “J. J.” Abrams, had a 100 million dollar budget and somehow involved the fate of Earth but we were saved at the last moment because of Americas awesomeness.
I thought the police wanted to charge Zimmerman but the prosecution told them they had no case. Did something change?
I am not sure anyone knows. That’s the problem. If you shoot someone, why aren’t you accountable? That doesn’t say much for this law you have been defending.
The film was made in 1962. Nuff said?
@Moon-howler
Zimmerman is accountable, and he never argued that he wasn’t.
But there is a huge, huge difference between a justified shooting in self defense and the charge of murder and that is what this is about. If you don’t like the law that says Mr. Howler can defend himself without first retreating (in your own home) that is your right. I hope you never have to chose or need the defense of that law. If you do not like the law that allows Mr. Howler to shoot while already being beating (broke his nose and slammed his head on the pavement) after screaming for help that too is your right. Again, it is one of those there but for the grace of God go I things. That too is your right. However, believing the sequence of events and and how it actually went down is different than arguing that a Castle or Stand Your Ground law is inappropriate. I think we are losing sight of the fact that both laws are designed to give the benefit of the doubt to the victums of crime. In the Zimmerman case, one officer wanted to arrest (at the station) – just make sure about the applicable law, but clearly all the officers present, by their own reports, believed that he had been attacked.
Several years ago a PWCPD officer was attacked and severely beaten. He took additional injuries trying to prevent the guy from getting his gun – enougth that he had to leave the force. A second officer shot the guy several times to stop it. My concern with both laws is that as a citizen, I do not understand I would be covered if I had helped either the officer or Zimmerman and that is wrong. I don’t think the laws go far enough.
I suppose you are right if you believe Zimmerman. I think he is a liar but that is my opinion. Why do I think that? His story has changed too many times. There is a huge distance from going home and being charged with murder. I believe he was supposed to be charged with man slaughter.
Here’s the problem–there were only 2 witnesses and 1 of them is dead. The foresnsics were rushed through and little evidence was taken. Where are the clothes, whwere are the DNA samples, where is the autopsy? The entire process seems very incomplete and in my opinion, it was handled poorly.
I made an if—–> then statement. If there is no accountibility then there is something wrong with the law. Otherwise, what is to keep someone from luring a person into a confrontation, bumping them off, and say you acted in self defense? That is pretty much what I am seeing. I would like to be proven wrong.
My problem with the Zimmermans of the world is that they basically aren’t trained like our police officers are. You have amateurs against the pros.
Thanks, Moon-howler, for reminding me that Harper Lee’s biography – which I missed because I couldn’t stay up that late – was available online through PBS. I’ve read “To Kill A Mockingbird” numerous times and am familiar with the Sixties South. Harper Lee was gutsy to write it.
Second Alamo, no comparison. Whites have always worked from an advantage. Did then. Do now.
I know my parents, New Yorkers, tried to get us out of there (the 50s/60s rural South) and to DC. I’ll have to ask my mother how many, if any, of their decisions were tempered by the racial climate. I know our minister tried many times for a transfer away. (His talking the congregation into inviting the choir from the Black church to sing only to have his church members worry about where to seat the parents if they showed up clinched the deal.) Our lives were segregated – socially and in school. Only our maids crossed the color line. (And most towns had their Boo Radleys.)
I could tell some tales that Scout could understand about my federal agent father. In fact, a couple of the things I appreciate and like about the South are the love of the land and the love of a good tale-telling.
@Censored
You and I will have to compare notes on parents. I had a father from NJ and a mother from Virginia. My father turned Virginian because of my mother. There wre ways to do things and ways not to. I do know my father belonged to a wood building club. They built furniture and shot the bull. He told them that integration was coming whether they liked it or not. (he wasn’t endorsing it one way or the other, just stating his opinion that it was coming) This might have even been after Brown v Bd of ed was handed down. They got mad at him and he didn’t go back. I am not sure if he was given the boot or if he didn’t like their attitude.
I think the moral of this story is, it was real hard to go up against the status quo, even a little bit.
The mistake younger people often make is being a little too quick to apply the R word. Plenty of people lived by the rules of society who were not what I would call racist. I don’t think many folks really understand racsim like people who grew up when we did.
“That doesn’t say much for this law you have been defending.”
I think when you understand the law we can begin to debate it.
To the topic, this movie is a sleeper for people in my generation. It needs to be amped up with explosions, CGI, 3D and lots of violence.
Perhaps that is because some people in your generation simply lack the ability to evalate anything that is cerebral and doesn’t have lots of pop and snaz. Notice I used the word SOME.
I know people of your generation who are quite capable of unserstanding things with a plot and a theme. As for violence, this film is filled with violence.
Insulting me and pretending I don’t understandn the law doesn’t make it so. I have no intentions of debating the law with you. Frankly, I don’t think there is all that much to understand. Look at who it was written for.
I so wish this whole Martin thing would go to trial, but they first have to charge Zimmerman with something, and that something has to be based on factual evidence. If they charge him on something that has no evidence, then he will walk anyway. Face it, there is no way an intelligent jury would not have reasonable doubt that Zimmerman shot Martin in cold blood. Too many solid facts dispute the initial claim of hunting Martin down and shooting him in cold blood for no reason as was first voiced by the parents. I’ve yet to see anyone admit that their initial claims were flawed. They created a story, and are now hell bent to make it so.
“Perhaps that is because some people in your generation simply lack the ability to evalate anything that is cerebral and doesn’t have lots of pop and snaz. Notice I used the word SOME.”
I don’t disagree. I blame public education.
But, I was actually talking about the racial angle. I grew up in schools where people just didn’t care if you were white, black, yellow or brown. I just don’t see this American racism that ‘seems to be everywhere’. I also don’t understand white guilt – at all.
SA, agreed. The State won’t meet it’s burden. It’s sad that a teenager died but it happens everyday in Chicago without a peep.
Leave the particulars of Zimmerman and Martin out of it and you have a case that Prosecutors would have a lot of trouble with (based on what’s known in the open press). As Ms. MH notes, there were two direct witnesses, one of whom is dead and the other who has a lot of room to maneuver and every incentive to make the dead guy appear to be the aggressor. But the issues isn’t (or shouldn’t be) whether Zimmerman is guilty. The issue is whether there should have been more immediate process around the death, the investigation, and the decision to kiss it off. There are times when the State will bring a criminal action not because they are very sure they will get a conviction, but because they think there is a good possibility that a wrong was done which, if allowed to become commonplace in society, would tear the fabric of the law apart. This may be one of those cases. I would absolutely love to be a defense attorney on this one because of the apparent lack of extrinsic evidence to disprove my client’s story. But . . . that doesn’t mean the State shouldn’t bring charges.
To Kill A Mockingbird is a classic, in fact, clearly, today, there is still a clear discrepency in prison terms and executions that are disportionately more severe when race is taken into account.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-black-and-white-who-lives-who-dies-who-decides
As far as Zimmerman goes, when an unarmed teenager ends up dead from a gunshot wound by a neighborhood watch person, the bare minimum of the legal process should be followed.
Rule of Law!
@Second Alamo
Second Alamo, the parents never said that. Not even once. If you line up all the real evidence, there are big gaping holes in Zimmerman’s story. Martin doesn’t have a story. He is dead.
Marinm,
I thought your mantra was we are all responsible for our own destiny. If your generation is incapable of becoming interested in a “classic”, don’t blame the public schools, blame your generation.
H/T to Scout.
@marinm
Plenty of people are offered a decent education but choose not to take advantage of it. The school cannot come home and force feed knowledge and skills to those unwilling to learn.
There is racism in schools. I don’t know why you didn’t see it.
“There is racism in schools. I don’t know why you didn’t see it.”
:Shrug: Maybe because I don’t hang out with racists.
You don’t have to hang out with racists to understand that there are racists. As I said, I am glad you weren’t aware of it. There are also people who hate gays, and who have other prejudices.
Who knows.
Bottom line, you can’t legislate human nature. Humans will find fault with those who are different in any one or more of many ways. It will always be that way. The differences between the races is just more obvious. We blame everything here on racism, yet in countries pure of race they use other attributes to segregate themselves. The African-Americans can look to the ‘motherland’ to see what can happen in their otherwise utopian world of a single race where racism theoretically can’t exist. Absence of racism doesn’t guarantee nirvana, and never will. To focus on racism is to ignore greater and more destructive issues such as violence. I can take not being allowed to participate in an exclusive club, but I can’t take worrying about being harmed for no reason. That, is the greatest freedom, and one that we are rapidly losing.
Beyond belief.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/apr/4/black-caucus-members-offer-resolution-honor-trayvo/
Interesting that the To Kill Mockingbird thread has evolved into Trayvon Martin discussion also.
I rented streaming video of To Kill a Mockingbird from Amazon. 3 bucks. Harper Lee is amazing and this movie is more amazing than I remember. I still can’t remember when I first read the book. The book was published in 1960 and the movie came out in 1962.
To those not familiar with the 20th century south, study the relationship between the 3 kids and the black adults. I miss that and I fear that is something future generations will never know or understand.
To marin, the movie is black and white. Intentionally.
Strange that To Kill a Mockingbird isn’t available on Kindle, Nook, ebooks or ibooks.
Maybe it should be.
To Kill a Mockingbird was shown at the White House this evening. Members of the Peck family were there for film. Gregory Peck would have been 96 today.
April 5, 1916- June 12, 2003