What contemporary media and investigation has revealed is that great people can have terrible flaws . They may have embarrassing addictions and underhanded ways of achieving their goals . It is possible to be one of Americas great Athletes and TV dad and also be a cross dresser / cross gender . It has always existed however much more difficult to monitor in the past . To mistake a hero for a perfect person can be devastating for a child or an adult .

I've concluded that whoever thinks that Atticus was a bigot either did not read the book to the end or came up with a much different conclusion than I.
I live in the deep south; conditions down here have improved but there is still a lot of work to do in the future and right now.
IF people had read everything in the book they might not feel as they do.

Dear Beverly,
Who's the Jewish martyr?

You asked who is the Jewish martyr, my answer is ALL JEWS who have died for simply who they were, Jews.

The whole point of the book is that when your heroes fall, you have to rise and become the hero you thought he was.

I grew up in the South. My heroes were Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jeb Stuart, but they were also Moses, Elijah and Pincus. My parents taught me about the shame of being racists and distinguishing between whites and blacks. Years later I recall them using words that I would not be proud to use myself. My heroes, including my parents, were flawed and all too human. While our society may dwell on the flaws of their heroes, in the end is it not their greatness that belonging to their societies and times they still rose above it and lend strenth to our own dreams, aspirations and strivings? When did we need to be perfect? Are we not dust? Are not all tzaddikkim people who have picked themselves up time after time?

To Beverly: My computer search leads me to believe that the first martyr for voting rights in Alabama was Jimmie Lee Jackson. He was an African-American, a Christian, and in fact a deacon in his Baptist church. So I'm with the other people who are asking who is the Jew whom YOU identify as the first voting-rights martyr in Alabama?

You're right. I was unaware of that fact so thank you for correcting me.

Goodman is the person was martyred in Mississippi, Schwarner and Chaney, but they were NOT the first.

Both Christians and Jews participated in trying to register black people to vote.

One thing we should never forget is that prior to the '60s. Blacks were treated as chattel. It still burns my bottom that the REPUBLICANT party is pushing for ID for voters.

The ONLY way that the former GOP, now the TEAliban, can win is by CHEATING.

Once again, thank you for correcting me, I really do appreciate it.

You have obviouly not read the book, drawing conclusions from the media. The point of the book is how Scout misjudges her father when she sees him at a racist meeting and learns that he is actively engaging so there will be voices of reason present to moderate the discussion so that the inevitable outcome can be managed rather than cusing the violence that having ideals shoved down the throats of individuals that big government causes. This is a problem in the US today -- you can't legilate tolerance, you can only educate. Removing yourself from the discussion only guarantees fanatics will prevail, unchecked. It's a source of aggravation that people jump to conclusions based on truncated statements of the media with the result that people say, "I'm never going to read that book" because they fear their bubble will be burst. Atticus is still not a racist, and still pretty admirable, in my book.

When I got to the last chapter I actually cheered! I kept hearing from the "media" what a heel Atticus was, but I had to get the ultimate chapter before I discovered that Atticus is STILL a hero.

I live in the deep south and have seen some wonderful changes in this part of the world. Too bad that the "media" are always out there to spit on anything positive.

People seem not to understand that this was a different version of the eventual book, so that making comparisons is pointless. Atticus was rewritten completely, and made into a new person. The era and story were changed. The Atticus of the 'new' book was the original version. This was rejected by the publishers, so Harper Lee rewrote ths book. It was probably a very bad idea to resurrect the original version.

So if the publisher previously found the original not appropriate for the times, and the publisher now finds it is appropriate for the times - that should also tell us something. Not only about the leaders we deserve, but our fantasy story lines as well.

All it tells us is that Nelle Harper Lee is old enough not to have protested too hard regarding the first version, and her publisher wanted to cash in. Mind you, I LOVED the book, though of course, TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD was the real masterpiece.

Atticus represents the feelings of many people in the South.
Change came too quickly for them to REALLY adjust. Atticus
is still a heroic figure, & this book cannot diminish his goodness.
Living with extreme change takes time. That's reality.

"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races.... But I hold that ... there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Abraham Lincoln during Lincoln-Douglas debate August 28, 1858

The point of this article is that "the world is still filled with heroes." But until we get to that revelation in the very last paragraph, we read about people who are fallen heroes, and then we read about entire professions where nobody is a hero. (Finch and Huxtable are fictional, by the way; if the rabbi wants to find a fictional hero he should write about Superman.)
An answer to Rabbi Blech from Jewish tradition: Yes, of course we must recognize "the sacrifices of parents, the goodness of friends, the kindness of strangers" and so on. It's called hakarat hatov. And no, rabbi, those people aren't necessarily "heroes," especially if you define hero as someone who is perfect. And finally, if the world is filled with heroes, why didn't you name a few of them? A long list of fallen heroes could at least be tempered by a short list of one or two who are still standing!

You are completely correct - the book is about teaching Scout that no one should be a god of perfection, and that to totally grow up, we have to learn to discuss the ideas and actions of our elders with them, and understand who they are and what thsy do. Thr book shows Atticus is NOT a racist, but is activly engaged with the radicals to help moderate the outcomes and protect his community from the backlash the radicals are trying to ignite.

C'mon. Some of what Atticus says in the book is definitely racist.

So many people who read both books think they see some sort of massive change of character in Mr. Finch. But I do not.

Atticus Finch was not a champion of "civil rights" in Mockingbird--as so many wanted to see him. He was simply a lawyer who wanted the truth to come out, and who wanted the innocent man to go free, and the guilty man to be arrested.

So, too, in this next book, this character has not changed stripes. He simply makes true observations about the people around him..........both the white and the black people around him in the 1930's (1950's) American South.

Perhaps if more people were like Atticus Finch, we would have fewer Fergusons these days.

Since To Kill a Mockingbird was written so much later, this may explain Harper Lee's desire to transform a racist into a hero.

Despite Atticus Finch's personal views (or Harper Lee's) he still "did the right thing" by defending Tom. Despite "being" a racist, Atticus knew Tom was innocent of the crime charged and could not allow someone else to railroad Tom at the cost of his life. So even "bad" thinking people can do and stand up for what is right. Perhaps that changes the person down the road; perhaps that is the point of the novel, of people talking, of keeping faith. Being judgemental is never good, no matter what side one takes.

I have read hundreds and hundreds of books but when asked, I always reply without hesitation that Atticus is my favorite FICTIONAL character. The "new" book that just came out was a rough draft. The author re/thought her story and To Kill a Mockingbird was the result. Much better!

Why bother reading rough drafts? In Mockingbird Atticus is an amazing father and human being. Period. In this version he is completely someone else. Both FICTIONAL characters. One I love, the other I'll never meet since I seldom read rough drafts.

He will forever remain as he is - a hero.

This is the first draft of a novel that was rewritten so that the characters were completely different. The Atticus of Mockingbird was not a racist. It could have cost him his life to what he did, and it's inconceivable that a Klan member would do this. He didn't change. Harper Lee changed him when she rewrote the book and made it a new story. Writers do this. Dickens did, when he changed the end of Great Expectations.

Without having red this new/old book (yet), I do not have sufficient information to pre-judge the statements purported to be made by Atticus Finch. However, considering that USA had gone into the craze of politically correct cultural relativism where bad deeds can be hidden under accusations of "racism" and "bigotry", perhaps those comments just appear bigoted to those who had been brainwashed into this asinine politically correct cultural relativism,. Read the book and see for yourself!

This is a world of cynics. It seems that wherever there is a hero; there is someone looking for a way to discredit him of her. No one is perfect; one can not expect heroes to be; only examples of what one might be ;of courage, compassion, intelligence, of hope; of flawed persons trying to do their best and often failing.

Atticus is not a fallen hero. He is a fictional character who was rewriiten by Harper Lee. Had he been a real person who was discovered to have been quite different to his public image, there might be some point to such a discussion. As it is, there isn't.

Well-articulated comment, Jewish Mom.

No matter what his views, Atticus' action was noble and right.

Jewish "Heros" we're not perfect. Only G-d is perfect. As was explained to me our Heros were less than perfect so that we would find it easier to strive for greatness. since it is impossible for any human being to be perfect we must continually strive to be the best we can be at any given moment. Knowing that every moment can present an opportunity to do a "great" deed.

Excellent point! The Torah "heroes" were shown for all their good and bad because people are a mix of yetzer tov and yetzer hara.

Being a fan of Harper Lee, I requested the new book from the library. By the time I was notified it was in, I returned it immediately. She is no longer an author I would read. She created a hero and many years later, showed her true colors.

Why depend on somebody else's judgement about this book...read it and find out what YOU think about it!

It was the other way around. First she created a bigot, but in her final draft created Atticus, the hero. I like the final draft better.

This is an excellent article on fallen heroes. We should not judge them. Only G-d will judge these people. In the meantime, I hope they change their tune.

It's us today and them tomorrow!

I'd like to add one more comment.
The world is not black and white. There are probably not many superheroes who are consistently lily-white nor arch-villains who are consistently, demonically evil. Sure, there are some. But most of us are people who fall at various places between these extremes. We are faced with choices on the big issues and the small minutaie every minute of our lives. Sometimes we choose poorly, sometimes wisely, at at times, even heroically. We hope that in the overall picture, we are good people even if, at times, we lose it. We also hope that when we do lose it, we won't be judged as villains or fallen heroes but rather, as fallible human beings who try but sometimes fail. Many people's lives are heroic in the total picture even if they slip here and there. Just think of Holocaust survivors or survivors of any abuse, for that matter, who kept their faith and raised beautiful families - or even at a more minimal level - got up each morning and put in an honest day's work while battling to overcome depression. Heroes come in many shapes and forms. We are not the judges nor is it an all-or-nothing issue.
That said, I am in full agreement with Rabbi Blech that there are many heroic people in our midst who are role models worth emulating. But one doesn't need to lose faith if one sees a fault in a hero, because even heroes are human beings. The Torah doesn't cover up the slip-ups of our greatest leaders.

And we learn a great deal from David HaMelech, the Spiritual Hero, who says, "Chatassi! I have erred!"
As I have tried to encourage my kids, who have a leaning toward perfectionism:
"There are only two types of beings who never make mistakes: HaShem and people who were niftar (the deceased)!
All those "in between" make errors. The important thing is to apologize, if one errs, and to forgive, if someone else erred in your direction!

This "sequel" was written prior to the award-winning To Kill a Mockingbird, and Harper Lee had no intention or desire to publish it. What made her change her mind at age 89 is a mystery. How unfortunate that she weakened, and did not follow through on her initial, correct instinct.

So is my rabbi.

You need to rethink the definition of a hero.

I've read the book and see a totally different point of view. Atticus was not a racist per se. When he joined the KKK he did so in order to find out who was in the klan. Not because he was a racist himself.
He attended the citizen's counsel because it was EXPECTED of him in that tiny place in Alabama. It did not mean, as the book shows, that he was really one of them.
Yes, he is not perfect; I never thought he was.
I still believe that when push comes to shove that he is, at heart, a decent human being.
One must take into consideration the tiny town that it was and the fact that it was in Alabama where the first person to die as a result of trying to get black people to register to vote was a Jew.
My sister marched with Dr. King and when she was released she was told to get out of Alabama if she wanted to live.
Very little has changed in some of those areas in the deep south. I live in the deep south, Texas, and the amount of residual HATE is overwhelming.
But things are getting incrementally better. All it will take is another thousand years or so and then, who knows, maybe people will learn to love one another.

Beverly, I seem to be blocking. Who was the Jew who became Alabama's first martyr in the struggle for voting rights? Thank you.

To Beverly: My computer search leads me to believe that the first martyr for voting rights in Alabama was Jimmie Lee Jackson. He was an African-American, a Christian, and in fact a deacon in his Baptist church. So I'm with the other people who are asking who is the Jew whom YOU identify as the first voting-rights martyr in Alabama?

Once again, Rabbi, your clarity is spot on....

Heroes are all around us. We just need to know where to look.