Masculinity in the Novel To Kill a Mockingbird

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to delve into the questions of masculinity and what it is that constitutes a real man. The paper will contrast hegemonic masculinity as constructed by societal norms and which is exemplified in various representatives across the novel with the archetype of the noble man who the author embodies in the character of Atticus Finch. It will further be shown that the author’s noble man is not only superior to the typical macho man even by the standards set by hegemonic masculinity, rather that he also is far more versatile and complete as a person – in other words, the noble man is the ideal man. The noble man can do anything the macho man does, and he can do it better. Atticus demonstrates this when it is revealed that he is the finest marksman in the Maycomb County. Arthur Radley defeats Bob Ewell in single combat at the end of the novel, saving the lives of Jem and Scout in the process. Hegemonic masculinity teaches us that a real man is a warrior. Harper Lee’s ideal men are also warriors for they best the representatives of hegemonic masculinity in every encounter. Her ideal man is also an intellectual. Atticus is educated and knowledgeable, an expert in the field of law, and he defends Tom Robinson in court eloquently and factually. The ideal man that Harper Lee advocates is a man of superior physical skills and superior intellect. But even more than that, he is also an inspiration for his kindness, gentleness, compassion, and virtue. The final thing that the paper will demonstrate is that such a man is not too unrealistic to exist. He does feel fear and pain, but he chooses the path of courage and virtue regardless of the fear. Even more than that, through the analysis of selected scenes from the viewpoint of masculinity studies, the paper demonstrates that the figure of the moral hero Atticus Finch is not only a fictional character, but rather a cultural model that challenges societal patterns. For Atticus, the values that he defends are something real, they carry weight and are deeply rooted in his identity, whereas for the opposing side they represent imposed behavioral norms that no one really believes in but everyone uses because they continue to function.