Hesitation has always dominated my lexicon which in turn clouded my judgment over what's actually true as it is and what's just what my imagination or prejudice thought it is. This is exactly the case with To Kill A Mockingbird. I thought To Kill A Mockingbird would be Agatha-Christie-ish in term of genre; but as soon as I opened the first page, I knew I wrong all the way through. Moral of the story, just because it has "kill" in the title doesn't entail any significant clue in regards to its genre or even plot. Well, yes there was a murder case per se (or was it a "mockingbird killing case" as Scout eloquently put it?) but it was not the center of the book at all.

Where have I been?

You might ponder where I have been, If I have been around I must have known the book with its extraordinarily powerful story and message, therefore I must have been under a rock? Perhaps you are right, I have been living under a rock! And I deserve to be scolded for this ignorance.

To be fair, I knew quite well how significant Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird in America is. I knew that it is a mandatory reading in US junior or senior high schools. But, again, I was not aware of its story. Hence, I did not how powerful the story was.

Thanks God, a coincidence, if there is something as coincidence, saved my soul. Thanks to Marlyn, a former colleague of mine - one of the only few who is still in touch amid resignation - who had been given used books by her school and told me that I could take some if I was interested. She gave me list of the book and I instantly laid my eyes on 2 books: To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee and Metamorphoses by Kafka. Too bad, there was only one copy of Metamorphoses, though Marlyn said I could have it, but I refrained because I was not sure I could finish it in a short period of time.

I was reading Michelle Obama's Becoming when I got the book. So I had to finish it before I jumped to this book. But once I started diving, it took me only 3 days which I am still very proud of to finish the book. Who can't resist Scout's unique narration, right?

What did I find out?

1. To Kill A Mockingbird is Not A Hardcore Thriller Novel

I personally has issue with books, films or anything that contain violence. Imagine my relieve to know that this book though it has a few dead body but it was not graphically described and I would say that I still tolerate its level of violence. And yes, you were to bring this up, I am fully aware of the "catharsis" argument. Though it may be true to some people, I just, as said, personally dislike violence in general.

So what is To Kill A Mockingbird, really? I came to learn that it is such an extremely beautiful story which showcases the complexity of a child's process coming to an age and the kind of mindset they are building as they grow older. Sets in Maycomb, Alabama, To Kill A Mockingbird, also displays the complexity of life people of color have to face and the dynamic it creates for the White vs. Black in many aspects of life such as social life, justice, access to education and many more.

The story is told through the young version of Scout who was then between 6 to 9 as the book progresses. Scout's real name was actually Mary Louise Finch but somehow she was called Scout throughout the book. She is the youngest child of Mr. Atticus Finch who was also called Atticus by his children throughout the book. His a single parent and a working lawyer. Characteristically Atticus is a very responsible father whose parenting style, many might say, unorthodox. Although people many not know why he does what he does, he is very confident is his parenting. And there is Jem (Jeremy Finch) who is the oldest child. Scout and Jem have a very natural sibling relationship with Jem sometimes could be very pushy making Scout to do certain thing that Scout has moral contradiction on. For example when Jem and Dill wanted to get Boo Radley out of his house, Scout found this to be wrong and yet she tagged along.

2. Single Parenthood

To Kill A Mockingbird is specially interesting to me as it attempts at exploring the dynamic between two children, who have lost their mother, and a single working father. While domestically Atticus might not be involved much as they have a help named Calpurnia who had done an amazing job to keep the children well fed and taken care of; Atticus arguably still did a good job in instilling values into the kids.

Most parents, even today, very rare lending their trust that their children can learn life in their own terms. What most parents do is to instruct as oppose to guide. It's different with Atticus. He looked after Jem and Scout with trust. He avoided overbearing. He let them learn that making mistake is allowed and that said every action has its consequences. Atticus shows this very well when Jem killed Mrs. Dabose's plants as a vengeance for the things Mrs. Dabose said about Atticus. Consequently, Jem had to read for Ms. Dabose once a week for a month. And, what I admire the most from Atticus is that as father and also as a lawyer he never looses his temper. He never used physical punishment to the children either. I think that's the most difficult part of being a parent. Children can be very difficult to handle. Next thing we know we can't control our rage and that often leads to physical punishment. Bravo Atticus you can reserve yourself and for knowing what's best.

Generally Atticus is very progressive in so many aspects. Parenting, is definitely one of them. More than that, Atticus is also very progressive in regards to race, gender and social norm.

The lesson to learn here is that parents play a big role in children's upbringing which makes it very pivotal for parents to have certain quality. Atticus is teaching doing. Or as Ms. Maudie put it
Atticus Finch is the same in his house as he is on the public streets (Chapter 5, p. 52) 
It also affects every move Atticus made in his personal and professional life. He was aware that his children looked up to him and therefore he made sure that what they saw were the good ones (good according to his moral belief).

3. Racism

Racism obviously is the center of the story which summed up by Tom Robinson's case. Through this case we can learn how massively institutionalized racism was in To Kill A Mockingbird's Alabama. Though some people like Ms. Maudie and others who were more forward thinking in regard to race, they could not help it as it had been already internalized in them through their upbringing.

Scout, thanks to his father, went through a tough period rationalizing the contradiction between the values that she had been taught in school and in church about how people have to be equal and that we should be kind to everybody and the reality that was happening around her.

One of the most striking part for me was during the class project when Cecil presented a story about the Nazis. The teacher was very critical of the Nazis and as far as Scout knew we were not not supposed to hate people but Ms Gates made it clear that Nazis were bad and somehow it's okay to hate them.

What Scout had trouble comprehending was that how come we raged about morality in the far end country when we at home did the same thing? Was that because Jews are white therefore we had to sympathize with them while it's okay for Black people to be discriminated for their skin color? This signifies the contradictory nature of moral compass in Scott's hometown of Alabama.

4. Caste System

Though America has been known for its nickname as a free world which reflects its supposedly permanent detachment from the old world (Europe) and its rigid class conscious system; however, in this book we can clearly see that America has formed its own class system. It's perfectly summed up by Jem.

"You know something, Scout? I have got it all figured out,now. I have thought about it a lot lately and I have got it figured out. There's four kind of folks in the world. There is the ordinary kind like us and the neighbors, there is the kind like Cunninghams out in the woods, the kind like Ewells down the dump, and the Negroes."
So, the privileged whites do not like other non privilege whites. And all Whites hate the Blacks.

5. Sexism and Female Role in Society

Scout, who is a girl, had been harassed many times in the book for her untraditional way of growing. Since she always hanged around Jem, she more or less, followed what Jem did. Thus unlike other girls how would dress up and play dolls, Scout enjoyed watching trial in the court and having a little adventure with the boys. 

At one point in the book, Scout joined Aunt Alexandra' Christian group meeting and she was very unimpressed by the things that women do with their time. She even hated the conversation that was building. It was not overtly said but readers can see that Scout found the whole thing to be dull. 

6. Unfair Legal Treatment 

Racism and class system lead to an unfair treatment of the inferior groups. The Blacks were inferior in the book and they suffer from the injustice the most. This is a contradiction to their social and religious values but somehow it bothers them less. 


All in all, Harper Lee had done such an amazing work with this book. I really admire her vision. This book showcases the problem in our society without having to do it in a preachy style. She wanted us to see the real condition in our society by ourselves and let us independently judge whether it is good or bad. 

Finally, I can clearly see now why it is a classic and it's classy too I dare say. I am glad to have read the book. Everyone, do read the book with or without your teacher assigns it!
In American culture, or Western culture in general, it’s very generic for children to leave home completely
after high school, which is also the time when they leave for college. Leaving for college signifies the
beginning of their independent lives. That may be the same for other cultures, but unlike the American
one, children in other cultures such as Indonesia are expected to return home after graduation and
resumes life as it was. In America, in contrast, it’s considered odd to live with your parents as an adult.


Similarly, when it comes to the parents, in America it seems very normal to not take parents in to live
with you even though they are old and perhaps sick. Alternatively, parents will stay in the retirement
home, where they will be cared for by the home staff. In other cultures - say, Indonesia, this is be
considered cruel or even ungrateful (for everything that parents have sacrificed for the children.) 


In the context I have just described I, therefore, am considered less of an Indonesian. I am in my mid 20s
and ever since I was 13, I have never lived with my parents for more than 2 months. 


However, reality faces me last time I visited home for Eid. We are a family of four. 3 of my brothers have
got married and live in their own houses. This leaves my parents completely alone. There are only the
two of them left in the house. Yes, from time to time my brothers will visit but that’s about it. 


When I was home my mother happened to be sick and apparently that has been going on for quite
sometimes. My mother has an allergy that affects her breathing system. Whenever she gets in contact
with dust or strong spicy smell, her body will react and she will have difficulty to breath. As a child I am
very worried for her condition and in that very moment the thought about “who will care for my parents
when their health declines?” dominates me.  


I am not home most of the time. Currently I live in Jakarta in a kost-kostan (a dorm type of housing
where you get to rent one of the rooms) which makes it very impossible to take my parents in with me.
And I don’t think they will want that either. They have their own house where they have lived their
entire life. They have known the community which can be difficult to find in a place like Jakarta where
community life is very much a non-existence. But that is just my assumption. Perhaps they long for
an adventure? Perhaps they are tired with the same place and the same people all the time? 


As a child I do think about my parents and their happiness is one of my priorities, especially my mom.
She has lived the same life for her entire life. She has been a good wife and a good daughter in law.
She has never left the house because she had to care for my grandmother who was old and sick.
And now in her old days, I think she deserves to enjoy life. 


My plan for my parents will be to let them enjoy life. Visit places that they have never visited before.
My mom has never been to Jakarta, so I want to take her to see Jakarta. And one day when I own
a house I want to take them in to live with me as long as they want it. I may not be able to go back
home to care for them, but I hope they will be willing to come and live with me.


As of today, we haven’t discussed who will care for father and mother. Would it be my oldest brother,
my second brother, my third brother, or even me? I will be very happy to take the responsibility to
care for them. We will see! 

What about your culture? Are children expected to take parents in and care for them once they grow old?   
Related image
Photo from tukesomalism.com
I have always considered myself to be someone who prioritizes reason over emotion. Little that I know that event in life may
challenge our pre-existing notion of ourselves. And that’s why I have come to accept the reality that as human beings we will
not cease to evolve. If you say that you are a shy or introverted person, an extroverted person, or whatever believe me, you
may be whatever you claim yourself to be right now but it can change if you want it too or if life forces you to do so. What do
I mean by that? Did I just suggest that we should surrender our identity at the expense of life event? No, that was not what I
meant. Our upbringing has made us believe that we are either this. This is the root of the problem. We have been trained to
always put ourselves in a box and hoping that only that box where we belong. The truth of the matter is, we evolve. Either we
initiate the evolution or life event forces us to do so. The choices are either we want to keep up with the demand or we are
left behind. Those who have difficulty to keep up are the ones living behind. 


I was a very active person as a kid. I never had difficulty socializing or being around a large group of people. But today, I
really really value my space. I won’t be comfortable sharing what I would call my cave with other people for a long time. 


I cannot really rationalize this. Even though some of friends really see this coming, I did not notice it before. But as my friend
pointed out that even back when I was in high school I was not really the type of person who would refrain from doing certain
activity just because no one accompanies me. Having lunch, for example, I did not, and still do not, see why I have to be
accompanied. If someone wants to come along, great. If not, It won’t be an issue for me. I guess the term for this is being
comfortable alone. 


Now that I am in my mid 20s, as I am so used to being independent, I seem to be establishing a pattern where I am having
difficulty to share my space with other people. It doesn’t only apply to strangers but also my close friends and family. I am
more than happy to share some time and moment with them, but I don’t think I will be okay if I have to be around them 24/7.
This statement does not apply to my parents, of course. I love them and I am very happy around them. But another problem
occurs, I can’t seem to enjoy being at my hometown for too long. Well I can analyse this situation: a, because there’s too
little thing to do; b, my body seems to react in a bad way to the weather; and c, I am fine with the lack of entertainment
but a good quality of internet service will be great. 


Will I stay in my current state? I doubt. Even this view is bound to changes.


We human beings are so malleable. We are changed by our surroundings, events and as we learn better about life.
And that’s natural. Some changes may cause resistance not only from ourselves but also from people around us. That’s life.
We cannot avoid conflict. What we can do is to handle conflict with grace. It’s easy for me to say that when my only reaction
to conflict has been a silent and an escape. It’s okay, I won’t judge myself. I value process and let that be my process. 

So, should keep saying that we are A or B or C? Or let time, event and life define us?