Atkinson, Rob. “Comment on Steven Lubet, ‘Reconstructing Atticus Finch.’” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 97, No. 6, 1999 Survey of Books     Related to the Law. (May, 1999), pp. 1370-1372.                                                                                                                     <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-2234%28199905%2997%3A6%3C1370%3ACOSL%22A%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U>

Like many others, this author discusses the piece by Professor Lubet and its validity. He says that Lubet goes beyond the previous claims by critics to question the very truth of Tom Robinson and Atticus’s advocacy. This author argues that while biased and imperfect narrators are a standard in fictional works, there is no reason to believe that anything revealed from Scout’s perspective is anything but true. Only one account exists, and that is Scout’s. He argues that reading the film any differently, looking at other character’s perspectives, and fitting the story to our own desires simply rewrites the original work and its intent. The book from which the film was adapted acted as a love letter from Harper Lee to her father, and her intent was to portray her father, played by Atticus, as a man of virtue and strength. Why then would there be any question regarding this stance? The character obviously was meant to be a paragon for the law profession. Viewers are not only anxious for Tom’s acquittal, but also that Atticus is doing the vindication. Harper Lee originally expressed her story through Scout’s eyes, and therefore her perspective must be the truth.