IHub reads: First fishbowl

I wanted to post this on Friday like my last post, But I wanted to wait until the online fishbowl was over.

My thesis for the fishbowl was:

” I believe that the dog represents the people who have been convicted in court. Even if they where innocent. And that Atticus has a big part in either proving them guilty or innocent.  But in the end he still does not have a choice in deciding if a person is guilty or not. He still has to shoot the dog.”

(I copied this strait from the online fishbowl.)

My opinion has not changed much after the fishbowls. I still believe that the dog represented innocence even though he appears to be a danger. I am not saying the dog was not going to hurt anybody, But nothing can prove that it was going to hurt anybody either. He was convicted guilty and shot before it was given a chance to prove itself innocent. And Atticus had no choice afterwords.

I have not been given permission to quote anybody else in the fishbowl, so I won’t for now. If I am given permission I will expand on this more.

Thank you for reading!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *