He was still holding my hand and he gave no sign of letting go” (page 372). Radley then asks Scout to to take him home, “in the voice of a child afraid of the dark.” (page 372), showing that he was shy to speak aloud and felt frightened to be in contact with people other than his family in such a long while. At the beginning of the book when no one truly knew him, Boo is described as a monster. By the near ending when Scout finally meets him, she compares him to a child afraid of the dark. Comparing people’s assumptions about Boo from the beginning of the book and the impression he left on Scout by the end of the book shows that Boo Radley is simply just misunderstood. Another type of figurative language Harper Lee uses in To Kill a Mockingbird is irony. Ironically, Boo Radley turns out to be the complete polar opposite of Scout and Jem’s primary image of the monster they believed he was. Referring back to the explanation of the metaphor usage by Lee at the beginning of the novel, Scout and Jem
He was still holding my hand and he gave no sign of letting go” (page 372). Radley then asks Scout to to take him home, “in the voice of a child afraid of the dark.” (page 372), showing that he was shy to speak aloud and felt frightened to be in contact with people other than his family in such a long while. At the beginning of the book when no one truly knew him, Boo is described as a monster. By the near ending when Scout finally meets him, she compares him to a child afraid of the dark. Comparing people’s assumptions about Boo from the beginning of the book and the impression he left on Scout by the end of the book shows that Boo Radley is simply just misunderstood. Another type of figurative language Harper Lee uses in To Kill a Mockingbird is irony. Ironically, Boo Radley turns out to be the complete polar opposite of Scout and Jem’s primary image of the monster they believed he was. Referring back to the explanation of the metaphor usage by Lee at the beginning of the novel, Scout and Jem