Sycamore Row

Seth Hubbard’s death opens the novel and triggers its conflicts. As such, he fulfills the role of the herald archetype—the catalyst which sets everything in the narrative in motion. He also embodies the scapegoat archetype, a figure whose public—or in this case, publicized—death atones for the community’s sin. The scapegoat is often more powerful in death than in life. Before his death, few people in the community knew or had ever heard of Seth Hubbard. After his death, he becomes the biggest story in the county. Jake’s success in upholding the wishes in Seth’s written will highlights the novel’s thematic interest in Rectifying Historical Injustice and Healing Generational Trauma.

Grisham reveals Seth’s character in three primary ways: interpretation by other characters, interpretation by the narrator, and the content of his final written communications. Those who knew Seth view him as secretive, untrusting, and embittered. Seth’s directive to make sure his family suffers in his letter to Jake reinforces this perspective. The narrator concludes Seth was a neglectful father who left his ex-wife scarred by their unpleasant life together. On the other hand, his office manager calls Seth a fair man who paid employees well for hard work. She emphasizes the quality which most redeems his character in the novel by pointing out that he wasn’t racist like most white people in the area.

A desire for revenge against his second ex-wife motivated Seth to amass immense wealth in the last 10 years of his life. Despite how much of his life was ruled by bitterness, Seth’s choice to leave 90% of his estate to Lettie was guided by a nobler motive—an act meant to atone for the crimes of his father and his community against her family; a personal form of reparation. Understanding this motive shifts the community’s perspective on Seth. Once deemed an “asshole” (41), by the book’s resolution, many admire Seth for his courage and sense of justice.

Letetia Delores Tayber Lang, known as Lettie, is a woman who’s had a hard life with little opportunity. Inheriting millions from Seth Hubbard should be a windfall, but in a county still beset by racism, and pitted against Seth’s children (who believe themselves entitled to the inheritance), it catalyzes a lengthy legal battle. The conflict over Seth’s will leads Lettie’s daughter on a search to uncover Lettie’s true ancestry and unknown past, ultimately unearthing an event emblematic of the American South’s legacy of racialized hatred, violence, and inequality. As the trial progresses, revealing the connection between Seth and Lettie’s family histories, the verdict comes to represent a community-wide reckoning with Ford County’s past, Rectifying Historical Injustice and Healing Generational Trauma.

Despite her central role in the story’s conflict, as a character Lettie largely exists in the background of Grisham’s narrative. She is frequently acted upon, making few choices for herself. Lettie’s character resembles the damsel in distress archetype—a vulnerable woman who needs to be rescued by the hero. Lettie is victimized by her husband, her relatives, and her community. In a sense, she’s even victimized by Seth, who could have prevented the chaos he brought into her life by explaining his choices in his will.

Jake wins the case, but control of Lettie’s inheritance is almost immediately taken out of her hands. Judge Atlee suggests—actually insists on—a settlement, deciding how the estate will be divided and choosing a white man to oversee the Rinds benefit foundation. Lettie’s daughter accepts this plan on her behalf. Grisham disempowers Lettie even within her own narrative such that her very characterization becomes representative of the Inequality and Entrenched Racism in the American South.

Grisham characterizes Judge Reuben Atlee as impartial above all else: “neither a Democrat nor a Republican, liberal nor conservative, Baptist nor Catholic; […] [h]e ha[s] no favorites, no leanings, no preconceived notions about anything or any person” (105). This description describes Judge Atlee’s personal ethos, professional reputation and moral code, but not the ways in which his background and personal identity influence his perspective. Growing up in the American South on an ancestral, antebellum estate, born to a life of wealth and white privilege invariably influences Judge Atlee’s lens on the world and his work.

Judge Atlee represents power and authority within the context of the legal system. While he honors the limits of his authority, he does occasionally ignore them. He holds Lettie’s original lawyer, Buckley Sistrunk, in contempt without sufficient cause because he realizes it will prevent Sistrunk—a Black lawyer—from claiming racial discrimination. Atlee also gives instructions—in the guise of advice—regarding matters outside his purview. He tells Jake who to hire as estate administrator. He acknowledges self-interest in some of his choices, such as his reasons for wanting a jury trial. These examples help demonstrate the subjective, human aspect of the court system and its role in dealing out justice.

By positioning Judge Atlee as morally opposed to Unethical Practices in Trial Law, Grisham uses his choices to demonstrate how courtroom rules, meant to increase fairness, must be balanced by ethical judgment. Both Lanier’s surprise witness and Ancil’s deposition video violate discovery rules, but Judge Atlee deems them crucial for the jury to understand the case and make an informed decision. He explains, “I admitted the video of Ancil Hubbard because it was the fair thing to do at that moment. The jury, and I suppose all of us, needed to understand the history” (444). Though this decision puts the verdict at risk of appeal, Judge Atlee makes a judgement call about the information needed to deliver a just verdict.

As opposing council, Jake’s antithesis and the story’s antagonist, Wade Lanier presents the greatest obstacle to Jake’s success. Lanier’s skill in the courtroom makes him a worthy opponent, positioning him in the role of the shadow archetype. His legal fight with Jake to determine the fate of Seth’s estate forms the structural arc of Grisham’s plot. Lanier has public opinion and the financial resources of a big law firm on his side, stacking the deck against Jake.

Not only are Lanier and Jake fighting for opposite outcomes, the two men represent diametrically opposed values in their approaches to practicing law. Lanier uses tricks and manipulation to win, rather than risking defeat in the name of integrity. As the narrator observes, Lanier is “well versed in the ethics of his profession when they [can] be beneficial; otherwise, he ignore[s] them” (125). Like Jung’s shadow archetype, Lanier can be seen as representing the dark side of Jake’s psyche, the vision of what Jake could become if he gives in to amoral instincts. Lanier’s actions and his ultimate failure to win the case allow Grisham to create a satisfying narrative resolution, reinforcing the idea that Unethical Practices in Trial Law may be rampant, but true justice ultimately aligns with ethical responsibility.

Harry Rex Vonner, a ruthless divorce lawyer and Jake’s friend, provides comedic relief in Grisham’s tense plot. Harry Rex’s irreverent, dry humor and dialogue adds dimension and tonal variety to the story—for example, when Jake says he needs to get home and Harry Rex responds, “Tell Carla I love her and lust after her body” (221). In another example, Harry Rex jokes that if he got busted for a driving under the influence, he’d “just hire Jake to postpone it forever” (321). This reference to Jake allegedly delaying Simeon’s drunk driving charge portrays Harry Rex as a man who takes nothing seriously, making everything a source of entertainment. He’s also an ally in Jake’s pursuit of justice at trial, both in Sycamore Row and A Time to Kill.

Lucien Wilbanks serves the story as both mentor and ally to Jake, though their complicated relationship departs from conventional portrayals of either archetype. Part of Jake admires Lucien’s ideals, respects his mentorship, and is grateful for his help on the Hubbard case. Another part of him is wary of Lucien’s alcoholism and unprofessional behavior toward women. The dynamic between Lucien’s good qualities and his flaws, and their impact on Jake and the case, complicate the plot and add tension. As a staunch opponent of racism who’s mortified by the actions of his ancestors, Lucien’s perspective underscores the narrative’s exploration of Rectifying Historical Injustice and Healing Generational Trauma.

Seth’s children, Herschel and Ramona, represent a source of opposition to Seth’s final will and his attempt to right a past injustice. Herschel and Ramona form an image the public can rally around as it tries to impose its racially biased values regarding who should inherit Seth’s enormous fortune and become one of the richest figures in the state—values that reify Inequality and Entrenched Racism in the American South. As characters, Herschel and Ramona function more as stereotypes of greed and entitlement—obstacles for Jake to overcome on his quest for both legal and moral justice. Herschel has moments of depth that explore the impact of parental disregard, but the significance of such moments is never acknowledged and they do little to impact the story.

Simeon Lang, Lettie’s husband, serves as a compelling obstacle in Lettie’s life, raising her personal stakes in the trial that will allow her to inherit Seth’s fortune and leave Simeon. Grisham characterizes Simeon as having an alcohol addiction and being an unhelpful father and husband who steals Lettie’s money and physically abuses her. His choice to drive drunk, resulting in the deaths of the Roston brothers, threatens to destroy Jake’s chances at a win in the trial and thus Lettie’s future independence. A glimpse into Simeon’s own generational trauma, as well as his frequent but short-lived episodes of remorse, add limited depth to his character.

Portia Lang is Lettie’s oldest daughter. After six years in the US Army, away from Ford County, she returns home, bringing with her a more progressive perspective on equality than those typical of Clanton’s white population, emphasizing the Inequality and Entrenched Racism in the American South. Portia’s search for information about Lettie’s ancestry helps put the pieces of the puzzle together regarding Seth’s motive for leaving his estate to Lettie. Her tireless search for truth makes Seth’s intent to Rectify Historical Injustice and Heal Generational Trauma via his personal reparations a reality in the narrative.

Ancil Hubbard, Seth’s brother who hasn’t been heard from or seen in Clanton since he was 16 years old, serves as a modified version of the archetypal outcast. The outcast character is banished from his social group for his crimes and destined to wander from place to place. The main difference in Ancil’s case is that his initial banishment is self-imposed, a reaction to witnessing horrific crimes committed by his father. Since then, he’s reinforced his need to stay on the run by committing petty crimes and making enemies. By courageously facing the trauma of his past to give his deposition, Ancil helps heal generational wounds and rectify injustice.