I have said that Scout is a good narrator however had the story been from a more mature perspective how would the story have changed for the worst? THANKS!! I will give best question!
If the story had been told from an older person's perspective, part of the analogy that is the title would be lost. To kill a mockingbird is an analogy for to kill innocence, and even though that is a direct reference to Tom, it also references the kids. The kids were innocent, but they were exposed to the case and other crimes so their innocence is damaged. Also, the book wouldn't be the same if the narrator already had an understanding of how cruel the world could be. One of the biggest points of the book was Jems reaction to Tom being so harshly punished, but an adult would have expected it. Also, a big part of the book was about growing up and a mature narrator could not have made that point because they had already grown up.
A child's perspective is more pure simple the truth. I believe an adult would have told us from their point of view possibly editing and adding to the plain truth
if she hadn't went out that night when atticous was at the jail and she calmed the mob. Also it would be more depressing because people the (scout) person would actually understand what was happening. say for example if Jem had been telling it. he understood more of the way of the world.
Wrong. Scout is not a good narrator, she is unreliable because she is so young. She describes events from a child's perspective, which skews the reality of the story. She sees things in a different, more innocent and euphemized manner than the adults in her life. She doesn't really understand what's happening.
If the story was told from a more mature perspective, the events in the story would be more realistic and the racism and mature content of the story would be more evident. Scout deals with things with her naïve imagination, whereas an adult would tell the story more straight-forward.