To Kill a Mockingbird has been popular ever since its publication in 1960. Even before its release, four national mail-order book clubs had chosen it as their monthly selection. Within two years, it had won the Alabama Association Award, the Brotherhood Award of the National Conference on Christians and Jews, and, of course, the Pulitzer Prize for Literature (Harper Lee was the first woman to win this prize since Ellen Glasgow in 1942). The film rights were sold and the resulting movie (on which Harper Lee served as a special consultant after she declined to write the screenplay) came out in 1962. Since its publication, the novel has been one of the ten most frequently assigned books in secondary schools.
Interestingly, apart from the reviews TKAM received when it was published, there has been little in the way of literary criticism focused on it. It's mainly in the legal literature that people have dissected the book, at least the character of Atticus. See, for example, "Being Atticus Finch: The Professional Role of Empathy in To Kill a Mockingbird" from the Harvard Law Review and "Reconstructing Atticus Finch" by Steven Lubet, a critical piece that originally appeared in the Michigan Law Review and garnered dissenting responses.
Why do you think there has been a relative lack of scholarly discussion about TKAM, especially given how influential the book is in people's lives (remember that it's second only to the Bible as a book that's "made a difference" to us)? For those of you in the legal field, is Atticus Finch still a relevant touchstone for your profession?