Chicks On Lit discussion

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this book. I was so excited when it was first announced but now with the revelations about Atticus I'm conflicted on if I will even read it. It's becoming one of those "be careful what you wish for" things.
Go Set a Watchman

I read the first chapter on Friday. It's available online. My mouth literally fell open about something mentioned in the first chapter. I did not think it would happen. However, it made me want to go out and buy the book on Tuesday. Then all this internet drama started this weekend with the revelations about Atticus and now I'm conflicted as well. I'm too nosy, I'll probably still go and buy the book. Better to decide for myself, then rely on the internet :).

Pre-ordered from Amazon. Got a notice that it has been shipped. Was really looking forward to reading this but now am a little leery, based on stories I have read about how the characters are portrayed. I have a feeling I am going to be disappointed. :-(

I've decided to get on the list at the local library and read it when it's my turn.

I am conflicted about the book. Not only with the rumors I'm hearing about characters, but also the truth behind the release. I'm uncomfortable with the thought that Ms. Lee is being taken advantage of. I know she's been living the life of a recluse. Talking with my Husband about it today I said to him "If she really wanted this book released, I like to believe that after the success of Mockingbird back in the day, she would've done so." I do think there was a reason why she didn't send this manuscript out to publishers. I guess we'll never know.

I'll probably read it at some point, but TKaM is one of my all time favorite books. I wonder 'why now?' on the release. Part of the purity? mystique? of TKaM is that it was the only book she ever released.

I'm bothered not only by the reversal of Atticus, but also by the nature of this release. Is this something Harper Lee advocated? I agree with Tina that its unsettling to think of Ms. Lee as taken advantage of. Not to mention, what does this do to her legacy if the reviews hold true and this new book isn't well received? Maybe there's a reason this manuscript was locked up all these years.

Apparently from what I've read, she did send this manuscript to publishers who encouraged her to refine it to the point she wrote the 'back story' from the child Scout's point of view and that is what became To Kill A Mockingbird. Who knows why she didn't release this then, but other speculation is that it just wasn't as good... they like TKMB better, so it got shelved. Yes - from all the rumors floating around, its troubling whether she wanted this published and how lucid she really is. She has always been a private person. I read various articles about it and then don't trust which news source to believe. Although the varieties of interpretation are beginning to merge.

Here's two I found the most informative: http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/2015/0...

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/13/living/...

I got my preordered copy yesterday, but intend to revisit TKMB before I crack it open.

Nancy, I am also revisiting TKaM before I read this new book. I got a paperback copy of the first book, which I haven't read in almost 25 years, and started it last night. Figure it would be better to be able to compare the two back to back.

Me too Sheila - I haven't read it since?? Well - too long! I want to keep in mind that in reality Go Set A Watchman came first and TKMB is really an extension of that. I would venture to say perhaps she didn't like GSAW in hindsight and just dropped it - happier with what came out of it.

I also reread TKAM earlier this summer just to get ready for Go Set A Watchman. I was really excited about this new book, but then all the reviews, spoilers, and discussions over this past weekend...well, not that it spoiled it for me, but I feel it was just so unnecessary. I watched some PBS specials about Harper Lee, and learned that this book is the "parent" of TKAM, and as such, it will be different. Just as people are different, and as individuals grow and change as their lives and circumstances change, so will the characters in these 2 books. Whether or not the readers like or approve of the changes, well, remember, it's a work of fiction. No matter whether I enjoy the second book or not, To Kill a Mockingbird will Always be one of my favorite books. People should not be influenced by what is on the internet, and just read! I have started it, and I won't say my opinion here, I"ll wait until I am done, and then write my review....but I hope people will not be swayed not to read it by what was on the internet this past weekend.

I think that is the approach I want to take too Sue and ignore the media and just read the book. I think will be surprised after we read it. I am with others that want to read TKAMB first. It's been a while since I read it and it's got me curious to see if we have any indication of Atticus showing a darker side so the media says back then?

Rebecca wrote: "I think that is the approach I want to take too Sue and ignore the media and just read the book. I think will be surprised after we read it. I am with others that want to read TKAMB first. It's bee..."
You are right Rebecca. I reread TKAM about a month ago, and I can't really remember any negatives about Atticus, but then, I wasn't really looking for any. My friend is an 8th grade English teacher and she does the book every year, so she knows it inside out. We are both reserving judgment until after reading it, but I think it was very poor public relations on the part of the NY Times to publish such a scathing review last week. I know it won't be TKAM, but it is part of the legacy of Harper Lee, an iconic American writer.

I'm doing the opposite reading order since she wrote Watchman first. My copy arrived from Amazon yesterday so I will read it first and then re-read TKAM. I read TKAM every few years so I remember it well.

I found this comment at the close of an NYT article thought-provoking:

[T]he new version of Atticus may lead people to reread “Mockingbird” more closely. “It will force an interesting conversation about — if this is really Atticus — what have our own desires done to the character, and what is the literary truth?” Ms. Holloway said. “This is who we want to be as a country, but this is not who Atticus was.”

The entire article is here
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/boo...

I'm reserving judgment... and I like Nell's idea of reading them backwards so to speak, but I'm already into TKMB. IMHO Its difficult to avoid subjective reviewing that often means we don't like a book because we don't like the character or something the character does or the direction of the plot. Sometimes that's the point of a book - the value in giving us a glimpse into another life that is vastly different from our own. Disappointment in a character's actions is perhaps a more appropriate evaluation. And that does not have anything to do with the writing. I love looking at people's reviews on here, but I take them more as personal taste. Few of us are educated in dissect novels and even then... they're still pretty subjective!

Nell wrote: "I found this comment at the close of an NYT article thought-provoking:

[T]he new version of Atticus may lead people to reread “Mockingbird” more closely. “It will force an interesting conversation..."

Maybe the Mockingbird Aticus is the child Scout's version of the him, and Watchman is the adult Scout's version of her father. As Scout ages I would imagine she would see and realize different things.

I'm about half done with my re-read of TKAM.

Good point Sheila.

I wonder if everyone who named their child Atticus is now a little ticked off. ;) I know we considered that name for a long time.

If the reviews hold true, I am more impressed with Atticus Finch as an attorney for accepting the court appointment and zealously defending his client despite any personal views he may have held.

Allison wrote: "I'm bothered not only by the reversal of Atticus, but also by the nature of this release. Is this something Harper Lee advocated? I agree with Tina that its unsettling to think of Ms. Lee as taken ..."

Tina wrote: "...I am conflicted about the book. Not only with the rumors I'm hearing about characters, but also the truth behind the release..."

There was an elder abuse investigation into whether Harper Lee agreed to the release of Watchman. The state found, based on the evidence which included Harper Lee's testimony, that she did want the book released. Reports are that she has some physical frailty but she is mentally competent. I'm concerned with the persistence of this rumor. It seems based on prejudgments about age not on facts.

Nell wrote: "If the reviews hold true, I am more impressed with Atticus Finch as an attorney for accepting the court appointment and zealously defending his client despite any personal views he may have held."

Good point, Nell!

Tera wrote: "I wonder if everyone who named their child Atticus is now a little ticked off. ;) I know we considered that name for a long time."

LOL Tera! I would imagine there are probably at least a few annoyed parents out there.

Haven't read it yet. Maybe won't until classes are done with.

There was an elder abuse investigation into whether Harper Lee agreed to the release of Watchman. The state found, based on the evidence which included Harper Lee's testimony, that she did want the book released. Reports are that she has some physical frailty but she is mentally competent. I'm concerned with the persistence of this rumor. It seems based on prejudgments about age not on facts.

I've read quite a few articles about this whole thing, and I have yet to see this. I'll see if I can find it. The part that bothers me is the lawyer who says she "found" the book after Lee's sister died, but everyone else who was present in 2011 when they looked at the manuscript said this lawyer was indeed present. Sounds very, very fishy to me. I have put off getting a copy because I am unsure about the whole situation (well that and I was seriously broke this month! LOL).

Misty wrote: "There was an elder abuse investigation into whether Harper Lee agreed to the release of Watchman. The state found, based on the evidence which included Harper Lee's testimony, that she did want the..."

I'm not sure where you looked but I found several reports by googling it. Here's a link to one of them:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015...

The complaint was anonymous and the investigators interviewed her neighbors and had extensive conversations with Harper Lee. What bothers me is the persistence of this unfounded rumor because it presumes that age equals mental incapacity. As a professional advocate for elders, I bristle at this age-based prejudice.

I'm thinking that Harper Lee would not have saved the manuscript for all these years in a safety deposit box if she didn't think it had value. If she didn't want anyone to see it, wouldn't she have destroyed it long ago?

Sheila wrote: "I'm thinking that Harper Lee would not have saved the manuscript for all these years in a safety deposit box if she didn't think it had value. If she didn't want anyone to see it, wouldn't she have..."

:) As a composer, I can assure that is absolutely not true. Artists do not necessarily destroy our work because we do not want people to see it!

Nell - I can certainly see that it would be a hot button issue for you. As I said, I will look into it more.

Nell wrote: "If the reviews hold true, I am more impressed with Atticus Finch as an attorney for accepting the court appointment and zealously defending his client despite any personal views he may have held."

Hadn't thought of it that way. Excellent perspective.

I wish I had finishied this book in the summer when this strand started! I finished it a few weeks ago, and I'm still not sure how I feel about it! I do like your comment, Sheila, about Scout's different versions of Atticus (childhood vs. adult), but it's still a little unsettling.

I'm trying to grapple with the final message in GSAW, and I feel it's a bit foggy for me. TKAM seems more straight-forward, but this one is elusive. Is Lee making excuses for racism? Or is she making a case for sticking with something that doesn't necessarily make you happy in order to "be the change" you wish to see in the world? Is that really Scout's responsibility? Is it everyone's responsibility? And where does personal freedom and choice come into play? I'd think it would be exhausting to constantly fight all the time.

And the idea that she-or Atticus- needed to "die" in order to break the bond Atticus had from Scout is interesting as well, and perhaps goes to prove your point about Scout idolizing Atticus as a child.

Man, I really loved getting in touch with Scout and Atticus, but I'm so on the fence about the book itself!

(PS--I know this strand is a little old, so no one needs to respond if you don't want!)