Book Nook Cafe discussion

What's this ? Buddy Read !
All are welcome to join in the conversation. In this thread we will discuss 2 books !

Book:
To Kill a Mockingbird
Go Set a Watchman

Author: Harper Lee
Nelle Harper Lee (born April 28, 1926) is an American novelist widely known for her 1960 Pulitzer Prize–winning To Kill a Mockingbird, which deals with the racism she observed as a child in her hometown of Monroeville, Alabama. Though Lee published only this single book for half a century, she was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her contribution to literature.[1] Lee has received numerous honorary degrees, and declined to speak on each occasion. Lee assisted close friend Truman Capote in his research for the book In Cold Blood (1966).[2]

In February 2015, aged 88, after a lifetime of maintaining that she would never publish another novel, Lee released a statement through her lawyer confirming publication of a second novel, Go Set a Watchman, written before To Kill a Mockingbird, which was released in July 2015.

Born Nelle Harper Lee
April 28, 1926 (age 89)
Monroeville, Alabama
Pen name Harper Lee
Occupation Novelist
Nationality American
Period 1960-present
Genre Literature and Fiction
Literary movement Southern Gothic

When: The discussion starts on July 26th and ends when it ends. :) The thread will always be open.

Where: The entire discussion of both books takes place in this single thread. Please do not start new threads. It will be helpful if you post the title of the book at the start of your post.

Spoiler etiquette: Please put Title of book and the chapter # at the top of your post and the words- Spoiler Warning - if giving away a major plot element.

Book Details:
Both books are available in paperback, audio and eBook form.

Synopsis:
Mockingbird-- Winner, 1961 Pulitzer Prize. This masterwork of honor and injustice in the deep south. A gripping, heart-wrenching, and wholly remarkable tale of coming-of-age in a South poisoned by virulent prejudice, it views a world of great beauty and savage inequities through the eyes of a young girl, as her father-a crusading local lawyer-risks everything to defend a black man unjustly accused of a terrible crime.

Watchman -- This is the newly discovered novel, the earliest known work from Harper Lee. Originally written in the mid-1950s, Go Set a Watchman was the novel Harper Lee first submitted to her publishers before To Kill a Mockingbird. Assumed to have been lost, the manuscript was discovered in late 2014.

Go Set a Watchman features many of the characters from To Kill a Mockingbird some twenty years later. Returning home to Maycomb to visit her father, Jean Louise Finch—Scout—struggles with issues both personal and political, involving Atticus, society, and the small Alabama town that shaped her.

Exploring how the characters from To Kill a Mockingbird are adjusting to the turbulent events transforming mid-1950s America, Go Set a Watchman casts a fascinating new light on Harper Lee’s enduring classic. Moving, funny and compelling, it stands as a magnificent novel in its own right.

Discussion questions for
To Kill a Mockingbird

*** Discussion questions may contain spoilers !

You can answer the questions or just think about them to enhance your reading.

Discussion Questions
1. How do Scout, Jem, and Dill characterize Boo Radley at the beginning of the book? In what way did Boo's past history of violence foreshadow his method of protecting Jem and Scout from Bob Ewell? Does this repetition of aggression make him more or less of a sympathetic character?

2. In Scout's account of her childhood, her father Atticus reigns supreme. How would you characterize his abilities as a single parent? How would you describe his treatment of Calpurnia and Tom Robinson vis a vis his treatment of his white neighbors and colleagues? How would you typify his views on race and class in the larger context of his community and his peers?

3. The title of Lee's book is alluded to when Atticus gives his children air rifles and tells them that they can shoot all the bluejays they want, but "it's a sin to kill a mockingbird." At the end of the novel, Scout likens the "sin" of naming Boo as Bob Ewell's killer to "shootin' a mockingbird." Do you think that Boo is the only innocent, or mockingbird, in this novel?

4. Scout ages two years—from six to eight—over the course of Lee's novel, which is narrated from her perspective as an adult. Did you find the account her narrator provides believable? Were there incidents or observations in the book that seemed unusually "knowing" for such a young child? What event or episode in Scout's story do you feel truly captures her personality?

5. To Kill a Mockingbird has been challenged repeatedly by the political left and right, who have sought to remove it from libraries for its portrayal of conflict between children and adults; ungrammatical speech; references to sex, the supernatural, and witchcraft; and unfavorable presentation of blacks. Which elements of the book-if any-do you think touch on controversial issues in our contemporary culture? Did you find any of those elements especially troubling, persuasive, or insightful?

6. Jem describes to Scout the four "folks" or classes of people in Maycomb County: "our kind of folks don't like the Cunninghams, the Cunninghams don't like the Ewells, and the Ewells hate and despise the colored folks." What do you think of the ways in which Lee explores race and class in 1930s Alabama? What significance, if any, do you think these characterizations have for people living in other parts of the world?

7. One of the chief criticisms of To Kill a Mockingbird is that the two central storylines—Scout, Jem, and Dill's fascination with Boo Radley and the trial between Mayella Ewell and Tom Robinson—are not sufficiently connected in the novel. Do you think that Lee is successful in incorporating these different stories? Were you surprised at the way in which these story lines were resolved? Why or why not?

8. By the end of To Kill a Mockingbird, the book's first sentence: "When he was thirteen, my brother Jem got his arm badly broken at the elbow," has been explained and resolved. What did you think of the events that followed the Halloween pageant? Did you think that Bob Ewell was capable of injuring Scout or Jem? How did you feel about Boo Radley's last-minute intervention?

9. What elements of this book did you find especially memorable, humorous, or inspiring? Are there individual characters whose beliefs, acts, or motives especially impressed or surprised you? Did any events in this book cause you to reconsider your childhood memories or experiences in a new light?
(Questions issued by publisher.)

Discussion questions for
Go Set a Watchman


*** I don't think the question will contain spoilers as I have not yet read the book. :) Though be mindful when reading the replies as they most certainly will contain spoilers.

You can answer the questions or just think about them to enhance your reading.

I have not read Watchman and cannot find publisher questions online, so I will post some general questions about the book and fiction books in general.


1- How would you rate Watchman compared to Mockingbird?

2- Do you think Watchman enhanced your understanding and enjoyment of Mockingbird or hindered it?

3- What do you think was Lee's purpose in publishing Watchman?

4- What did you think of the books title? Did you know the bible was the source of this quote before you read the novel?

5- Did you connect or sympathize with the characters?

6- What issue or themes do you think the author was trying to get across to the reader? Was she successful ?

7- What were the books strengths and weaknesses?

8- Did you think the author explored the main issues in a new way? Was it insightful ?

9- Did you sympathize with the characters?

10- Did you understand their wants, desires or were you left unmoved?

11- What did you think of the writing style? Was it better, worse or the same compared to Mockingbird?

12- Do you agree or disagree with the early reviews of the book? How would you rate the book on a 0-5 scale ( 0 lowest /5 highest)

The movie


To Kill A Mockingbird Movie Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks88M...

to kill a mockingbird full movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CsN7...

Wow, what a thread! I'm thrilled.

:)

Just start posting away when you or anyone else wishes to comment on either book.

We usually don't wait until we finish the book to start posting our thought. Instead we comment as we read. However, that's up to you. It's your Buddy Read.

I'm not going to reread the book, as i did so fairly recently. I'd rather not buy the new one, as i'm not sure i like what i've heard about the publication process. I'll wait for the library copy, i think. However, if no one minds, i'll probably add comments about the original book here.

Last year we visited Monroeville and the Monroe County Court House, where a museum is located. There was as much about Truman Capote as Harper Lee, apparently because he shared more with them, or so it seemed to us. His part seemed more personal.

The courtroom from the movie was a pattern for the real one in this courthouse. It was thrilling to be there. Heck, you could practically see Scout upstairs, observing the trial. It was a nice visit but i can't help but hope that Lee's estate will give more artifacts (or, at the least family photos) to them once she dies.

Because Deb is a sweetheart she sent me a postcard of that courthouse. I keep it in my copy of Mockingbird. :)

Pleased to know that, Alias. Of course i thought of you while there because i know how much you like the book. It was surprising how few postcards they had a such a large site, though. Indeed, most of the gift shop items available were southern, not at all related to the book itself. Which isn't to say i didn't want to buy much, you understand.

****Please note this article from the NY Times about both books contains SPOILERS.


Harper Lee’s ‘Go Set a Watchman’

By RANDALL KENNEDYJULY 14, 2015

n 1992, a law professor named Monroe Freedman published an article in Legal Times, a magazine for practitioners. He asserted that Atticus Finch, the iconic hero of Harper Lee’s novel “To Kill a Mockingbird,” ought not be lauded as a role model for attorneys. Lee had portrayed Finch as zealously representing a black man, Tom Robinson, despite intense disapproval from many whites. What’s more, Robinson was accused of having raped a white woman. Not only did Finch ably defend Robinson in court; one evening he also faced down a mob that sought to abduct the defendant from jail in order to lynch him.

Generations have admired Finch for his fidelity to due process even at the risk of unpopularity and personal harm. Freedman noted, however, that Finch did not volunteer to represent Robinson; he did so only upon assignment by the court, saying that he had “hoped to get through life without a case of this kind.” Freedman also pointed out that Finch abstained from challenging the obvious illicit racial exclusion of blacks from the jury that wrongly convicted Robinson and the racial segregation in the courtroom itself, where blacks were confined to the balcony. At the time of this fictional trial, there would have been good strategic reasons for forgoing objection to these customs. Confrontation would have had little chance at success and a large likelihood of provoking retaliation against the defendant. In Freedman’s view, however, those considerations were not decisive in influencing Atticus Finch. Rather, Freedman inferred that Finch failed to oppose Jim Crow custom because he was at home with it. He told his children that the Ku Klux Klan was merely “a political organization” and that the leader of the lynch mob was “basically a good man” albeit with “blind spots along with the rest of us.” To Freedman, Finch’s acts and omissions defined a lawyer who lived his life as a “passive participant” in “pervasive injustice.”

This column by a legal academic, published in a relatively obscure trade journal, so enraged admirers of Atticus Finch that this newspaper published an article about the column and the impassioned responses it provoked.

Dismissed by some as the ravings of a curmudgeon, Freedman’s impression of Atticus Finch has now been largely ratified by none other than his creator, Harper Lee herself. The most dramatic feature of her “new” novel, “Go Set a Watchman” — written before “To Kill a Mockingbird” but published 55 years afterward — is the revelation that Atticus, the supposed paragon of probity, courage and wisdom, was a white supremacist. In the mid-1930s, when the events of “To Kill a Mockingbird” transpire, white dominance was so completely established that Finch could blithely disregard any political dissatisfactions blacks felt and still get credit from his adoring daughter — and from millions of readers — for defending an innocent man.

Two decades later, when the events of “Go Set a Watchman” take place, white dominance has been shaken. Blacks are demanding the vote and attacking racial segregation. Finch’s previous unflappable patrician calm now gives way to defensive anxiety. He defends segregationist propaganda with titles like “The Black Plague.” He derides the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (N.A.A.C.P.), especially its lawyers. He rails against the prospect of blacks leaving their “place.” “Do you want Negroes by the carload in our schools and ­churches and theaters?” he asks his daughter, Jean Louise (also known affectionately as Scout). “Do you want them in our world?” He veers between expressing condescension — “Honey, you do not seem to understand that the Negroes down here are still in their childhood as a people” — and expressing contempt: “Can you blame the South for wanting to resist an invasion by people who are apparently so ashamed of their race they want to get rid of it?”

The audience for these questions, Jean Louise, the grown-up Scout, is bereft of her beloved childhood companions. Jem, her brother, has suffered the fate of their mother: death at an early age from a sudden heart attack. Her mysterious neighbor, Boo Radley, is gone; and Dill, Scout and Jem’s irrepressible summertime chum (a character modeled on Lee’s longtime friend Truman Capote), is largely absent too.

The most striking new presence is Henry Clinton, a hard-working young lawyer in Atticus’s practice who hopes to marry Jean Louise. She appears to be on the verge of succumbing when she learns to her dismay that Henry, like Atticus, is a member of the Maycomb County Citizens’ Council. Established in the aftermath of Brown v. Board of Education, White Citizens’ Councils were tonier alternatives to the Klan. They were designed to be respectable organizations that would enable businessmen and professionals to thwart racial desegregation.

Henry figures in two of the most memorable scenes in the novel. In one, he climbs a water tower to save Jean Louise. Still ignorant about sex as a sixth grader, she believes she is pregnant because a boy at school put his tongue in her mouth. She considers jumping off the water tower to commit suicide to spare her family disgrace. In another scene, Henry escorts Jean Louise to the high school prom. She is wearing falsies that stray. “Her right false bosom was in the center of her chest, and the other was nearly under her left armpit.” He hugs her close to prevent others from seeing what has happened, comforts her outside of the school gymnasium, and throws the falsies away. When they land on a sign honoring students who have joined the armed forces after graduation, the school’s outraged principal demands that the guilty party turn herself in. Henry, with Atticus’s counsel, concocts a scheme in which each of the girls at the school writes a note saying the offending falsies look like her own, ensuring that no one bears the full weight of the principal’s anger.

Although “Go Set a Watchman” sporadically generates the literary force that has buoyed “To Kill a Mockingbird” for over half a century, the new novel is not nearly as gripping as the courtroom drama and coming-of-age story it eventually became. The first hundred pages are largely desultory, though they do create a sense of anticipation. Then Lee begins to introduce the reader to Jean Louise’s discovery that Atticus and Henry have joined the White Citizens’ Council. Her disappointment, which develops into anger, suggests an opportunity to explore a dense, rich, complicated subject: How should you deal with someone who has loved you unstintingly when you find out that this same person harbors ugly, dangerous social prejudices?

Unfortunately, Lee’s response is uninspired. In an ending that is all too compressed, she portrays Jean Louise as teetering between a moral revulsion that makes her love for Atticus and Henry impossible and an acceptance of the men despite their racism. Lee’s rendering of Jean Louise’s ambivalence is undeveloped. One yearns for a narrative that conveys the contending emotions with vividness and detail, as the heroine grapples with the intricacies of the problem: Is it wrong to revoke affection because of disgust with the ideology of someone who has nurtured you all your life? Is it intolerably dictatorial to impose a political litmus test on loved ones? Is it complacent to refuse to? If morality compels censuring the retrograde beliefs and conduct of lovers, friends and family, how should that be done? And then what?


Alas, in “Go Set a Watchman,” the reader is given only a sketch in which Jean Louise is hurriedly made to try on one reaction and then another without earned resolution or depth.

Would it have been better for this earlier novel to have remained unpublished? Though it does not represent Harper Lee’s best work, it does reveal more starkly the complexity of Atticus Finch, her most admired character. “Go Set a Watchman” demands that its readers abandon the immature sentimentality ingrained by middle school lessons about the nobility of the white savior and the mesmerizing performance of Gregory Peck in the film adaptation of “To Kill a Mockingbird.”

But the conversation doesn’t end with Monroe Freedman’s complaint about Atticus Finch’s limitations or with Jean Louise’s disillusionment with her previously idolized father. After Lee sold the manuscript we’re now reading, she worked hard on revisions. At her editor’s urging, she shifted the novel’s time frame from the 1950s to the Depression, away from the messy adult problems of a young woman coming to understand the racism of her father, and back to childhood, where seen through Scout’s eyes, Atticus Finch could become the hero that millions of readers love. The editor’s shrewd suggestion belonged to a specific time and place, too. In America in 1960, the story of a decent white Southerner who defends an innocent black man charged with raping a white woman had the appeal of a fairy tale and the makings of a popular movie. Perhaps even more promising, though, was the novel Lee first envisioned, the story of Jean Louise’s adult conflicts between love and fairness, decency and loyalty. Fully realized, that novel might have become a modern masterpiece.

GO SET A WATCHMAN

By Harper Lee

278 pp. Harper. $27.99.

Randall Kennedy is the Michael R. Klein professor of law at Harvard Law School.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/14/boo...

Was it her editor who suggested the altered novel? As a novice writer, eager to get published, it seems unlikely she would have opted to stay with her original vision. It takes a leap of faith to imagine it would become what To Kill A Mockingbird became. I guess i'm on the fence about this.

I have not read Watchman but in my mind i wonder if Atticus's ability to offer a good defense to a man of a race he appears (from Watchman info) to not like, isn't one mark of a good man. This is just off the top of my head. He knows justice but is not particularly anti-racist.

I'm looking forward to reading Watchman. I'll probably re-read Mockingbird or see the movie again, too.

I had to put a Stop on my library hold for it for now. My hold on All the Light We Cannot See expires soon. So that will be my next read.

Alias Reader wrote: "I'm looking forward to reading Watchman. I'll probably re-read Mockingbird or see the movie again, too.

I had to put a Stop on my library hold for it for now."

I liked All the Light We Cannot See so much that I bought the book, and the same
with The Nightingale

-- ENJOY!!

Carol, I've never read a Kristin Hannah book. I do have it on my TBR list.

Can we keep this thread open through August? I'm still reading it.

Yes. Threads like these can stay open for years. I've looked back at some over a year old, which is sometimes how long it takes me to locate & read some of our selections. It's great they are always handy.

Yes. The books in this thread stay open and are not deleted.

Apparently the sequel is so bad, a bookstore is giving out refunds.

They make a good suggestion about how to approach the book, though: as a way of getting more familiar with Harper Lee's writing process, instead of as a standalone novel.

Interesting, Mkfs. I think that this is generous on their part. Almost every review/commentary on the 2nd book has stressed it is best viewed as a source for writers to learn how different a final product can be from its original.Thanks for the info.

I've started reading Go Set a Watchman. I don't agree that it's a bad book. I do agree that it isn't at the same level as To Kill a Mockingbird. Some readers have had their high expectations dashed.

I have to say that I have often been disappointed by writers whose recent work hasn't met the same standard as their previous work. If I purchased the book in question, I have never even considered requesting a refund because I was disappointed. I figure that this is a risk that I am taking whenever I purchase a book, and that it would be wrong to demand that bookstores be held responsible when the book turns out to be a poor risk.

I'm glad to hear you are enjoying Watchman, Shomeret.

I agree with you about returning books. Sometimes I see people post on Amazon that they are returning books they didn't like.

I think that is so wrong. You read it. It's used. It doesn't matter if you enjoyed the book or not.

I'm on a very long list for Go Set a Watchman (in the libraries) . . .

Agree with you all about the issue of returning books.
It is up to us whether or not we purchase a book. Do people understand what being in business is like?? Or is it all about "me, me, me". Well, silly question.

Bobbie57 wrote: Or is it all about "me, me, me". Well, silly question. ..."

You hit the nail on the head, Barbara. When did we as a society become so self absorbed?

I was astonished the first time i heard a person say she returned a book she didn't like. AND she had read it all the way through! As Barbara noted, they are in business and shouldn't be treating them the way one does a library book.

Alias Reader wrote: "I'm glad to hear you are enjoying Watchman, Shomeret.

I agree with you about returning books. Sometimes I see people post on Amazon that they are returning books they didn't like.

I think tha..."

Getting this thread back to its topic, I have finished the book and I would have given it 2.5 stars if that were allowed by Goodreads.

The biggest problem was overt didacticism toward the end. Jean Louise AKA Scout in To Kill A Mockingbird, thought about racism and had long discussions about it with various characters.

Shomeret, is that a good rating for you? What is the average rating for books you rate on GR ?

Thanks !

Alias Reader wrote: "Shomeret, is that a good rating for you? What is the average rating for books you rate on GR ?

Thanks !"

I use Goodreads guidelines. Three stars means that I liked it, but two stars means that it's OK. So 2.5 means that it was better than OK, but I can't say that I liked it. It was better than okay because it gave us additional background on the characters in To Kill A Mockingbird. It's also inspired a great deal of interesting discussions about racism in articles about the book. So I have to give the book some credit.

Thanks for the follow-up !

I have a hold on it at the library. Though I've frozen the hold. I can do that for 6 months.

Interesting comments, Shomeret. Like you, i already credit the book with the fact good discussions have derived from people, whether they've read the book or not. I also have been intrigued by the discussions about the actual fact of it being published at all. So, in many respects it has engendered more thoughts than many a book published lately.