"To Kill A Mockingbird" gets a sequel

mrincredible said:

I vote for "Mockingbird 2: Kill Harder".

Does anyone know why she didn't have it published in the first place? Maybe she wasn't happy with it and decided not to.

gerryl said:

Hmmm...on Facebook was a notice that this book was published 3 months after the death of Harper Lee's sister, Alice. Alice was both Nell's attorney and protector. So some feel her current attorney has taken advantage of Harper Lee's aging, unclear mind.

Re: Go Set a Watchman - I don't know if this was already posted, but I was surprised to read the article in today's NY Times on the front page "Kind Hero of 'Mockingbird' Is Cast as Racist in New Book."

That was a very interesting book review... I need to read both books now!

Did anyone else watch American Masters on 13 last night? It was interesting to listen to all the writers talk about the work. And the story about her friends who gave her the money to write full time as a Christmas gift. They seemed to think that her mind has been clear enough to give permission to have the book published.

Today in the NY Times people on social media are protesting that this first book is not as positive as TKAM. I think it is hilarious that people are complaining about something that was written prior to Mockingbird.

As for money and compensation, it sounds like Lee made a good deal of money from the book and the movie.

For anyone who likes such, a writer, named Roy Hoffman wrote a lovely, touching column about how he and his daughter met Nell Harper Lee in 2007. This too was in the NY Times.

Also, his own book, Chicken Dreaming Corn is about Jewish immigrants in Mobile, Alabama in the early 1900's . Harper Lee wrote a very positive blurb for this book.

It sounds to me like both books are very interesting portraits of attitudes of the time when they were written, and I'm fascinated by the changes her editor requested, as well as how she originally wrote it.

Anyone else seen the movie about "In Cold Blood"? Harper Lee was very close to Truman Capote and apparently was on the scene a lot while he was doing his research for that book. Quite a portrait of him, and their relationship.

I don't see why we have to dislike a book just because it's not as "rose lens" as TKAM. This one is probably a truer reflection of how things were then in that part of the country.

Anyway, I'm going to read both now, one right after the other. The only question is, which one to start with??

Cracks me up...people talk about how this changes Atticus. He is a fictionalized character. She made a choice to change her character. I'm not so sure these changes are so unusual. Of course, if her editor had not encouraged her to change the viewpoint of the story, I doubt the book would have become the icon it did become. Perhaps she would have continued to write then. Maybe her life would have had a different trajectory.

Peggy, I think i will read both also. I had assumed I would read TKAM first since I am already familiar with it. But I was so intrigued by the Roy Hoffman column, I am going to read his book first.

Just finished reading "Go Set A Watchman." IMHO it comes across as being a much more balanced picture of the time/place than Mockingbird. What I found most interesting is that at the end of the book it is Jean Louise (Scout) not Atticus who is accused of being a bigot, due to Scout's inflexible attitude towards what is happening in her part of the South.

There was a very interesting article in the NYTimes a few weeks ago that explained that Watchman was a very early, unedited version of Mockingbird. Watchman was written first. Harper Lee, with help from her very strong and gifted editor, crafted Mockingbird from Watchman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/books/the-invisible-hand-behind-harper-lees-to-kill-a-mockingbird.html?_r=0

Just finished reading "Watchman" and was not impressed. Had this book been written by someone other than Harper Lee I doubt that it would have been given much attention at all. It was in my opinion just average and an OK read but not a great one!

I also just finished reading "Watchman" and was somewhat disappointed. It's a quick read and it does make you think and I do have questions.

"

First draft of a manuscript that was revised into a classic. It's nothing but a money grab. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/25/opinion/joe-nocera-the-watchman-fraud.html?smid=fb-share

Not sure it is a fraud, but an oddly timed money grab. I thought it was more nuanced than the reviews suggest, and that there are a few beautifully written passages that do not match some of the more pedestrian/preachy parts stylistically. Much of the dialogue is stilted, but the sense of place and evocation of time are notable. Lee may have had an amazing editor; if this is indeed an early draft of what became TKAM, her original editor was something close to a coauthor, or at the very least brilliant at suggesting revisions and course corrections. I am not sure I believe the various accounts of the manuscript’s discovery and could be persuaded that this was indeed an early attempt at a sequel. In any case, GSAW isn’t as bad as I feared it might be, and is worth the read.

It's a total money grab and fabricated "literary event" by Harper Collins. It is nothing more than a first draft of TKAM. It was never a sequel and any advertising as such is really false.

I haven't read it; I'm not really interested in doing so. The real lesson here is to destroy anything you don't want published, apparently. I won't even speculate as to whether or not Harper Lee was lucid enough to actually give consent for publication.

I think the people who are refusing to read it either out of principle or because they don’t want their image of Atticus to be ruined are missing an interesting read. I suspect Harper Lee is no longer able to give an authoritative account of what really happened and obviously there are lots of people with major financial axes to grind. All the same, the book has its moments, whether they are what Lee originally wrote, were deleted at her editor’s suggestion in the course of revisions, or were added more recently by a talented faker with an ear for midcentury history and southern cadences. I would be interested to know what southerners of good conscience make of it.

I've read it. I found the main character, Jean Louise "Scout," to be interesting,touching, and admirable. She's a young woman who, while she loves her home town, realizes that she doesn't belong there and can't live there anymore. Those of you who won't read the book should maybe think again.

double post