I read To Kill a Mockingbird so long ago that aside from the basic plot, I don't remember much about it. I do remember it being one of my favorite books though. And since I've often found that re-reading books I loved as a kid is often a different experience as an adult, I decided to give it another go and compare it to Harper Lee's latest follow-up.
And it all came back to me. But this time I see it through the eyes of a 40 year-old who has seen and experienced a lot more......especially in most recent times with Ferguson, Hurricane Katrina, Black Lives Matter, etc. and on and on. I'm no longer reading like Scout. But I'm not really Jem or Atticus either. I think the thing that most rings true of this novel is how none of it is simple and it's all fairly subjective depending on who you are and what kind of life you've had.
You have to remember that Mockingbird is set in 1935, but how true does this particular passage ring in today's current crises:
"In our courts, when it's a white man's word against a black man's, the white man always wins. They're ugly, but those are the facts of life." (Atticus speaking to Jem, page 220)
So then after listening to a spirited debate on The Diane Rehm Show comparing the two books, I decided to read Go Set a Watchman. Apparently, while this novel is a follow-up to the first book it was supposedly written first. Recently it was unearthed and published amid some controversy. Aside from the publishing debacle, many intellectuals are saying it's the better book of the two because it's less idealistic and a lot more real. Especially when viewed in our modern times (Ferguson, Hurricane Katrina, Black Lives Matter, etc.)
But aside from all that, back to the story.....
Scout returns home in her late 20's to the mid 1950's post WWII era Alabama. She is quickly disillusioned to find that all she thought she knew isn't true at all. Did Calpurnia, the cook and nurse who raised her, really not love her at all? Was her Uncle Jack just a blathering idiot? Were all the women around her empty airheads who only cared about catching husbands? And worst of all, was her father, the great Atticus Finch, defender of innocent black men, was he really, truly, a racist?
I'll let you read the book and decide.
To be honest, I didn't love Watchman. What's to love? As far as I can see, it's just Scout (or Jean Louise or whatever she's calling herself these days) arguing with everyone she comes in contact with. But I'd also be lying if I didn't see some of myself in her.
And there is definitely something I relate to in this: what it's like to have a father who you respect and love deeply but who you also disagree with mightily. I certainly do.
But with all that said, I sometimes do think we need to give each other a break. Not let people off with their bigotry and prejudice.....no, not that. But I think we do need to consider them. Calpurnia. Uncle Jack. Atticus. Hank. Consider them for who and what they are. Consider their time and place. Consider that they might still be learning just like we are. Because for as much as Scout/Jean Louise was angry at Atticus, he still admitted that would consider other opinions. How many old white men can you say that about?
I do think the timing of this book's release is curious. Other than the time period it was written in, are we living in any more complicated racial times? Is it good for discussion or it is just baiting? I'm not sure yet. I do know the conversation is always a good one to have, but believe it or not, I've never been one for arguing loudly about it. I've always found stating your case in a calm and rational way moves far more mountains.
So I guess that's the only advice I could give to Scout. At age 8 or age 26. Oh, and shut up and listen sometimes. That's works pretty well too.
You have to remember that Mockingbird is set in 1935, but how true does this particular passage ring in today's current crises:
"In our courts, when it's a white man's word against a black man's, the white man always wins. They're ugly, but those are the facts of life." (Atticus speaking to Jem, page 220)
So then after listening to a spirited debate on The Diane Rehm Show comparing the two books, I decided to read Go Set a Watchman. Apparently, while this novel is a follow-up to the first book it was supposedly written first. Recently it was unearthed and published amid some controversy. Aside from the publishing debacle, many intellectuals are saying it's the better book of the two because it's less idealistic and a lot more real. Especially when viewed in our modern times (Ferguson, Hurricane Katrina, Black Lives Matter, etc.)
But aside from all that, back to the story.....
Scout returns home in her late 20's to the mid 1950's post WWII era Alabama. She is quickly disillusioned to find that all she thought she knew isn't true at all. Did Calpurnia, the cook and nurse who raised her, really not love her at all? Was her Uncle Jack just a blathering idiot? Were all the women around her empty airheads who only cared about catching husbands? And worst of all, was her father, the great Atticus Finch, defender of innocent black men, was he really, truly, a racist?
I'll let you read the book and decide.
To be honest, I didn't love Watchman. What's to love? As far as I can see, it's just Scout (or Jean Louise or whatever she's calling herself these days) arguing with everyone she comes in contact with. But I'd also be lying if I didn't see some of myself in her.
And there is definitely something I relate to in this: what it's like to have a father who you respect and love deeply but who you also disagree with mightily. I certainly do.
But with all that said, I sometimes do think we need to give each other a break. Not let people off with their bigotry and prejudice.....no, not that. But I think we do need to consider them. Calpurnia. Uncle Jack. Atticus. Hank. Consider them for who and what they are. Consider their time and place. Consider that they might still be learning just like we are. Because for as much as Scout/Jean Louise was angry at Atticus, he still admitted that would consider other opinions. How many old white men can you say that about?
I do think the timing of this book's release is curious. Other than the time period it was written in, are we living in any more complicated racial times? Is it good for discussion or it is just baiting? I'm not sure yet. I do know the conversation is always a good one to have, but believe it or not, I've never been one for arguing loudly about it. I've always found stating your case in a calm and rational way moves far more mountains.
So I guess that's the only advice I could give to Scout. At age 8 or age 26. Oh, and shut up and listen sometimes. That's works pretty well too.
Comments