Review: Go Set A Watchman by Harper Lee

This nearly didn't happen; I nearly didn't even purchase Go Set A Watchman. The release date kind of sprung up on me and I was still umming and ahhing the night before. I loved To Kill A Mockingbird, and so I was torn between not wanting to ruin the book I adored, and the possibility that the new book could be amazing - Harper Lee did write this, after all, however long ago. I apologise to everybody to whom I agonised over this decision. I quite obviously did purchase this book and, what is perhaps more shocking, is that I actually liked it.

Contains spoilers because I need to talk about the ending.

Plot summary: Maycomb, Alabama. Twenty-six-year-old Jean Louise Finch - 'Scout' - returns home from New York City to visit her aging father, Atticus. Set against the backdrop of the civil rights tensions and political turmoil that were transforming the South, Jean Louise's homecoming turns bittersweet when she learns disturbing truths about her close-knit family, the town and the people dearest to her. Memories from her childhood flood back, and her values and assumptions are thrown into doubt. Featuring many of the iconic characters from To Kill a Mockingbird, Go Set a Watchman perfectly captures a young woman, and a world, in a painful yet necessary transition out of the illusions of the past - a journey that can be guided only by one's conscience. 

Obviously there's a lot of controversy over Go Set A Watchman -  whether Harper Lee actually consented to its release, whether it was necessary to publish it at all and particularly over the alternations to the character of Atticus Finch. Incidentally, I read an article on the struggles now faced by people called Atticus, and... really? You didn't struggle before this!? I mean, I'm glad your parents are well-read, but... really?

Anyway, from all the hoo-hah, I was expecting that this first draft of a first draft of To Kill A Mockingbird also showed Atticus as a preliminary mock-up - the version that was planned before he became what we all know and loved, and he would therefore likely be different. I was prepared for that. I didn't like the idea and I wasn't sure how I'd deal with it, but I understood.

Except, thankfully, it's not even that. I thought Atticus' alteration was an unintentional by-product of the earlier book; something to be disgruntled about but ignore. However, I'm not sure it's really fair to complain that Atticus is different, when the very fact that he's different is part of the plot. It actually works really well and I like it a lot. Essentially, Scout (sorry, Jean Louise now) has to struggle with the concept that perhaps her father is flawed after all - having pinned all her own moral standings and ideologies on Atticus, she now has to deal with what happens when one of his beliefs breaks away from her own.

It's a clever idea and it mixes things up a bit. I'm not sure how interesting this would be if you hadn't read To Kill A Mockingbird. There would be nothing to compare Atticus to, and therefore most of the nuances of the plot would pass you by. I mean, it makes sense as a stand-alone, but you wouldn't feel Scout's disconnect quite as harshly. That said, why would you read this book before the other? It comes later, both in terms of storyline and publication, so perhaps I'm worrying too much.  

The writing style is distinctly that of To Kill A Mockingbird. It has the same tone, the same atmosphere and just general snugliness. There are a few sentences that were so convoluted I had to read over it a few times to work out what it was trying to say, but we know that this book was barely edited. There are also a few references to American statutes and decisions that just assume you're intimately familiar with them as it never bothers to explain what they actually were, and I was thrown off track a few times by this.

So yes, I liked Go Set A Watchman. I still do, in fact. The only problem is that I finished this book yesterday and haven't been able to get it out of my head ever since. The ending, and the build-up to the ending, is... not what I expected and it left me reeling. I knew, KNEW, that it would turn out that Atticus and Hank were acting sort-of undercover in order to keep an eye on those pesky racists in the village. KNEW IIIIIIIIT. To the point where I was getting quite annoyed at Scout for not realising it sooner.

But then... that did most certainly not happen. Like I said above, I accept that Atticus has changed and I think it makes a good storyline. I'm just not sure I agree with the message of the book and it left me all frowny and scowly. Essentially Scout is appalled at how racist her town has become - her family now even refuse to associate with her beloved housekeeper because of the colour of her skin. Still though, an interesting storyline.

But it's resolved by her uncle hitting her, calling her a bigot and explaining to her that she just has to accept it. Then she nods and smiles, and feels incredibly guilty for daring to contradict her father because she should absolutely just accept that he thinks black people are lesser. She accepts that SHE'S in the wrong.

"You deny them hope. Any man in this world, Atticus, any man who has a head and arms and legs, was born with hope in his heart... They are simple people, most of them, but that doesn't make them subhuman.

You are telling them that Jesus loves them, but not much. You are using frightful means to justify ends that you think are for the good of the most people. Your ends may well be right - I think I believe in the same ends - but you cannot use people as your pawns, Atticus." 

God, Scout. How bigoted of you. 

I'm not necessarily offended, because I understand that times have changed and therefore so have attitudes towards, well, everyone. Black people, women, homosexuals... we're pretty lucky to live in the time that we do. I also know that Go Set A Watchman is almost entirely unedited. It's just that it's confusing and there's no real resolution other than Scout's misplaced acceptance.

To clarify, I'm happy with the book overall and I'm really happy that we got a chance to read it. I just wish that the ending had been a little more thought-out and I didn't disagree with the message so desperately.

How did you feel about Atticus' transformation? Has this book affected how you feel about To Kill A Mockingbird? 

Review: To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee

I have spent the last two days so engrossed in this book that I have an uncomfortable tight feeling in my stomach, and I was actually vaguely surprised upon looking up that there is a world apart from 1930s Alabama. I was indifferent about beginning my reread of To Kill A Mockingbird, but now I'm not sure whether to cry, throw up or just continue to wander round with a shellshocked expression. This book is just unbelievable.

Plot summary:
'Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird.'

A lawyer's advice to his children as he defends the real mockingbird of Harper Lee's classic novel - a black man charged with the rape of a white girl. Through the young eyes of Scout and Jem Finch, Harper Lee explores with exuberant humour the irrationality of adult attitudes to race and class in the Deep South of the thirties. The conscience of a town steeped in prejudice, violence and hypocrisy is pricked by the stamina of one man's struggle for justice. But the weight of history will only tolerate so much.

Hmm. I thought the 'mockingbird' of the story was Boo Radley. Thoughts?

I wish there was a way to really and truly impress on everybody just how much they should read this book. I know some schools teach taught it (nice one, Michael Gove) but it's not the same as reading it alone, allowing it to affect you and being willing to take on everything it can offer. I have read it before, in 2009, but I don't think I really 'got' it - or at least, I don't remember feeling the same way I do right now.

To Kill A Mockingbird is the best book I've read all year, which is saying something as my first read was Pride and Prejudice. It helps that I know that book by heart and this was full of surprises, but it doesn't really matter. I literally finished the book ten minutes ago and skipped a review list of twelve just because I want to talk about it now, so excuse me when I start to ramble.

The story builds slowly but very effectively. It's told from Scout Finch's perspective, who is barely eight years old. She only gradually comes to understand what's happening with regard to the trial and even then can't really reconcile the facts with the implications. It's the innocence of the children that really brings home the injustices - Jem, who is 12, is just so damn certain that Tom Robinson is going to be aquitted, with the condescending but well-meaning arrogance of a child. They don't understand people as a whole, and just how deceitful and prejudiced they can be.

Their father, Atticus, has shown them the correct path but they haven't yet grasped that he's different from the townfolk. As their only reference point, they assume that he is the norm, not the exception, and the evidence to the contrary only unbalances their perception of justice.

   "Doesn't make it right," Jem said stolidly. He beat his fist softly on his knee. "You can't just convict a man on evidence like that - you can't."
   "You couldn't, but they could and did. The older you grow the more of it you'll see. The one place where a man ought to get a square deal is in a court-room, be he any colour of the rainbow, but people have a way of carrying their resentments right into a jury box. As you grow older, you'll see white men cheat black men every day of your life, but let me tell you something and don't you forget it - whenever a white man does that to a black man, no matter who he is, how rich he is, or how fine a family he comes from, that white man is trash."

This isn't some dry, dusty legal drama - far from it. The tension and atmosphere in the courtroom scenes is unbelievable. We only see excerpts of the trial as a play-by-play of any case would bore us all to tears, but the parts we do read are just perfect. I honestly felt like I was sat on the balcony with Scout, Jem and Dill, watching every cross-examination and hysterical witness. It seems real.

Obviously some interesting moral and legal questions are raised, but Harper Lee never lectures or drags down the story with them. Apparently the book is based on her father, Amasa Lee, who defended a black client in 1923. Hence the accuracy of the fictional court procedure and presumably the societal attitudes as well, I'd assume.

   Jem was shaking his head. “I know it’s not right, but I can’t figure out what’s wrong — maybe rape shouldn’t be a capital offense....”
   Atticus dropped his newspaper beside his chair. He said he didn’t have any quarrel with the rape statute, none what ever, but he did have deep misgivings when the state asked for and the jury gave a death penalty on purely circumstantial evidence. He glanced at me, saw I was listening, and made it easier. “—I mean, before a man is sentenced to death for murder, say, there should be one or two eye-witnesses. Some one should be able to say, ‘Yes, I was there and saw him pull the trigger.’”
   “But lots of folks have been hung — hanged — on circumstantial evidence,” said Jem.
   “I know, and lots of ‘em probably deserved it, too — but in the absence of eye-witnesses there’s always a doubt, some times only the shadow of a doubt. The law says ‘reasonable doubt,’ but I think a defendant’s entitled to the shadow of a doubt. There’s always the possibility, no matter how improbable, that he’s innocent.”

What really makes this book are the tiny scenes that are trivial and unnecessary for plot development, but touch you nevertheless. My favourite scene in the whole book was where the 'Negroes' donate a larder full of food - just little things that show how intricate and rich with detail To Kill A Mockingbird really is.

My only criticism (and it's a small one) is that I feel it hasn't aged all that well. I mean, it's still more than readable but once or twice I felt a little lost. I'm not always sure what they're getting at. For example, at one point Scout says that she knew what Atticus was trying to do, but it takes a woman to do that kind of thing. I had absolutely zero idea what Atticus was trying to do and I still don't.

I don't think I've adequately expressed the sheer wonder of the this book, but I've reached the end of my frantically scribbled notes. There's just so much symbolism, detail and tension without ever descending into moral lecturing. If you only read one book this year, please let it be this one.

Read Ellie's review of To Kill A Mockingbird (and the film too) at Book Addicted Blonde.