2017 Reading Challenge discussion

I did not like this book. I read to kill a mockingbird in High School, and watched the movie. I remembered not liking it, but with all the press about it I thought maybe I was wrong and gave it a try.
I feel like the complete disrespect that everyone showed Jean Louise was awful. She was not allowed to have any Ideas of her own, without being condescended to. I might have completely read it wrong or gotten the wrong idea about the book, but I was really glad it was so short.

I don't want to read it since I heard that it really taints all the characters from "To kill a mockingbird". Your comment seems to agree with that...

I wish I had read reviews before I read it, because I wouldn't have wasted my time.

I read it last year and it was such a disappointment. Never mind all of the controversy surrounding the book whether or not Harper Lee had actually given permission to publish the book.

It was such an interesting story, I understand why you all did not like it. It made me angry and frustrated, but I enjoyed that at the same time. Atticus was not the same man in this book as he was in the first and that was hard to take. I was not alive during this period in our history, but I wonder if I had been if this book would have made more sense to me.

Melissa, I pretty much feel the same as yourself about Go Set a Watchman. Beyond all the publication controversy, the story itself is certainly controversial as well.

Even though I didn't care for some of the events in the story or the character's beliefs, I am glad I read the book. When reading about an area that I have never visited or an earlier historical time period, I always try to keep in mind that certain beliefs and socially acceptable behaviors were quite different than what I am used to. That doesn't mean I agree with or like the beliefs, but somehow it seems good to be aware of how things have changed throughout the decades.

I did live through the period described in the book, and I actually can see why Atticus acted as he did. Those of us who live in today's world can certainly fault him for his ideas, but just remember that he was someone who had grown up in a system, someone who knew the system was wrong, but also someone who had to continue to try to live in harmony with others in that small town. His actions were to try do what was possible to slowly change a culture, rather than radically change a culture.

Thanks for posting your thoughts, Ann. :)

Thanks Ann for your thoughts! I can absolutely see that in this book. I appreciate your perspective.

I read this book last year too and found it rather flat. I agree with the comments about Jean Louise's ideas being disregarded, in today's world that would be an unthinkable way to treat a successful woman. In the time and place this book is about, it was the norm. As for Atticus, I think he was the same man as in Mockingbird, just seen through different eyes in the story. "Watchman" was the first draft of Mockingbird. Harper Lee's editor told her to rewrite it from the viewpoint of the child, Scout, rather than the adult, Jean Louise. The difference that filter makes is quite evident: Scout idolized Atticus but Jean Louise sees him in a more realistic light. There is also the difference in narration, with Scout relating events in the recent past and Jean Louise recalling them many years later.

I didn't particularly love Watchman either, because the story that makes Mockingbird so compelling was completely missing. The child's perspective on such serious adult matters is what made Mockingbird the classic it is. Hopefully, the publishing of Watchman won't destroy that legacy.