You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.21 AVERAGE
3.21 AVERAGE
Not sure if my thoughts on this would have been different had I read it closer to To Kill A Mockingbird, or as well if I read it when I was younger, when I read the predecessor. Obviously there was a lot to live up to. Not sure it was worth it. Definitely catches the time, but overall kind of weak in substance if you aren't invested in just following the characters.
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
It's unfair to rate this book, because it's not a book. It's a draft. It reads like a draft, or like a manuscript that should never have been published. Allegedly Lee's editor read this and told her to rewrite it from the vantage point of Jean Louise's childhood, and "To Kill a Mockingbird" was born. (And, interestingly, the best passages of this book are the few flashbacks to young, feisty Scout.) It's been at least a decade since I read "Mockingbird," which I found as meaningful as every other American sixth grader who read it for school, and I wonder how sound I would find its philosophy on race, equality and the meaning of justice -- true justice, not paternalism disguised as justice -- if I read it again now, having passed Sociology 101. Was Lee's editor her Gordon Lish?
I truly feel horrified for Ms. Lee upon finishing this. I think she was taken advantage of by her publishers, and I henceforth resolve to burn every unpublished draft I ever write to protect myself from some alternate future in which the world wants to read my most embarrassing fledgling thoughts.
I truly feel horrified for Ms. Lee upon finishing this. I think she was taken advantage of by her publishers, and I henceforth resolve to burn every unpublished draft I ever write to protect myself from some alternate future in which the world wants to read my most embarrassing fledgling thoughts.
2 1/2
I honestly found (and still find) it difficult to reach what I feel would be an appropriate rating for Go Set a Watchman. Its journey to publication was an odd one, and unlike To Kill a Mockingbird, it went through little to no revision with an editor. One article I read said that it was more than a manuscript than anything else, and others have argued about whether or not it's a true sequel to To Kill a Mockingbird. The characters have the same names, but that does not mean that they are the same. Because some consider Go Set a Watchman more of a manuscript and not enough of a sequel yet we tend to read and rate it as a completed novel and sequel, the book is, well, complicated and difficult to discuss. But like everyone else, I still want to try.
The bad: Overall, the writing wasn't great. Certain parts felt rushed--especially the beginning and the end. The construction of the story didn't feel right. It needed some rearranging and more development. The dialogue involves a lot of yelling and I don't know if "angst" is the best word, but something like that. The overall resolution felt real, but the quick journey to the resolution didn't. All of these issues were difficult for me to get past.
The good: As many people have said, the book provides a better look at racial issues, particularly those in the South. I've seen many write that this book is less "black and white" and more "gray" than To Kill a Mockingbird, and I agree. It also tackles the issue--and this might be a spoiler--of seeing a person as an idol or god and coming to terms with the fact that the person is not actually a god and that your beliefs won't always match up with his or hers. Though Go Set a Watchman might not be seen as a true sequel to To Kill a Mockingbird, I was able to better understand why Scout felt certain things about her father and other characters, especially when they disappoint her, because I've read it. Those disappointments felt so real to me. I also liked that I didn't completely agree with Scout or her father. (It made me uncomfortable, but it seemed like the characters would have those ideas given the time period.) I loved the flashbacks to Scout's childhood. I loved them in part because they reminded me of To Kill a Mockingbird and in part because I think the writing was better.
Basically, the book needed to go through a stronger revision process. (One that didn't result in a completely new book, like To Kill a Mockingbird.) It just did. However, I'm happy that I read it and that I got to receive at least a slightly stronger understanding of what Lee originally wanted to publish and the ideas she wanted to convey.
[Review also posted on Baby Steps: http://petcherpages.wix.com/babysteps#!Book-Review-Harper-Lees-Go-Set-A-Watchman/cu6k/55c2cd0c0cf2e37b76c2a733 ]
I honestly found (and still find) it difficult to reach what I feel would be an appropriate rating for Go Set a Watchman. Its journey to publication was an odd one, and unlike To Kill a Mockingbird, it went through little to no revision with an editor. One article I read said that it was more than a manuscript than anything else, and others have argued about whether or not it's a true sequel to To Kill a Mockingbird. The characters have the same names, but that does not mean that they are the same. Because some consider Go Set a Watchman more of a manuscript and not enough of a sequel yet we tend to read and rate it as a completed novel and sequel, the book is, well, complicated and difficult to discuss. But like everyone else, I still want to try.
The bad: Overall, the writing wasn't great. Certain parts felt rushed--especially the beginning and the end. The construction of the story didn't feel right. It needed some rearranging and more development. The dialogue involves a lot of yelling and I don't know if "angst" is the best word, but something like that. The overall resolution felt real, but the quick journey to the resolution didn't. All of these issues were difficult for me to get past.
The good: As many people have said, the book provides a better look at racial issues, particularly those in the South. I've seen many write that this book is less "black and white" and more "gray" than To Kill a Mockingbird, and I agree. It also tackles the issue--and this might be a spoiler--of seeing a person as an idol or god and coming to terms with the fact that the person is not actually a god and that your beliefs won't always match up with his or hers. Though Go Set a Watchman might not be seen as a true sequel to To Kill a Mockingbird, I was able to better understand why Scout felt certain things about her father and other characters, especially when they disappoint her, because I've read it. Those disappointments felt so real to me. I also liked that I didn't completely agree with Scout or her father. (It made me uncomfortable, but it seemed like the characters would have those ideas given the time period.) I loved the flashbacks to Scout's childhood. I loved them in part because they reminded me of To Kill a Mockingbird and in part because I think the writing was better.
Basically, the book needed to go through a stronger revision process. (One that didn't result in a completely new book, like To Kill a Mockingbird.) It just did. However, I'm happy that I read it and that I got to receive at least a slightly stronger understanding of what Lee originally wanted to publish and the ideas she wanted to convey.
[Review also posted on Baby Steps: http://petcherpages.wix.com/babysteps#!Book-Review-Harper-Lees-Go-Set-A-Watchman/cu6k/55c2cd0c0cf2e37b76c2a733 ]
The essence of the story punched me in the gut, but the content didn’t actually deliver.
I enjoyed this book but I felt like a lot of the time I was confused about what was going on. Perhaps I'm just not old and experienced enough to understand yet.
Also, I could be wrong but it felt like the primary purpose of this novel was essentially an old man yelling at a cloud, 'Stop loving Atticus!! He's actually a terrible person!!'
Also, I could be wrong but it felt like the primary purpose of this novel was essentially an old man yelling at a cloud, 'Stop loving Atticus!! He's actually a terrible person!!'
challenging
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
emotional
funny
hopeful
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I was worried that I could never enjoy something as much as I loved to Kill a Mockingbird, but I was wrong. I liked the continuation of the flawed human story and how everyone, especially grow-up Scout--is trying their best to find their way in the very uncertain and volatile time period of the 60s in the South. It is not a 5*, but it was a good book that I kept turning after taking breaks to breathe and process through my own disappointment in human beings and our ignorant and misguided ways and beliefs.
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
It was good.
challenging
reflective
sad
medium-paced