Take a photo of a barcode or cover
jackienorris 's review for:
Go Set a Watchman
by Harper Lee
Uh, so many feelings.
It's hard to accurately talk about this book because, what is it really? A prequel? Sequel? I don't know. It's more an interesting insight into the progression of an author than anything. The story behind it's publication is enough to warrant some raised eyebrows.
This book is not nearly as well-written as Mockingbird. Not even close, really. The writing was disjointed. The flashbacks seemed random and pointless. It flipped back and forth from first-person to third-person. One thing I loved so much about Mockingbird is that you got this rich, detailed portrait of a town and people but Lee wasn't explicit in doing it. Watchman failed in this regard.
Watchman would not have stood by itself. Atticus is more a peripheral character than anything. The whole climax of the book would have been void of any emotional angst had you not known his entire history.
All that said, I thought the climax (an argument between Jean-Louise and Atticus) raised some great questions and important points. I love the idea that Jean-Louise had to tear down her idols, to strip everything away and really evaluate what she believed and how she would live her life. Personally I think that is a lesson we all need to learn, and to one degree or another, are forced to learn as you grow. People betray you. Institutions fail you. What is that going to mean for you? Until Jean-Louise keenly felt betrayed by Atticus, "she did not know she worshiped him."
As for Atticus being a racist, I'm not totally convinced. Mockingbird gave us the ideal - a possibly whitewashed portrait through the eyes of a child. Watchman humanized him more - for better or worse.
Was it as good as Mockingbird? Absolutely not. Am I glad I read it? Yes.
It's hard to accurately talk about this book because, what is it really? A prequel? Sequel? I don't know. It's more an interesting insight into the progression of an author than anything. The story behind it's publication is enough to warrant some raised eyebrows.
This book is not nearly as well-written as Mockingbird. Not even close, really. The writing was disjointed. The flashbacks seemed random and pointless. It flipped back and forth from first-person to third-person. One thing I loved so much about Mockingbird is that you got this rich, detailed portrait of a town and people but Lee wasn't explicit in doing it. Watchman failed in this regard.
Watchman would not have stood by itself. Atticus is more a peripheral character than anything. The whole climax of the book would have been void of any emotional angst had you not known his entire history.
All that said, I thought the climax (an argument between Jean-Louise and Atticus) raised some great questions and important points. I love the idea that Jean-Louise had to tear down her idols, to strip everything away and really evaluate what she believed and how she would live her life. Personally I think that is a lesson we all need to learn, and to one degree or another, are forced to learn as you grow. People betray you. Institutions fail you. What is that going to mean for you? Until Jean-Louise keenly felt betrayed by Atticus, "she did not know she worshiped him."
As for Atticus being a racist, I'm not totally convinced. Mockingbird gave us the ideal - a possibly whitewashed portrait through the eyes of a child. Watchman humanized him more - for better or worse.
Was it as good as Mockingbird? Absolutely not. Am I glad I read it? Yes.