Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
It May Not Be The Rumored “Atlas Shrugged” Sequel, But…
I’m pretty excited about the sequel to Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird. The best thing about “Go Set a Watchman” that I’ve gotten from the news reports is that it’s not a new novel: Lee wrote it back in the 1950s and it was “rediscovered.” Again, this is a sequel to Haper Lee’s work, not Allan Moore’s.
Of course, expectations for most will probably be set too high, but it can’t help but be an interesting read as a grown-up Scout goes home again to visit her Dad and hometown.
Is it too early to speculate who can play Atticus Finch in the inevitable film adaptation? It has to be Daniel Day Lewis, doesn’t it?
So, are you excited about this? And if not (or even if you are), what classic novel would you love to discover a sequel to?
Published in Culture, General
I’m so sorry to do this to you, but I’m going to opportunistically co-opt your thread so that I can say something only distantly related to what you asked.
It would be so TOTALLY COOL if they made Brandon Sanderson’s Way of Kings into a movie. I mean, like, friggin’ awesome!
That’s all, return to your previously scheduled thread.
-E
CandE – Since I mentioned a possible film adaption of the new book, you were in the topical vicinity.
It was written first. Upon reading it the publisher requested a prequel we know as To Kill a Mockingbird.
Then the original was lost.
Instugator said it first, but Go Set a Watchman is really Lee Harper’s first novel. I also understand To Kill a Mockingbird was extracted from the flashback scenes of Harper’s first version of Go Set a Watchman. Thus it is likely readers may feel they are re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird (assuming the first version is published) or a sparse tale with the heart of it cut out (assuming the re-write is published). Either way, I have low expectations.
Harper resisted publishing it for many years, probably for good reasons. At her age, it may not really be her decision, but rather that of the caretaker of her literary estate. (Or Harper has financial issues.)
For whatever reason it is to be published, it is sure to be a big seller, and quite profitable. Despite my expectations, I do plan to read it. (At least any surprises will be pleasant ones.) However, I expect an affirmation of my rule that an author’s second published book is generally the worst.
Seawriter
Seawriter – In an article in The Millions – Stephen Fry explains the second novel problem this way: “The problem with a second novel is that it takes almost no time to write compared with a first novel. If I write my first novel in a month at the age of 23 and my second novel takes me two years, which one have I written more quickly? The second, of course. The first took 23 years and contains all the experience, pain, stored-up artistry, anger, love, hope, comic invention and despair of a lifetime. The second is an act of professional writing. That is why it is so much more difficult.”
But as the article says, there are some second novels that aren’t too shabby: Pride and Prejudice, Oliver Twist, Rabbit Run. I’d throw in for The Firm over A Time to Kill.
As you said, expectations should be kept low for “Go Set a Watchman“. Even though, as you point out, it’s Lee’s “first” novel rather than the “second”.
The second novel is To Kill a Mockingbird. Go Set a Watchman is Harper’s first novel, even if it is published second. (Incidentally, that is why so many “second” novels are so bad. The first published novel is rarely the first one written. But when it is a big success, the publishers ask the author how quick they can come up with a second . . . and out comes that rejected, less-well-written, first novel.)
Seawriter
Interesting that there’d be so much buzz surrounding a book about a rape culture apologist like Atticus Finch. Rape victims need to be believed!
Noooooooo! Is nothing sacred?
Part of the wonder and beauty of To Kill a Mockingbird is that it was her one and only work. She said everything.
I will cope by pretending this never happened.
That’s how I get through every day.
Harper Lee wrote another book? I thought Truman Capote was dead!
I’d like to read a “buddy” story with Holden Caulfield, Phaedrus from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, and John Galt. I can’t imagine what the title would be.
The Three Amigos?
Seawriter
Who are these Mon-keeees!?
Doh! Of course! (My favorite scene: discussing a plethora of piñatas.)
There doesn’t need to be a sequel to Atlas, she said everything she could possibly say.
Plus a couple hundred pages.
What about the two or three successful, world-changing men who Dagny had not yet slept with? Don’t they deserve a chance?
There seems to be a question about just how much consent Harper Lee has given to this endeavor. She is confined to a nursing home and plagued with failing hearing and failing eyesight.
If there is a bright spot here, whatever vision presented here will be hers.
Remember Scarlett by Alexandra Ripley? Ripley was a so-so novelist tasked by Margaret Mitchell’s estate to “finish” the story of Gone With the Wind. Mitchell never wanted to do it so why should anyone else? The result was 800-plus pages of nothingness.
The Benjamins, maybe? You know – money. Cash. That is generally the focus of an estate. Maximizing cash flow, not art or literature.
This is another reason I dislike over-long copyright periods. It encourages this type of rent-seeking.
Seawriter
Several months ago when the story about rapes at UVA was the topic of conversation, I remember thinking that we should all go back and re-read “To Kill a Mockingbird.” It would remind us of the importance of due process and the possibility that the accusation of a woman about rape might not always be true.
“To Kill a Mockingbird” was required reading for my now grown children. However, there was always one part that bothered me. Scout observed:
“…people had removed from their store windows and automobiles the stickers that said NRA—WE DO OUR PART. I asked Atticus why, and he said it was because the National Recovery Act was dead. I asked who killed it: he said nine old men.”
The whole book was a tribute to the importance of law. It seemed inconsistent for Atticus to snidely comment on those who were trying to respect the rule of law represented by the Constitution.
I hope such snarkiness does not imbue any new book by Harper Lee.
Unless that were followed by some comment why “nine old men” somehow invalidated their decision I have no problem with the passage. A little more detail is required.
There is no more detail and perhaps I am too sensitive, but it seem a little out of character for Atticus. Why say “nine old men” instead of the the Court. “Old” seemed pejorative.
In Asia, Old is more a symbol of wisdom – in some of the places in the South in the 1950s – too.
I like to believe you are right. But that was not how I perceived it at the time.