Go set a watchman

I am glad that I read this book, but I would not have finished it had not I simply wanted to be able to say that I have read it and out of respect for Harper Lee. I get why the publisher, even all those many years ago, sent it back to her for rewrite. To me, it was a lesson in how we must be willing to radically change our original story idea, not to get so married to it that we cannot see past it. What she came up with in her masterpiece "Mockingbird" is so far and away superior to "Watxhman" (which I found tedious, amateurish, sermony[is that a word?], and pretentious) is not even comparable. So there--I've said it-- feel free to agree or disagree. (BTW, I reread "To Kill A Mockingbird" 2 years ago and loved it all over again.)

 

I'm not going to read it, out of respect for Harper Lee:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122290/suspicious-story-behind-publication-go-set-watchman

 

I can only echo this. I do like the name though, it reminds me of the beginning of Agamemnon.

 

Yes, a good name. From a Bible passage, I believe.

 

Isaiah 21:6
'For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth.'
KJB

That's very interesting. I honestly had no idea, for some reason I thought it was an allusion to Hamlet, and old Atticus being some sort of Claudius figure.

 

Yeah, methinks she was taken advantage of. She had made it crystal clear for decades that she'd never publish another book. Pretty suspicious she'd start doing it now as an elderly almost completely blind-deaf woman in a nursing home w/ a dead sister. And said dead sister protected her for much of her life.

 

And her agent died/retired (I forget which) and a new, younger agent took her place.

 

I haven't read it but a member of my critique group did and said among other things that the POV changes frequently within the same paragraph and she had a hard time reading it.

I expect the thrift stores will soon be full of used copies.

 

Yeah, if I see it in a charity shop for £1 I might give it a read, but I'll not be going out of my way to read it. There's frankly too many other books, especially when I know all the good bits of Go Set a Watchmen were used in To Kill a Mocking Bird anyway.

 

A money grab for Harper Collins at the expense of an old woman.

 

Hmmm?? More negativity than I thought I'd see on this subject. Actually saw a segment on 60 Minutes with one of her lifelong friends who said that stories of Harper Lee being infirm and/or having dementia and being taken advantage of in having this published were a bunch of hogwash and were entirely untrue. This same segment showed her happily signing papers to have the book published and quoted her as saying that she was very happy to have it published. And yes, it was unedited, has some changes of POV, some grammatical errors, etc., which, for writers and students of literature I think is some of the reason to read it. I do not believe the story that she was taken advantage of in it being published--if I did I would not have bought it (on my Kindle, btw, so my copy won't show up at a thrift store). I hold to my original point that I am glad that I read it--as a writer who admires her one GREAT work, and as a student of literature.