I've never actually read the book, even though we studied it in school and I received high marks (grades), but I love the movie. I can't really comment on the quality of the novel, but regardless of our contemporary opinions on the writing and theme it is a classic and it has been important to American culture. I always liked the idea that Harper Lee wrote one classic novel and that was it. Unlike Kerouac who had a few mediocre scribblings or Salinger, who's other work most people can't name. A sequel or follow up work from Lee seems almost.... wrong. It's certain to disappoint because of the gigantic expectations linked to a literary classic. Kind of like SW Episode 1 or any movie by Tobe Hooper after the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Salinger was smart in not really publishing much after Catcher. He wrote. He wrote the rest of his life, but with the instruction nothing was to be published until long after his death so that he wouldn't get massacred by critics and fans expecting another Catcher.
I would personally be disappointed if i only had one successful book, but i know exactly what i'm getting into so no complaints from me. As a writer though, i would secretly hope i had at least two or three hits.
It's very rare, is what you mean to say. Thr world is filled with amazing happenstances. Thisbisbone of them. She only wrote one "good book," which is quite telling.
This woman wrote a book that has stood the test of time for 54 years. Dozens of books were published in 1960 yet it was this book that withstood it all. We have no room to call her a 'talentless hack'. Some of us will be lucky if our books can be remembered within a decade. It takes most authors more than one book to obtain some measure of fame. She did it with one book. One.
Well, to be fair, she only wrote one book. a 100% strike rate is pretty good. If she'd written 60 stinkers before TKAM your point might have some value.
Technically this new book is the first book she had written, To Kill A Mockingbird was the second one that actually got published.
Because you're trying to call a woman who achieved literary fame with a book that is still talked about in schools 54 years after publication a mere talentless hack.
I was joking about "talentless." Obviously she has SOME talent. Most published writers do! She's still seriously overrated .
Lol you can change what you meant by something pretty easily behind a computer screen. It's completely okay to see it as overrated but calling a famed writer talentless in a writing forum as a "joke" isn't logical.
You mean isn't wise, right? Logical isn't the correct word here. Also, people discredit famous writers here all the time.
It is the right word. Most of the other writers people bash on here have never written a novel that was considered an American classic. People have had a very warm response to a sequel to this book, so she's obviously doing something right.
Hey, arent you the guy who several pages back said she'd change the world with her new book? Do you understand the reviews are already looking bad?
I understand you're only 17, but you need to look up the word logical. Your usage isn't correct. You didn't even say my statement was illogical(still incorrect) . You said my decision to state it here was illogical. That makes no sense.
Use my age to fulfill whatever opinion you want, but i stand by it. There's no logic in it and you're mad that i pointed it out.
