Let me preface this by saying that I hadn't read Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird in a long time, 17-20 years long time. I picked it up to reread it before reading the lately released sequel Go Set a Watchman. I loved Mockingbird. I understood it more this time having witnessed a bit more of the world. I've seen the hatred and the racism that I didn't notice or wasn't exposed to as a young teenager. It was heartbreaking. But, I think in the reread I didn't associate with Scout or Jem like I might have the first time; rather, being closer in age, I looked up to Atticus as an example. That may have been the problem with Watchman.
Stylistically, the two are on par with one another. The only problem there was that Watchman copied verbatim (or at least nearly) on describing Maycomb County and Aunt Alexandra. I thought that this occurrence was weird, maybe a little lazy. But, my wife, being the English teacher she is, told me that Watchman was, at least, conceptually written first. Given that, it was understandable.
One of the things that made Mockingbird such a great novel was that it exposed not only the injustice in race relations, but also the inconsistencies of good people. Scout's teacher failed to connect the dots between despising Hitler and what he was doing to the Jews and what Maycomb county had done to Tom Robinson. But, that inconsistency was put onto Atticus, destroying him as a character.
Atticus is turned into at the very least, a classist and elitist who performs justice for the sake of some abstract notion of justice. He doesn't care about the people he defends, the people are merely the means by which he can offer his worship to the disembodied justice. At this, he is at least a cold, callous ethics professor, sitting in an ivory tower pronouncing judgment from upon high in language that makes the dim townsfolk not know he is judging them. He lets Scout into his world because, although he fights his sister's claims, he holds a belief in the superiority of the Finch family and its ilk. That's being kind. The reality is Harper Lee has exposed him as a hypocritical racist.
Mockingbird seemed like a story of injustice, one that made you groan in your soul. The whole point of Watchman though is Scout coming of age and developing her own conscience independent of Atticus. In order to do that Scout can no longer (and thus, we as readers) deify Atticus. Lee has to make him human and the way she chose to do it was to turn him into a hypocrite. Atticus' brother tells Scout, "They must never descend to human level", because when they do they fall further down than the typical man does. In taking this tack, Lee produced another well written novel and a good story, but she destroyed the man Atticus. She killed Jem for no reason. She sent Dill to Italy for no reason. If she wanted to write a compelling story she could have done so without flaying Atticus. She could have made Scout the fiancée of Henry, the successor of the recently deceased Atticus. Henry could have been the flawed racist/moralist and Scout could have still had the convulsions she did in the book.
I don't even want to talk about what she did to Calpurnia. The bond was broken unnecessarily. Maybe I'm too much of a romantic to like this novel. Maybe Lee, having lived through this, has a better grasp on the realities that was 1950s Alabama. Living in Georgia in the 21st century I get a glimpse of the holdovers from that era. Living in a society where racial tensions are currently on the rise, or at least currently in the ascendency in the news cycle I can tell you Watchman offers no hope. Watchman only gives facts. If it existed and Mockingbird did not, it would be a good novel that was descriptive but devoid of inspiring. Mockingbird was inspiring and is inspiring for readers of all ages for two reasons, Jem & Scout and Atticus. Jem & Scout are relatable to the teenagers forced to read it because they still live in relative innocence. Their innocence being tested by the trial and unjust verdict opens them up to a new world. Jem's anger is a righteous anger that ought to be shared by the reader, especially the young ones who are impotent to exact real societal change. Scout's unceasing questions are also a laudable goal that should be followed by the young reader. Older readers have Atticus to look to as a source of justice in an unjust world. Not only that, he's pragmatic not simply populous or moralizing. But in Watchman there are no inspirational characters. Jem and his righteous anger is dead. Scout has been turned catatonic and has been demoralized. Atticus has been exposed as a racist. It is a sad (albeit true) commentary on the current state of affairs. But, where is the hope?
No comments:
Post a Comment