I am always amazed by how many people think that TKAM is non-fiction.
TKAM was taken from Lee. It is a fine story with many nuances. It was taken from her and made to be just one thing....a civil rights book.
Her authorship was even questioned. Many believe that Truman Capote wrote it.
I can see where Lee would strike back at those who stole her writing. They didn’t acknowledge her artistry and focused on the civil rights part of the book? OK. now, she has taken that away.
I see it as a masterful move by Lee.
“This is my story. I created it. It is mine to do with as I please.”
The artist defeats the yammering mob.
While TKAM is a work of fiction, it is based on the real life Scottsboro trial. I’ve never really thought about the civil rights aspect, but merely the basic God given rights outlined in our Bill of Rights. Tom Robinson was denied a fair trial. This was based on his race; however, if we follow the Bill of Rights then this is never an issue. Black or white, we all are entitled to a fair trial. Just my $.02.
It’s worth remembering that “Go Set a Watchman” preceded “Mockingbird.” The original book represented Harper Lee’s true vision of Maycomb, Alabama (a fictionalized version of Monroeville, her home town); race relations in the Jim Crow and her depiction of Atticus Finch, Scout, Jem and the other characters that populate the book.
As a first-time novelist, struggling to get published, she eagerly accepted an editor’s suggestion that the original manuscript be re-written around the flashback sections of Scout in her youth. In fact, the book was reworked three times before publication, and it clearly benefitted from the process.
But it’s also a fair bet that her editors and agents were liberals who had their own ideas about the narrative and characters, and their suggestions helped change the book’s tone. The Atticus Finch of Watchman is far different than the one depicted in Mockingbird, more complex and conflicted than the one we came to know in the original book and film.
And, in many respects, it is seems to be an accurate depiction of her native south in the mid-1950s, where most whites were quite comfortable with segregation and had little desire to change. The new book seems to be Miss Lee’s rebellion against racism and prevailing attitudes of the era, though in real life, she distanced herself from the Civil Rights movement.
It’s easy to see why her editors pushed for a major overhaul of the original manuscript. A more nuanced narrative like “Watchman” would have been a tough sell in the early 1960s. Transforming the book into a moral tale, (and making Atticus into a progressive hero) was a brilliant move, creating an epic best-seller than has never been out of print.
From what I can tell, Ms. Lee had no burning desire to publish “Watchman” after the success of Mockingbird. The manuscript was buried in her papers for years; her attorney found it in a safe deposit book and sold it to Harper Collins, which realized a “new” work by Harper Lee would be an immediate best-seller. The state of Alabama conducted an investigation and decided that Ms. Lee was not coerced into publishing the book, but that begs an obvious question: given the staggering success of Mockingbird—and her lack of output over the past 55 years—why not publish it 20, 30, or even 40 years ago? Judging by her handling of the manuscript, it appears that Harper Lee was content to let it remain in that safe deposit box.
Personally, I’m glad the new book is being published, and I’ll probably buy a copy (along with millions of other readers). It’s very interesting to see Ms. Lee’s original vision for her work, even if it conflicts with Mockingbird.