I read it as a child, and liked it, but I never understood the whole Tom Robinson sub-plot, so a lot of the book passed me by. I didn’t know it might be considered wrong for a black man to kiss a white woman. I liked Scout, Jem and Boo Radley, and their relationships with each other and Atticus. It was a fascinating book to me, because I could tell she was saying something that I didn’t understand. I reread it several times as I got older and gradually pieced together something about American history and culture. For an outsider, it was a good way to learn.
I didn’t get it. I couldn’t relate to any of its themes at all, most likely because I didn’t grow up in America, where most of its points are more evident in daily life (or were, at least).
Plus, at the time I read it (for High School) I was very cynical about analysing books, so promptly forgot everything in it almost immediately.
[quote=“rhubarbarin, post:33, topic:595276”]
I first read it when I was around 8 or 9 (not for school obviously) and it blew my mind, since I had had rather little exposure to the reality of racism at that point./QUOTE]
I don’t remember how old I was when i read it, but it was my first exposure to the emotional reality of blind, unreasoning prejudice and injustice. Sure, I’d seen small. petty unfairnesses, and I read the newspaper, so I had an intellectual knowledge that terrible things existed and happened in the world. But this was my first awareness on a gut level, which is far stronger and more real than intellectual knowledge, and more able to arouse compassion.
Well said, sir.
I say I haven’t read a lot of novels in comparison to what I usually read. I’d say I read about one novel for every fifteen non-fictional works. And yes, when I do read novels, I tend to avoid racial tension novels, since I find them less than entertaining on the whole.
But I have read racial tension novels that are better than Mockingbird, Roots being the first one to come to mind. Uncle Tom’s Cabin has a better plot than Mockingbird, but the purple prose is off-putting to some, though not to me. I remember actually liking Fried Green Tomatoes better than Mockingbird. But I don’t actually remember Fried Green Tomatoes very well now, so perhaps that book wasn’t so memorable.
I suppose, racial tension being so common a theme of novels, I simply assumed that To Kill a Mockingbird’s racial tension theme had to have “been done, and done better.” Because if Mockingbird is truly the apex of the racial tension genre, then I can see why I’ve been avoiding racial tension novels all these years.
So I hereby retract my “done, and done better” claim. Happy now?
How did TKAMB affect me?
It made my wonder if I’d missed something, because it seemed like standard fictional childhood reminiscences and liberal blandishments. Then I watched the movie and got the same thing. Then 20 years later tried to watch the film again and couldn’t get half way through it.
So, overall the experience was, “eh, different people sure have different reactions to stuff” and “jeez, will I have to read that book again before I can confidently comment on it, because maybe I missed something… Lord knows that has happened before.”
I don’t know about happy. I’m not trying to be a bully. It just seemed odd that you made such a definitive statement and then later admitted that you hadn’t even read all that much in the genre. It would be like me declaring that some SciFi/Fantasy book had been “done and done better”, when the fact is that I can count on one hand the number of books in that category that I’ve read.
I have no quarrel with those who don’t like the book. I just think it’s important to back up your claims, you know?
When I was a teen and read it, the main story to me was that of Boo Radley, and Scout. I didn’t fully understand the depth of the Tom Robinson plot.
When I read it a couple of years ago, the main story was definitely Atticus and Tom Robinson.
I can’t say it changed my life or anything but it is a truly moving and profound book. I don’t think Scout was aggravating; actually, I was quite pleased with her portrayal and found her sweet and utterly charming.
I do like the way the book doesn’t really preach to you, like * Uncle Tom’s Cabin * has a tendency to do so. It just lays out the story, and except for a few select speeches by Atticus, mostly lets you draw your own conclusions. I generally tune out the preachy sections of books, anyway - you put in a 20 page author treatise (I’m looking at you, 1984 , and you, The Jungle ), and I will just not read it. Show, don’t tell.
As for Atticus, I have always admired him deeply. A man doesn’t need to be perfect for me to admire him, and really, flawed men (and women) are far more interesting anyway.
I loved it. I wanted a father that would allow me to call him by his first name.
I loved Atticus. I related to Boo.
I lived in Florida when I read this book and there was a lot of racial tension in the city at the time.
I felt like I was almost the only one in the world that didn’t see black people as bad. Even members of my own family would use the n word like it was nothing. I hated it then and now. Though, it seldom happens anymore.
I reread the book just a few years ago and still enjoyed it quite a bit.
:: looks over shoulder ::
Who are you apologizing too? I didn’t say the thread was only for people who liked the book. Admittedly I did say cruel things about people who disagree with me, but I always do that.
I came in here to say basically this. Instead I’ll just go QFT.
It didn’t have any influence on me at all. When it came out, I couldn’t relate to it. Growing up in northeast Ohio, I didn’t have experience with the kind of overt racism that was the norm in the south. Ohio was plenty racist, but it was usually not out in the open, except sporadically.
Re-reading it as an adult, when my children had it as required reading, I thought it was a pretty good kids’ book, but nothing more.
That said, I’m glad it is still widely read. It says things that need saying.
It made me much calmer about things that could happen but haven’t yet. Whenever something potentially bad or life-altering comes up I think (I could be mis-quoting Atticus, sorry): “It’s not time to worry yet, Scout. I’ll tell you when it’s time to worry.”
I’m apologizing to absolutely nobody at all. Rather, I’m making an (in retrospect) excessively sarcastic and somewhat ham-handed point that this is a Pulitzer Prize winning novel, adapted into an Academy Award winning film, that is considered a great of 20th century literature and a touchstone of modern culture that still isn’t quite cool enough for the message board. If you don’t like it you don’t like it, but Jesus Christ, what do you have to do to be considered great literature here? Is Homer just some blind Greek guy who couldn’t shut up about hot sweaty men? Is Kafka just some neurotic Czech Jew on a bug trip? Is Twain just some jackass who couldn’t shut up about white orphans on boat trips with black guys?
That’s why I was pressing Two Many Cats on her statement that racial tension has been done better, and restating what the teacher/Scout issue was. If you don’t like it, fine, but please explain why. Other than that it just looks like, well, I just don’t like it because everyone else does. Perhaps my tastes are more refined.
[QUOTE=Anamika]
As for Atticus, I have always admired him deeply. A man doesn’t need to be perfect for me to admire him, and really, flawed men (and women) are far more interesting anyway.
[/QUOTE]
It could even be argued that Atticus himself would be the first to point out his flaws.
Skald, out of curiosity, what do you dislike about the movie? I felt that it was so faithful to the book.
Oh, I was just being melodramatic. There’s nothing wrong with the movie, except that it’s not as godo as the book. That is, it’s a fine motion picture, but a great novel.
I can only speak for my opinion on this: it’s not a matter of me feeling my tastes are so refined that I can judge this book as lesser. I’m afraid that it is simply the fact that I just don’t get it. And as clear evidence to me of my limits in judging literary quality, on the same vacation where I took this novel, I also first read The Catcher in the Rye and felt that book merited none of the heaps of praise it receives. IMHO, it wasn’t a very good book at all. Nevertheless, both books have earned their place and I accept that, like fine wine, my taste is not refined enough to appreciate these books.
I read it in high school (~18 years ago) and hardly remember a thing about it. I simply couldn’t relate to any of the characters or events, and might as well have been an anthropology (xenopology?) text on aliens.
Nah, Catcher is overrated.
I share this admiration. I had and still have a very conflicted relationship with my father, and Atticus always seemed to me to be the father that I wished I could have.