So, a little context on Go Set a Watchman. Harper Lee notoriously never published another novel after To Kill a Mockingbird and was very adamant about this throughout her lifetime. Her sister Alice was her caregiver and managed her accounts throughout her life. Her sister was her advocate and pushed back on many of the requests made of Harper Lee that she did not wish to fill. So many found it to be quite suspicious that the announcement of the publication of this book was made only two months after her sister died. At this point, Harper Lee was in her late 80s and hard of hearing and had largely lost her sight. Many felt that Lee was manipulated into agreeing to publish Go Set a Watchman without having full comprehension as to what she was agreeing to, even including investigations into elder abuse. It is alleged that the existence of the manuscript was known for many many years, and the agency was simply waiting until her sister died so they could fast track it for publishing.
And while Go Set a Watchman was initially touted as a "sequel" to To Kill a Mockingbird, Lee had provided an explanation that the novel was actually a first draft of To Kill a Mockingbird that she had provided to her editor. The editor had considered it a good effort, but not publishable and encouraged Lee to write the story from the perspective of Jean Louise (Scout) as a child, as she felt the flashbacks in Go Set a Watchman were the most compelling part of the story. Hence, To Kill a Mockingbird. (There are separate controversies about how the perceived-by-some, low quality of Go Set a Watchman somehow manifested into this amazing polished work of To Kill a Mockingbird in such a short timeframe, but I'll leave that argument for others to tease apart). There are differing opinions about whether Lee was happy about Go Set a Watchman being published. It sounds as though she was happy to learn that the manuscript still existed and her new attorney stated that Lee was happy about the book being published. But those who knew Lee disagree with this assessment - that she never would have agreed to it, consistent with the stance she had held her entire life.
So with that background laid, all I have to say is this: THIS BOOK SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED.
No writer would ever have consented to have an early draft of a novel published, especially without any opportunity to revisit the work and improve it. And given that this was an early draft of To Kill a Mockingbird, hey guess what?? Harper Lee did revise and improve it...it's called To Kill a Mockingbird.
So all of that controversy aside, I tried to read the book at face value, and boy oh boy, it's been a long time since reading something made me really angry. I acknowledge the problematic issues around To Kill a Mockingbird - the racist experience in 1940s/1950s Alabama being told by white characters and a white author instead of through the black experience. But this book made that seem like child's play.
The book takes place ~20 years after the events of To Kill a Mockingbird, with Jean Louise returning to Maycomb from New York to visit her family and her sort of boyfriend, Henry, during the time of civil rights and desegregation. While Jean Louise seems to be the moral compass in the novel (and again, even she is problematic), and the one who is the least racist, she's kind of an insufferable, annoying character. So if she's supposed to be the "heroine" here, she's not a very convincing one.
But I'm not actually convinced she's supposed to be the voice of good in this novel. Jean Louise inadvertently sits in on a town meeting, including her father Atticus and Henry, where everyone is very strongly opposing desegregation in their town. The invited speaker drops the n-word many times, and Jean Louise's whole world is ripped apart seeing that her father, who she (and every reader ever!) has put on a pedestal as the embodiment of righteousness and honor and respect for all human beings, might actually be a racist. After seeing this, the novel moves to face-offs with all the people she cares about (Henry, her aunt, her uncle, and ultimately, her father) where they all try to convince her that she is completely wrong and segregation is what's best and that black people don't deserve the equality they're seeking. I mean, for fucks sake, her uncle slaps her across the face because she's so one-minded about the situation.
But the final interaction with Atticus is what left me fuming. Like I was actually verbally expressing my anger at the story to anyone nearby who would listen. For example (dialogue from Atticus):
"This is merely for your own information, that's all: so far in my experience, white is white and black's black. So far, I've not yet heard and argument that has convinced me otherwise....
Now think about this. What would happen if all the Negroes in the South were suddenly given full civil rights? I'll tell you. There'd be another Reconstruction. Would you want your state governments run by people who don't know how to run 'em? Do you want this town run by - now wait a minute - Willoughby's a crook we know that, but do you know any Negro who knows as much as Willoughby? Zeebo'd probably be the mayor of Maycomb. Would you want someone of Zeebo's capability to handle the town's money? We're outnumbered you know.
Honey, you do not seem to understand that the Negroes down here are still in their childhood as a people. You should know it, you've seen it all your life. They've made terrific progress in adapting themselves to white ways, but they're far from it yet..."
So yeah, in case you still had any redeeming views of Atticus as an honorable man who fights for justice for all, lemme just spare you any more uncertainty and let you know that apparently this book rebrands Atticus as a big ol' racist. And the entire perspective of Scout's family that she's vehemently fighting against is that blacks don't need to be treated badly, but they shouldn't be treated equally. And even though, as I mentioned, Jean Louise seems to be the voice of reason here, even she is problematic, acknowledging how much she dislikes the NAACP, how furious she was at the decision of Brown vs Board of Education, and how she would never marry a black man.
Everything about this book sits wrong with me...there's so much racist garbage in it that, like I said, it made me angry. I realize that this was written back in the 1950s, but that does not give any of it a pass; one review I read said it perfectly: that this novel is on the wrong side of history. It just makes me dislike Harper Lee for these, her politics, written in an unfiltered, unedited way. As I mentioned earlier, I realize that To Kill a Mockingbird is problematic for some of its racist issues, Go Set a Watchman one-ups it with so much racism abound.
So the only place I can land, again, is that this book never should have been published. Clearly as a money grab by her publisher, I don't suspect they anticipated the negative impact it would have on the legacy of the author and on the re-interpretation of To Kill a Mockingbird. Not to say that she in any way should have been protected from having this expose her, but again, it just should never have happened.
Don't read this book. Even in spite of all of what I've said above, it isn't even a very well-written book. The narrative jumps all over the place (hey, I don't mind a good flashback now and then) and there just isn't much likeable about it. So yeah, hard pass on this one.
Now that that vent is through, I've moved on to The Ambassadors by Henry James. When I read The Talented Mr. Ripley (which I loved), I learned that it was based on The Ambassadors. So I'm looking forward to seeing in which ways this story mirrors that one. Progressing onward.
