Thanks for the review. 
- Edit 1
- Edit 1Before modification by Legolas at 23/05/2011 10:07:56 PM
I held off reading this book for ages. Mainly because someone described it as a book about growing up in the South. While accurate, this is not all it is, and it is not the best selling point when describing a book to me: the bildungsroman has never been my favourite genre, and the American South not my favourite region. I also tend to be more drawn to European classics than the American ones (I do not know why; I am sure there is a sensible explanation that does not make me look like a bigot).
I'm the same way, I guess... some American classics I read and loved, but there are others that I feel not much inclination to read, and I'm certainly worse read in American literature than in British and French literature (though probably better than in the other major "literatures" ). I guess it might be because the mindset is a bit different from the European one, without being exotic enough to become fascinating in its strangeness. Though of course that depends on the book; "The Age of Innocence" could well pass for European literature. And a book like "The Catcher in the Rye" is very American, but somehow very recognizable even to Europeans all the same.
You should try Carson McCullers. I still need to read, well, all of her oeuvre except the one book, but that one book (The Ballad of the Sad Cafe) was one which, to quote your post below, "survived being taught in school", even in translation. I might bump her other books a few spaces up my list.
I do, however, feel drawn to the Truman Capote/F. Scott Fitzgerald New York scene of American writing, and it was via this avenue that I finally discovered Nelle Harper Lee for myself. She was a childhood friend of Capote, and I had heard that one of the characters in To Kill a Mockingbird was based on him. Naturally, I had to read it. Thus my discovery of one of the truly great books of the world.
What's with the Nelle?
Words like "compelling" have lost much of their meaning through over-use, which is sad because it suits the book perfectly. It is also perfectly plotted, quite apart from the important themes it deals with. Each strand of the story, which is skilfully made to seem like simply an episode or moment of small town life becomes important in the story as a whole: Boo Radley, Tom Robinson, the pride of the Cunninghams, the difference between the Cunninghams and the Ewells, Mrs Dubose, the rabid dog, Atticus' sense of honour and his ability to do what is necessary, all come together; and I cannot find fault with the claim that opens the book, that to make sense of Jem's broken arm, the story must begin where it does. The variety of impressions and local sketches, then, do not only have a value in their own right as creating an image of a particular time and place, they also have a place in a tightly constructed plot. Still, I would argue that the road to the end is still the main point.
It's funny how sometimes a writer can write a tremendously good book on their first try - and then stop publishing because they can never live up to the first one. Harper Lee is no doubt the best example, on a somewhat different level Margaret Mitchell comes to mind as well. Just imagine they'd written more books, even if none of those was quite as good as their magna opera (that looks very weird, but it should be right...).
More than all this, however: I love Atticus Finch. I defy anyone not to.
How very unsurprising.