To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee is a fantastic, touching read with many funny giggle moments also with plenty of frustration and heart ache.
I read this 20 years ago when I was 14 and I'm kind of sad it's took so long to pick it up again I really do believe we're meant to read this a few times in a lifetime.
For the age of the book and the fact it's told from a child's point of view I think it hits hard where it's supposed to and make us sit up think.
Yes I think there are a few more up to date books which cover the Same racist and coming of age hardships but there is something a little special about this book and I believe if you read I think you will find it.
I highly recommend this and think everyone should read it.

2024: Each time I read what PBS dubs the perfect American novel, my heart fills just a little more. There are few books where the beginning paragraphs hit a home run for me, and this is one of them. It has been a long month filled with family time and endless cooking so for the last ten days I opted for comfort reads and there is no family who provides comfort like the Finches, with the exception of Aunt Alexandra. “Lawyers were children once,” quotes Charles Lamb in the opening epithet. Prior to this reading, I viewed Atticus Finch as an unapproachable, older father. Beloved by his children to the point of idolization, but with an impenetrable outer skin. As an adult looking back at the events which shaped the novel, Scout paints the picture of her father as one who makes everything right and makes her feel safe. Even though this novel had been marketed for adults, it is in its essence a coming of age novel, which shows Scout’s growth through elementary school while her family faces events that mean to alter the history of a town. Atticus would need to be a strong figure to guide his children through the plot, and he would need to wistfully remember his childhood in order to relate to them. This is the man who told us all to walk in another’s shoes and see things from their point of view. Until today, I never viewed Atticus as multi-faceted, just a great man. Today that view slightly changed, yet he remains one of my top personas of all time.

Pestering Boo Radley is like killing a mockingbird, Scout implores Atticus. He never did anyone harm. There is a reason why this novel won the Pulitzer as being ahead of its time. The beginning and ending paragraphs mirror each other and provide closure. Scout and Dill engage in childhood escapades while learning life lessons imparted on them by their neighbors. Jem believes that the story began the summer Dill came and he tried to make Boo Radley come out. Being four years Scout’s senior at the time, he already saw the events of the novel from an adult perspective. Scout and Dill did not. They started as innocent seven year olds who thought that they would get married one day and ended as empathetic individuals who wanted to change the world. Perhaps Atticus’ lessons had penetrated these children after all; Scout, at least, looked like a lawyer in the making. If the world changed in her lifetime, perhaps she would get that opportunity.

With a book as perfect as this one, it comes as little wonder to me that Harper Lee never published another in her lifetime. She became a recluse; perhaps she modeled Boo Radley after her own tendencies. Boo did not come out because he did not want to. I am of the camp who is 99.9% sure to never read Go Set a Watchman. To Kill a Mockingbird is practically perfect in every way and made to change the way a nation thought about groups of people. Harper Lee had as much courage in publishing it pre- Civil Rights Act as the characters in her novel did in living with there preconceived notions of how the world functions. Bravery, courage, and empathy remain the overarching motifs in this great American novel. I view it as the ultimate comfort read and in the words of my reading friend Tessa, five stars and a heart.

2019: With endless books and infinitely more to be written in the future, it is rare occasion that I take the time to reread a novel. As women’s history month is upon us (2019), I have kept revising my monthly lineup to feature books by remarkable women across the spectrum. Yet, none of these nonfiction books pay homage to the writers of the books themselves. Even with memoirs, the prose focuses on the author’s achievements in her chosen field. Last week a goodreads friend and I paid tribute to women authors in a daily literary journal. In one of my friend’s posts, she pointed out that as recently as 1960, the author of the most endearing of American novels had to use a masculinized version of her name in fear of not being published. Nelle Harper Lee of Monroeville, Alabama published To Kill a Mockingbird under her middle name, so only those well read readers are aware of the author’s full name. It is in this regard, that I included Pulitzer and Presidential Medal of Freedom winner Nelle Harper Lee in my Women’s History month lineup. It is as auspicious of a time as any to reread one of America’s greatest novels.

When I was in ninth grade English class, I read Harper Lee’s novel for the first time. At age fourteen I was hardly a polished writer and struggled with many of the assignments. Yet, I do remember that the top essay in the class focused on the overarching theme of courage and how Harper Lee showed how each of the characters, major and minor, embodied this trait in the trying times associated with the novel. It was courageous of a southern woman to write a novel with this subject matter prior to the passage of the civil rights act. It is of little wonder to me looking back now that she chose to publish under a gender neutral name. Perhaps, she feared a lynch mob or being outcast in her home town. It was a trying time as the federal government asserted itself against states still grieving from the war between the states and holding out as the last bulwarks of white superiority. Harper Lee exhibited as much courage as the characters in her novel, and rightfully was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for her work. As such, being courageous starts from the top and works its way down to each and every character of this timeless work.

In 1930s rural Maycomb, Alabama people were pretty much set in their way of life. Town folk had received an education and worked as lawyers, doctors, bankers, and businessmen. The country folk may or may not have received an education because they had to work the fields and many were illiterate. Even the majority of those educated white folk still saw themselves as superior to blacks, and few, if any, had the audacity to take a black’s word over a white’s even if it were the correct moral thing to do. Yet, the crux of Lee’s novel is a court case threatening to disrupt this way of life, having the town divide along both racial and moral lines, and having each character step into others’ shoes and view the world from another’s perspective. Maycomb at the time embodied many rural American cities, isolated from progress as town set in its ways with few people who were willing to see the world from another perspective. One man was, however, a lawyer named Atticus Finch who is among the most revered fictional characters ever created. Even though this court case should not have been his, his superiors selected Atticus to counsel a black defendant because they realized that he was the one man in Maycomb who had both the ability to empathize and the courage to do so. His neighbor Mrs Maudie Atkinson noted that Atticus was the same man in the court house as he was at home and had nothing to fear. A widower, he instilled these values to his children Jeremy Atticus (Jem) and Jean Louise (Scout) from a young age, passing a strong moral compass onto his children.

In addition to critiquing southern race relations, Lee’s novel has endeared itself to children with the legend of Boo Radley. From the time they were young, Jem, Scout, and their summer friend Dill had courage to go to the Radley house trying to get Boo to come out even though all the other kids said the house was spooked. Atticus told them to put a halt to these childish games and explained Boo Radley’s background to them. The town claimed that Boo Radley was a ghost, but perhaps the reason he did not leave the house is because he did not want to. As the children grew older, Atticus warned them that there would be darker times ahead and they would have to be courageous in the face of what people said to them behind their backs. From the time Scout began school in first grade, she inhibited Atticus’ ability to stand up for what was right. Her teacher Miss Robinson was new to Maycomb and did not understand people’s ways. Scout explained about the Cunninghams, the Ewells, as well as other families at a personal cost to herself. As Scout grew older and was able to step into other people’s’ shoes more, she grew to understand differences between folks; however, she and Jem realized that differences did not make the world distinctly black and white or right and wrong. During an era when children were looked upon as unintelligent, Scout and Jem were wise beyond their years and following in their father’s footsteps.

Harper Lee created strong archetypal characters and had each embody their own courage. Each’s courage allowed Atticus to teach his children a life lesson that would endure for the rest of their lives. The family’s neighbor Mrs. Henry Lafayette DuBose demonstrates courage as she battles a final illness. Third grade teacher Mrs. Gates exhibits courage as she teaches Scout’s class about the rise of Nazism in Germany and th encourages her students to think for themselves about the differences between prejudices at home and abroad. The African American characters all demonstrate strong courage as well. The Finch’s housekeeper Calpurnia is a bridge between the white and black communities of Maycomb and does not hesitate to teach Scout and Jem life lessons as they arise. The Reverend Sykes welcomes Jem and Scout into his congregation as though they were his own and invites them to sit in the colored balcony at time when segregation was still the law. He risked a lynching and knew that the Finch family could possibly be labeled as negro lovers, yet Reverend Sykes played a small role in proving that one’s skin color should not determine whether someone is right or wrong. Of course, as part of the overarching story line, Boo Radley can be viewed as the most courageous character of them all. It is through the courage of an author to create characters who will stand up for what is morally right at a large cost to themselves that she created an award winning novel that was ahead of its time for its era. It is little wonder that the courage of these fictional characters has made the novel as beloved as it is today.

I believe that the courage exhibited by all these characters has made the town of Maycomb, Alabama stand the test of time and remain the timeless classic that it is. Most people can relate to those who have the courage to stand up for what they think is right or to fight against those tougher than them. This character trait has endeared the Finch family to millions of readers and will continue to do so for generations to come. Whenever a person asks what book would you give as a gift or what is the perfect book, To Kill a Mockingbird is my first choice. I find that it is perfect for any time but most appropriate in spring as in addition to courage there is an underlying theme of hope. Harper Lee won the Pulitzer for this timeless classic, and it also won first place in the Great American Read as America’s best novel. Thus I can think of no better way to honor women’s history month than with a timeless book that has and will continue to capture the hearts and minds of all of its readers.

5+ stars/ all-time favorites shelf

Beautiful book.

Rereading this book as an adult made me realize how truly beautiful and wonderful it is. It will forever be one of my favorites.

Is it weird that to me, reading this book is like sinking into a warm bath? It's an immensely comforting, beautifully written book that deals with big issues but never wears them on its sleeve. When I reread it last month I found little flashes of humor that had slipped over my head in my first reading (8th grade!). Few other books capture childhood so honestly. If you haven't read it, you should.

Even in the evil times when John Crow ruled the South and the Blacks were scarcely more free than in times of slavery and were allowed no civic power nor respect from their erswhile masters who were White, good men did their best.

As regards this book, the last phrase is a lie.

Atticus, a lawyer and good and caring father, a moral man, represented a Black man accused of raping a White woman. He lost, but he'd done his best.

That last paragraph is a lie.

Atticus belonged to the KKK, thought that Blacks were a distinctly lower form of human life and that separate development (ie. apartheid) was the best way to go for these childlike people who didn't have the reasoning power to rule, he said in Go Set a Watchman.

That last paragraph is mostly a lie.

Atticus did belong to the KKK but he did not really think Blacks were a lower form of human life at all. That was just what he said for the benefit of others. He really thought their intellectual power and ability to organise was greatly to be feared. He was frightened that Whites would have to give up having a life of ease and wealth structured around the cheap labour Black people had no alternative but to provide. He didn't even want to have to consider them at all.

Atticus represented the accused Black rapist only because if a White lawyer didn't then he was sure the NAACP would send in a very clever Black lawyer and not only that but insist, since these times were officially 'free', that Black people sit on the jury. Then he would not be sure of a conviction. The Blacks then feeling their oats would move in to the town and start demanding rights and power much to the detriment of the extremely exploitative and racist Whites.

When Harper Lee wrote all this, in Go Set a Watchman her publishers were apparently horrified and got her to rewrite the book from the point of view of a decent man who felt racism was a great evil, we were all equal. Is this why Harper Lee never wrote another book? Did she feel that her views were unacceptable and she wasn't going to kow-tow to some liberal publishers up North who didn't understand the ways of the South? Is that why she didn't give interviews too? She'd followed the advice of her publishers, been lauded and rewarded but humiliated as an artist.

Schools still teaching this book as a moral lesson should incorporate their understanding of the first draft, Go Set a Watchman. Otherwise they are doing the children a disservice in their moral education and furthering the ideas of paternalism is better than self-determination, racism had its softer side and that ignoring the truth (Watchman) to tell a good story is a perfectly fine concept for educationalists to embrace. It's not.

Five stars because it is a very well-written and enjoyable book and hangs together with Go Set a Watchman perfectly.

Read years ago, probably about 1 Jan 2000

If you have to write just one book, this is the one to write. Scout and Jem Finch will always be two of my favorite characters in literature. And Atticus... don't even get me started. I just wish Harper Lee had written a hundred books.

n  " Shoot all the blue jays you want, if you can hit ‘em, but remember it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird."n

I think this is arguably one of the most well known and well loved classics ever. And it's not hard to understand why - the characters are memorable, the flow of the story is easy to follow for a classic, the writing is lyrical and poetic without being twenty five metaphors deep like some American novels, and probably most importantly it aims to promote an anti-racism, anti-bigotry message most of us can get behind. but the whole time I was reading this all I could think was it's not the best way to discuss these themes from todays standards. Now there's a lot of essays written about how To Kill a Mockingbird is not as good as people may think and honestly I have to agree. It's filled out with the white saviour complex and characters with white guilt. when you're entire anti-racism story is all about white feeling and characters and barely shows any black people, but when it does the narrative refers to them with derogatory language and slurs and barely gives them ANY characterisation I have to wonder and obviously this book was groundbreaking for the time, and it still is so so popular today - but it is interesting this book by a white writer featuring white characters is lauded as THE anti racism book, even though people like Maya Angelou, James Baldwin and W.E.B. Du Bois were Harper Lee's contemporaries.

I don't think you can really talk about this book in it's entirety without talking about the representation and race issues and yeah, because I've read book in 2017 about these issues I do think parts of it ring problematic. But since there are also black writers who love this book, so I'm not saying it's bad - I'm just saying calling it THE book with THE BEST exploration of these issues feels hollow to me After all it has so many tropes that ah .... eh. Non-fleshed out black characters, white man deemed a hero because he realised black people are people and a constant centring of white characters in black issues. But don't take it from me, go read some essays by the experts.

n  

“You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view... Until you climb inside of his skin and walk around in it.”

n

But regardless of thoughts on those issues, from an entertainment point this book is definitely enjoyable this is one of the most easy to follow classics I've read - partly because of it being so character driven, partly because of it's straight forward and well defined plot, and partly because the telling of it through Scout's eyes really simplified things.

I think the most memorable aspect of this book for me was the characters. The central characters - Scout, Jem and Atticus were generally interesting to follow, with dynamic characterisation that left me remembering them after the book. The process of growing up for Jem and Scout, as well as the unravelling of the mystery around Attitucs the father was enjoyable to follow and that was really what kept me most invested in the story.

Story wise, the first half was a little difficult for me to get into. I was waiting and waiting for the events to start happening and now I realise it's less about the "trial" which I considered to be the plot and more about Scout and Jem growing up, and seeing the world with more nuance. For me the second half went much faster, especially because of the court room drama (I love court room scenes). But the thing is despite the book being about learning to see in grey, this book still feels quite black and white to me. There are still essentially "good people" and "bad people" and I just think it's much more nuanced then that, especially when discussing things like race, racism and the impact of colonialism & slavery.

n  

“Real courage is when you know you're licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and see it through no matter what.”

n

From a purely entertainment point of view, I definitely liked this book. It had interesting central characters and the plot moved quickly in the second half. I definitely have remembered details of this book after reading it, which shows I enjoyed it. But I don't think I got the enjoyment everyone else did out of this. I read this and kinda closed is thinking .. well is that it ? Thats the book everyone loves so much?

And the thing is, in 2017 I think we can accept this book is not perfect in it's representation and it may be time to find something different or better. Not to say it's bad, but come on, this isn't perfect.

I definitely see why this book is a classic, Lee masterfully utilises the child narrator to explore issues contemporary to her, but ongoing today, and it was a complete game changer. I know it's seen as a sin to rate this book below 5 stars, but I just think can't help thinking it wasn't as good as everyone made it out to be. And honestly after reading a lot of literature on this book for uni I don't think thats such a terrible stance to take. 3.5 stars

tTo Kill a Mockingbird is the worst kind of book. It is a perfect example of a white-guilt fantasy. It attempts anti-racism and only accomplishes the opposite. No, I’m not talking about the heavy usage of the word “nigger.” Most people fail to understand the issue; I have even heard it implied that talking about race in such a manner is racist because we should be color-blind in a post-racist utopian world. No, I am talking about the plot and the characters themselves. Calpurnia perpetuates the inherently racist mammy archetype and is the only black in the book portrayed as intelligent. The rest are not only uneducated, but they are explicitly written to be stupid. Yes, the sole intelligent black is the one serving the white folk. This is what Harper Lee is trying to tell you. The good blacks are the subservient ones.
tThe book compares blacks to mockingbirds. They are portrayed are harmless animals that should be treated accordingly. Animals. Subhuman. You would not treat an animal needlessly cruelly, and therefore you should not do the same to blacks. This echoes the sentiment of many early abolitionist groups who still believed blacks to be inferior, but just thought they deserved more rights than objects and they still believed in segregation. That was just barely praiseworthy back then and it was an abhorrent belief by the time this book came out. The book removes the idea of black resistance and depicts the blacks as passive creatures who are simply waiting for the White Man’s rescue. Atticus Finch is a complete and blatant white-guilt self-insert. It simultaneously never dares to put blacks in an aggressive position for fear of coming off as “racist. Again, Harper Lee completely misses the point.

tThe worst part of all this is that most whites completely miss the point. They might publish an edition with the word “nigger” removed, thinking that the usage of the word in a novel shows inherent racism. Their nostalgia and racism blinds them from the fact that the book itself has racist messages at its core. It was written to make white people feel better about themselves, and is an anti-racism attempt as awkward as somebody saying “my favorite slaves are niggers.” It is demeaning to black students and it should not be taught in classrooms. The very fact that this book is touted as a literary masterpiece (mostly for the supposed anti-racism rather than any exceptional prose or complexity) is just another piece of evidence that racism is still alive and well.

tJust to avoid any straw man arguments about me: I believe the works of Toni Morrison and Zora Neale Hurston to be worthless, not due to racism, but due to being poor literature. I am not very political. I don’t believe progressive social themes or anti-racism are pre-requisites for a great novel and I’m not a victim of white guilt. I’m just a reader who was disgusted by what I read and that alone gives me the right to speak on this novel and that alone is why I am speaking on it and that alone is what is relevant.

tOh yeah, and on the quality of the writing itself: all of the symbolism is contrived, the characterization is flat, and the prose fails to impress. It is simply not a very good piece of literature. You would do better to read something like Invisible Man, a book that was well-written in addition to containing impressively profound social and racial commentary.

لنبدأ مع بعض الإحصاءات والمعلومات المتعلقة بالرواية:

١- جاءت هذه الرواية في المركز الأول في استطلاع أجراه منظمو جائزة بيليز الأدبية الأميركية لمعرفة الروايات التي كتبتها أديبات، وكان لها "أبلغ الأثر في حياة القرّاء أو تغييرها"

٢- جاءت الرواية، بحسب استطلاع للرأي أجراه مركز الكتاب التابع لمكتبة الكونجرس، في المركز الثاني بعد الكتاب المقدس في قائمة أكثر الكتب قراءة في أمريكا!

٣- بيع ما يزيد على ٣٠ مليون نسخة من الرواية منذ تاريخ نشرها لأول مرة، كما أصبحت تشكل جانبا مهمً من المقررات الدراسية في كثير من المدارس والجامعات.

٤- تعد هذه الرواية من الروايات التي يُنصح كل إنسان بقرائتها قبل أن يموت!

بعد كل ذلك، ماذا بوسعي أن أقول عن عملٍ عظيم وخالد بدون أن أكرر ما قاله عنها ملايين القراء حول العالم؟

قال لي أحد الأصدقاء يومًا وهو يعرّف الرواية الجيدة، بأنها تلك التي ما أن تتركها للحظات حتى يستبد بك الشوق إليها ويدفعك لترك كل ما في يدك لتعود إليها، وهذا بالضبط ما كنت أشعر به كلما تركت قراءة هذه الرواية لقراءة كتاب آخر أو الخروج مع الأصدقاء أو الذهاب للعمل، حتى قررت أخيرًا أن أحملها معي أينما ذهبت لأقتنص الفرصة، متى لاحت، لإكمالها!

تعد هذه الرواية العمل الأول والأخير لكاتبتها هاربر لي التي بررت عدم كتابتها لرواية أخرى بأنها تنتظر الإلهام، ويبدو أنه لم يزرها حتى ماتت، وخيرًا فعل إذ أنني لا أتصور أنه كان بإمكانها أن تكتب رواية رائعة كهذه!

UPDATE:
Left my copy at the airport for someone else to enjoy.
Stumbled upon the Gregory Peck movie amongst all the inflight options.
All the stars aligned to read the novel and watch the movie within days.
I'm happy.

..........

A good travelling companion. Started it in the Southern Hemisphere and finished it in the Northern Hemisphere, waiting for the flight home.
It didn’t seem to matter that there were pauses. I picked it up when I could and the story still flowed.
It’s a classic, for sure. It’s loved by many. A story told from the eyes and mind of a child and I’m glad I finally got to read it.
4.5 shifted up to 5 stars.

Gosh, this is one of my new all time favorite books! It's just a shame that I will never be able to fully express how and why it affected me as much as it did. But I can try my best to at least write a few words to let you know what things I enjoyed (spoiler: I enjoyed every single word).

This story deals with the very important and sensitive topic of racism and is told from the point of five of a little girl. I had my doubts if this combination would work out. But somehow, Harper Lee was able to create an incredibly compelling character, who understands and misunderstands just the right amounts to be realistic, and to get all the major points the novel is trying to make across. It would have been easy to write from the perspective of Atticus, the 'hero' of the story. But I think this wouldn't have been the right thing to do; it would have seemed far too self-indulgent and conceited.

The characters themselves are all incredibly lovely. They just warmed up my heart. I'd love to give those three little kids, Scout and Jem and Dill, a giant hug. I'd like to shake the hand of Atticus and pay him my respects. I would go to Church with Calpurnia and find out more about her life. I would smile at Boo, to let him know that I accept him just the way he is, and while a simple smile might seem like a typical interaction to others, I'm sure it would mean a lot to Boo.
So yeah, all of those characters have found a place in my heart, and I know that they will definitely stay in my mind for a long time to come as well.

It surprised me how easy to read I found the writing style. It's hard to believe this was written in the 60's! I think the fact the topic is (unfortunately) a timeless one plays a part in that.
I'm currently still in a bit of a reading slump, but this book grabbed my attention from the first page and kept me smiling and laughing and crying. No wonder it's such a well-loved classic! I definitely agree that it's one of those books everyone should read at least once. Personally, I already know that I will read it many more times in the future.