Review of Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee

Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Obviously, I could not put this book down. One reason was the unwillingness to stumble upon spoilers. Warning! I must include some spoilers from the book in my review in order to be able to discuss the book, so if you are like me and want to experience the book for yourself, please stop reading at this point.

Have I left enough space for you to stop from reading ahead? Good! Here we go:

I have given this book only three stars for basically one reason: the book is not complete. I don't know how much of this has been echoed by other critics, as I have not read any other reviews yet, but if other readers aren't saying it, they are blind. When I say the book is incomplete, I don't mean that the story has no ending-- quite the contrary, I believe the ending to be one of the redeeming factors of the book, as it showed me what I believe Harper Lee was aiming at thematically. The ending spells out the major themes rather concisely. What I mean by the book being incomplete stems from three items which boil down to a lack of revision:

1. The book has events in it contrary to the events of To Kill a Mockingbird.
There are several examples of my first complaint, but the biggest is that Atticus Finch wins the Tom Robinson case in the Go Set a Watchman universe. Also, the Ewell girl is only 14 in the Watchman universe; whereas, she is 19 in Mockingbird. I can understand some of the complexities of revising a manuscript. Lee may no longer be cognitively capable of the revisions herself, and having someone else do it is always dangerous when considering authorship and author's purpose. Henceforth, I am attempting to view these two books as set in two slightly different parallel universes; therefore, making my first argument easy to ignore.

2. Consistent voice is missing from the dialogue, and the dialogue is didactic.
The end of the book is dialogue-heavy, and Jean Louise's voice in particular rings inconsistent. Sometimes she sounds southern, sometime Yankee, and sometimes so vastly academic that her voice blends in too much with Atticus and her uncle. This problem didn't exist at all in Mockingbird because Lee's first novel received the treatment that it deserved, in my belief. So often literature suffers in our modern world: putting a book out is too often a business transaction instead nursing great writing into a piece of art through revision. Publishers seemed more willing to put off publication in the past until a book was its best. I am not sure what the publisher was thinking here. If they were thinking the readers wouldn't notice, then I think they have underestimated their readers. Also, the end seems rushed, grasping desparately to get the (albeit profound and complex) message across. The thematic elements are revealed in the dialogue, but the action and voice are missing. It becomes a philosophy discussion without the discourse and actions surrounding the characters. Repeating myself, this is a lack of revision.

3. Inconsistent point of view and perspective mar the book, especially at the end.
The book is told in third person limited, sort of. The perspective shifts a bit from person to person at times. Lee also reveals a few actions that occur outside the knowledge of Jean Louise Finch. I have certainly read other books that possess this type of shift, but during the last few parts of the book, I noticed more and more that we receive the thoughts of Scout in first person, which happens rarely or not at all in the beginning of the book. My record player is certainly broken: this is a revision issue and would not have occurred had the book been put out more closely following Mockingbird.

Here's my soapbox: this book shouldn't have been released. I believe the motives behind its release were 100% money-motivated. Maybe I should take it more easily on the publisher and say that it shouldn't have been sold the way it was, as a sequel to Mockingbird written before the first book, but as a found draft of a manuscript (because that is what it is). It shouldn't have even been packaged to look like a novel. Still trying to be understanding, I can also imagine the uproar if the public knew a manuscript existed, and it never saw the light of day, but the publishing industry can't feign innocence here. Think about your favorite book series written in the past 20 years, and find one (maybe barring Harry Potter) that is consistent in quality. The publishing industry remembers that it must stay financially viable but often forgets that it is a conduit for the production and publication of art. I hold the personal belief that publishers pressure writers into putting out the next installment at the expense of quality. (The music industry also should plead guilty here).

All that being said, this book had amazing potential, and I certainly wish the history of this manuscript would have unfolded differently. The character of Jean Louise Finch appears completely developed. I believe that the tomboy of a child we get in Mockingbird develops into the opinionated, independent, lovable twenty six year old from Watchman. Admittedly, I didn't come to the novel completely spoiler-free. I had heard that Atticus Finch seems racist at points in the new book. I was reading To Kill a Mockingbird when I heard this rumor, so I began to look if it was even possible for the symbolic American moral pillar that is Atticus Finch to have racist leanings. I did find a few small pieces that support his dialogue and actions in Watchman. One such moment from the classic is something that Atticus's sister, Alexandra, says. It is something to the effect that "I can't believe that you of all people are getting upset about a case involving a Negro" (loose paraphrase). The other is the scene in which Dill and Scout leave the courtroom and have the conversation with Dolphus Raymond in which Raymond remarks to Scout about complexity of her father. I think that Lee left me enough breadcrumbs to find the so-called racist remarks of Atticus in Watchman plausible. What I think this actually does, to the second installment's merit, is make the character of Atticus rounder and more human. Atticus is as progressive a man as his generation can produce. Possibly, Lee never intended Atticus as a symbol of the perfect moral pillar but instead as an fallible man who believes strongly in justice, and his convictions lead to his actions, which, doubtless, require courage in Lee's original classic. His actions really require no less courage in the original's successor.

Also, I have no problem, as a writer, with the death of Jem Finch, which precedes the events of the novel. I find it necessary to move along the plot between Jean Louise and Henry, and I understand Harper Lee's choice in killing off a character. Still, the matter-of-fact revelation of his death shocked and grieved my soul.

This book is presenting complicated and profound themes about growing up, becoming an adult, and the fallibility of all men.

Though I have remarked that I don't believe this should have ever been published, especially without the word "manuscript" attached to it, if you love the original, you must read it. My advice is to approach it as existing in a slightly altered parallel universe of the original. I mourn the fact that I, myself, don't live in a parallel universe in which this manuscript was discovered and handled within a decade or so of To Kill A Mockingbird.

View all my reviews