A review of the 2015 "novel" by Harper Lee. SUBSCRIBE: / @adamwrightreviews #GoSetAWatchman #HarperLee #ToKillAMockingbird Follow me on Facebook: / adamwrightreviews
I think human beings read into all the minutia and not embrace the fact that this literary masterpiece has been rediscovered over time in a different manifestation. That being said, I personally enjoyed both novels and with an open minded approach embraced “what if”. Lee’s first transcript was rejected by the publisher for whatever reason at the time. Lo and behold Watchman reappears decades later, a great thing. We read to learn and escape, that is really what it’s all about.
Good review, but I gotta respectfully disagree. Dishonest marketing aside, I'm actually very glad this book got published. It's not nearly as polished as To Kill a Mockingbird, but I personally love Go Set a Watchman so much more. You can definitely see the things she was trying to do originally, and I respect this book so much for those things. Because this book goes places that To Kill a Mockingbird didn't. It's harsher, grayer, more adult in its outlook, because the morality is often confused. The scenes where Jean comes to understand that her view of her father is flawed, and that her father is actually much more flawed than she ever thought, hit me so much harder than anything in To Kill a Mockingbird. But I do understand the reactions to this book. If you've always treasured To Kill a Mockingbird (which I really didn't) then Go Set a Watchman would seem like a stain on its legacy. But for me, knowing that this was what Lee originally was trying for, I honestly just adore this book. 🥰
I picked up Watchman in a secondhand bookstore and decided to re-read Mockingbird. So I’ve just finished reading both books back to back. I feel kind of numb. Mockingbird was still wonderful. The language beguiling, the centre morals, strong. Watchman was the opposite language is clunky, the morals out of keeping with the characters. The idea that scout would accept a slapping from her uncle unbelievable. However, I guess if fans wrote a sequel for themselves. It would read more like Mississippi Burning than Watchman. Which, to be honest, is why fans shouldn’t write their own books. The book asks if men can compartmentalise, and in some ways, be moral and upstanding, and other ways bigots. It suggests the answer is yes. I hate knocking down my heroes, but I agree that the answer is probably yes.
Yes!! I agree. It didn’t make sense at all as a sequel. The father seemed like a completely different person. Thanks for the review to assure me that I’m not crazy. Haha
Your opening clip 😆 Also I like the detail in the background "spoiler alert not a sequel" Thanks for the review! Sounds like I'll be skipping this one.
I think human beings read into all the minutia and not embrace the fact that this literary masterpiece has been rediscovered over time in a different manifestation. That being said, I personally enjoyed both novels and with an open minded approach embraced “what if”. Lee’s first transcript was rejected by the publisher for whatever reason at the time. Lo and behold Watchman reappears decades later, a great thing. We read to learn and escape, that is really what it’s all about.
Good review, but I gotta respectfully disagree. Dishonest marketing aside, I'm actually very glad this book got published. It's not nearly as polished as To Kill a Mockingbird, but I personally love Go Set a Watchman so much more. You can definitely see the things she was trying to do originally, and I respect this book so much for those things. Because this book goes places that To Kill a Mockingbird didn't. It's harsher, grayer, more adult in its outlook, because the morality is often confused. The scenes where Jean comes to understand that her view of her father is flawed, and that her father is actually much more flawed than she ever thought, hit me so much harder than anything in To Kill a Mockingbird. But I do understand the reactions to this book. If you've always treasured To Kill a Mockingbird (which I really didn't) then Go Set a Watchman would seem like a stain on its legacy. But for me, knowing that this was what Lee originally was trying for, I honestly just adore this book. 🥰
Thanks for the comment! Totally respect your opinion and understand where you’re coming from.
I picked up Watchman in a secondhand bookstore and decided to re-read Mockingbird. So I’ve just finished reading both books back to back. I feel kind of numb.
Mockingbird was still wonderful. The language beguiling, the centre morals, strong.
Watchman was the opposite language is clunky, the morals out of keeping with the characters. The idea that scout would accept a slapping from her uncle unbelievable.
However, I guess if fans wrote a sequel for themselves. It would read more like Mississippi Burning than Watchman. Which, to be honest, is why fans shouldn’t write their own books.
The book asks if men can compartmentalise, and in some ways, be moral and upstanding, and other ways bigots. It suggests the answer is yes. I hate knocking down my heroes, but I agree that the answer is probably yes.
Yes!! I agree. It didn’t make sense at all as a sequel. The father seemed like a completely different person. Thanks for the review to assure me that I’m not crazy. Haha
I couldnt agree more with this review. Thank you!
Truly, one of the worst books I’ve ever read.
I guess the rumors are true ... Truman Capote helped
Your opening clip 😆 Also I like the detail in the background "spoiler alert not a sequel"
Thanks for the review! Sounds like I'll be skipping this one.
The biggest upset I have encountered while I read the book.
A dark illustration of blatant elder abuse!!