Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 87 posts

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#21

Post by wpietri »

puranjay wrote: post #18
pervycreeper wrote: post #13

Despite widespread changes in social attitudes on some topics, To Kill a Mockingbird is still as relevant to today's world as it was when it was originally published.

That's because it is a timeless tale about the goodness of people, of faith and charity and humanity. Those are everlasting values. My girlfriend reads the book at least once a year. She says it keeps her grounded and optimistic. I started doing the exercise last year and I have to say, she is right.

True. But also because it's a sensitive and nuanced examination of the fucked-uppedness of US culture with regards to race. I certainly hope that isn't everlasting, but the book remains depressingly relevant.

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#22

Post by savanaly »

mrkipling wrote: post #10
ojbyrne wrote: post #2

I thought I was seeing an onion headline at first.

...why?

I get it. To take the joke even farther, you might imagine a headline from The Onion along the lines of "God working on sequel to The Bible". Not funny when I state it all dryly of course, but hopefully you can see the joke now?

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#23

Post by mercer »

swamp40 wrote: post #5
wmeredith wrote: post #3

I'd be interested to hear more about the creative dynamic between this new book and To Kill a Mocking Bird. It says she put this new one aside 60 years ago to write TKaMB, but it features the characters later in their lives. I wonder if she was sketching out backstory to flesh out the characters and that was more compelling, so she pivoted and wrote To Kill a Mocking Bird instead?

It sounds to me like her editor thought the flashbacks to Scout's childhood were the best part of the unfinished book - so as you said, she pivoted to the good stuff.

While I expected it to annoy me, for some reason in this particular situation I love the fact that we're using very current terminology in the context of a 'classic' from the 60s. Perhaps because it 'anchors' the term and makes it seem more like a useful word to describe a phenomenon that has always existed, rather than annoying, very-specific jargon.

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#24

Post by [deleted] »

swamp40 wrote: post #5
wmeredith wrote: post #3

I'd be interested to hear more about the creative dynamic between this new book and To Kill a Mocking Bird. It says she put this new one aside 60 years ago to write TKaMB, but it features the characters later in their lives. I wonder if she was sketching out backstory to flesh out the characters and that was more compelling, so she pivoted and wrote To Kill a Mocking Bird instead?

It sounds to me like her editor thought the flashbacks to Scout's childhood were the best part of the unfinished book - so as you said, she pivoted to the good stuff.

[deleted]

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#25

Post by wpietri »

tjr wrote: post #11
xianshou wrote: post #4

On the basis of regression to the mean ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean ), or what we might call the "J.K. Rowling effect," it would be far too much to hope that the sequel will match the original. Nonetheless, this has got to set some sort of record for the gap between a novel and its sequel. Interestingly, there is a list of gaps between film sequels ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t…

The article shares though that she originally wrote the book around the same time as To Kill a Mockingbird , or more precisely, she wrote this book first, and was advised by her editor to expound upon some segments of it to write To Kill a Mockingbird instead. So a huge gap between publications, but I would expect the writing to be similar.

For the impact to be similar, it will take a lot more than similar writing. I will read this -- I would read Harper Lee's grocery lists with interest -- but I expect that it will be a minor literary footnote, not another beloved landmark book.

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#26

Post by nathanb »

Embarrassingly, I first misread this as Harper Lee working on a sequel to the Hunger Games finale Mockingjay, and I was so confused....

I was forced to read To Kill a Mockingbird for school. I started reading it with a bad attitude. After I finished it, I immediately turned back to the first page and reread it, not with a school mindset but with a "this is amazing literature that I need in my life" mindset.

If she was writing this "sequel" at the same time she was writing the original, they're likely to contain the same themes and the same timeless way of looking at life, society, and what it means to be human. I don't know if any novel could survive the pressure of being a long-delayed sequel of To Kill a Mockingbird, but I'm definitely willing to let it try!

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#27

Post by venomsnake »

puranjay wrote: post #20
cryptoz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isaac Asimov took a 30ish year break between the original Foundation trilogy and the sequels/prequels. And I thought that was a long break!

In between, he probably put out 200 odd books. The man wrote like his life depended on it. As far as gaps go, I'm still hoping GRRM won't break any records

Judging by Leviathan Wakes and the others from the expanse we are safe in the unfortunate case of "a jordan". It is written by his assistant and a friend of him. They are also the people that are his "hit by a bus" insurance.

And I think that he will progress faster nowadays with the show. Not that I have high hopes for the series after book four and five.

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#29

Post by spike021 »

nathanb wrote: post #26

Embarrassingly, I first misread this as Harper Lee working on a sequel to the Hunger Games finale Mockingjay, and I was so confused.... I was forced to read To Kill a Mockingbird for school. I started reading it with a bad attitude. After I finished it, I immediately turned back to the first page and reread it, not with a school mindset but with a "this is amazing literature that I need in my life" mindset. If she wa…

Apparently she was writing this novel first and incorporated flashbacks, which were so descriptive that someone (might've been her editor) strongly suggested she separate them into their own novel.

I think it'll be great.

Re: Harper Lee to publish Mockingbird 'sequel'

#30

Post by spike021 »

mercer wrote: post #23
swamp40 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds to me like her editor thought the flashbacks to Scout's childhood were the best part of the unfinished book - so as you said, she pivoted to the good stuff.

While I expected it to annoy me, for some reason in this particular situation I love the fact that we're using very current terminology in the context of a 'classic' from the 60s. Perhaps because it 'anchors' the term and makes it seem more like a useful word to describe a phenomenon that has always existed, rather than annoying, very-specific jargon.

Maybe at the time they would be referred to as 'memories'.
Post reply on HN