Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Kavita's Reviews > To Kill a Mockingbird

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
5858699
I basically started this book so I would have a background before I read the newly released sequel. This is one of those books which are socially relevant and so don't get relegated back to the dusty shelves where they belong. It's considered to be an indictment against racism in American society, but I did not find it all that powerful.

For one thing, we look at the entire issue of racism from a white point of view, which basically just skims over the daily humiliations and trials of being a black person in the segregated and racist society of the American South. The Finch family is the primary focus of the book, especially the two children (Scout and Jem), who have no knowledge of these issues, right till the end of the book. The legal case only takes up a small part of the book and while it makes a point about inherent racism in the courts, it really does not dig deep into the issue.

The story-telling is rather lacking with paper-thin characters and no actual focus. The book is divided into two parts and the first part is almost entirely Scout and Jem and their daily lives, which I found pretty pointless. They go on endlessly about their silly games and there is far too much attention given to some mysterious neighbour who doesn't really serve a purpose except to act as a deus-ex machina at the end. The second part is better structured but even here, it is still about the Finch family.

Child narrators almost always have a major problem with lack of understanding of the world around them, which does not work for me at all as a narrative. Looking at the story through the lens of an innocent white girl serves no purpose. She has no clue about the harshness of the lives of black people because she is sheltered, ignorant and innocent. If a child's viewpoint was even required, which I would definitely argue against, why not a black child who would have the right experience. Maybe even Tom Robinson's daughter?

There is not much done in terms of character development, except for Scout herself, and perhaps her brother. But these two should not be the focus of this story because they are really peripheral characters looking at the action taking place around them. Atticus Finch borders on a Gary Stu character. On a more personal level, I could not connect to the characters or to the story except in a few rare instances.

I did like a few scenes, especially the courtroom ones. I found Mayela Ewell the most interesting character in the book and would have enjoyed a bit more focus on her and how she felt about her life and her lies. Scout's development of a relationship with her aunt got me interested in spite of myself. But overall, I don't think this book even does its job properly. I found it hugely problematic that for an acclaimed novel against racism, the black characters aren't developed much or even exist for the most part in the narrative.
34 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read To Kill a Mockingbird.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

August 27, 2015 – Started Reading
August 27, 2015 – Shelved
August 28, 2015 –
0.0% "These kids are tiresome ..."
August 31, 2015 – Shelved as: classics
August 31, 2015 – Shelved as: historical-fiction
August 31, 2015 – Shelved as: award-winning-crap
August 31, 2015 – Shelved as: kitschy-child-narrator
August 31, 2015 – Shelved as: mary-sue-gary-stu
August 31, 2015 – Finished Reading
May 7, 2017 – Shelved as: usa

Comments Showing 1-8 of 8 (8 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jibran (last edited Aug 31, 2015 03:47PM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Jibran If a child's viewpoint was even required, which I would definitely argue against, why not a black child who would have the right experience. Maybe even Tom Robinson's daughter?

Very good point. This would have lent it some legitimacy it lacks.

I had pretty much the same sentiment about the book, couldn't see what the hype was all about.


Kavita I agree. It was a very feeble attempt at a social commentary.


Petra in Tokyo You are right. It is a white people's book about racism. What is interesting in your review is that you divide the book into two parts. This, and the focus of the two parts is mirrored in Go Set a Watchman. I will be very interested indeed to see what you write about the book.


Kavita Petra X wrote: "I will be very interested indeed to see what you write about the book."

I am reading the sequel now. So far, I've noticed that it's more sexist than the first one.


message 5: by DeB (new) - rated it 5 stars

DeB Hi, Kavita! I'm one of Paromjit's Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ friends and I was impressed by your review of Girls of Riyadh. I thought that I would compare our books - we do have a number in common. Your comments on "Mockingbird" are interesting. It is an important piece of American literature, historically, because it was published at a time when the "Civil rights movement" was gaining momentum. African Americans uniformly did not have federal voting rights until 1965. In context, the novel distinguished itself because the child narrator, Scout, was "colour blind" and could say that which was otherwise would be condemned among the conservative American South. It was a device that illustrated innocence in understanding humanity on a universal level, and the bias that racism created by limiting basic rights under law. The novel was very controversial and "liberal" at the time. I've included a link so you can read a little about the back story on the vote. The Rosa Parks Story is part of this time. Hope this helps your understanding. (I'm Canadian, 3rd generation immigrating mixture of no consequence, brought here to settle and colonize for the Brits' commercial wellbeing). Here is the link:


Emma Deplores Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ Censorship Given that you didn't like this, I can't imagine you'd think much of Go Set a Watchman - which was falsely marketed as a sequel, but was actually an early draft of this book. Essentially, Harper Lee originally envisioned a book where Scout was already an adult, but her editor convinced her that her best writing was in the childhood flashback sequences, so she ultimately wrote that book instead.


Kavita Emma Deplores Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ Censorship wrote: "Given that you didn't like this, I can't imagine you'd think much of Go Set a Watchman - which was falsely marketed as a sequel, but was actually an early draft of this book. Essentially, Harper Le..."

I read that one too. Actually, I liked GSaW slightly better. This one smacked too much of white saviourism to me. But yes, both are pretty bad, imo. Harper Lee is hyped.


Arthur Goldgaber Kavita, Your review was very well written and an interesting take on the novel. I guess a book can be very different when we come back and read it as adults and also in a much different era. I would like to see the Broadway play. I would assume the play emphasizes the court room drama.


back to top