To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee

[shelke]

Lawyer Atticus Finch defends the real mockingbird of Harper Lee's classic, Puliter Prize-winning novel—a black man charged with the rape of a white woman. Through the eyes of Atticus's children, Scout and Jem Finch, Harper Lee explores with rich humor and unanswering honesty the irrationality of adult attitudes toward race and class in the Deep South of the 1930's.

A classic novel and a must read of book fans everywhere, this book won the pultizer prize in 1961.

 

[Tonyblack]

A really great book! The young lad visiting his aunt and Scout and Jem's friend is based on the young Truman Capote, who was the childhood friend of Nelle Harper Lee.

If you haven't read it, I'd heartily recommend it.

 

[BatrickPatrick]

I've seen the movie >.>
It's on my reading list.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

I got it with UA at Tesco's on Friday The film was brilliant so I'm looking forward to reading it

 

[ShadowNinjaCat]

Yay for Boo Radley!
I didn't even know there was a movie,I only know the book.

 

[raisindot]

It's essentially the ONE book that every middle school student in America reads in English class, including myself mphhhhtht years ago and my ninth grader last year.


J-I-B

 

[Tonyblack]

It was also (and still frequently is) one of the most banned books in the US.

 

[mystmoon]

I was going to do this for GCSE, but we ended up doing Of Mice and Men instead because it's shorter (honest reason!)

 

[ShadowNinjaCat]

I never really understood in the end whether it was Jem or did Ewell really fall on his knife,or was it Boo for that matter?

 

[raisindot]

It was also (and still frequently is) one of the most banned books in the US.

That site and list are pretty outdated and really are more reflective of idiot practices is certain fundie-controlled school systems of the U.S. (i.e., the most crazy right wing areas of the south) than of the country as a whole. While I don't have stats handly, I'll wager that you'll rarely find any of those books banned in any library north of the Mason Dixon line, with the exception of certain whacko sections of Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Colorado and Idaho.



J-I-B

 

[superfurryandy]

Did it for O level, loved it and was mocked (ha!) by my classmates who didn't really like reading books.

 

[theoldlibrarian]

Yes its a masterpiece that I once wrote a 25 page study pamphlet on. Is there anything in particular you would like discussed?

 

[AndieKry]

oh, I had to right (meaning had write) a lot of rubbish about the russian classics while in school. Not saying that all is rubbish but when you had to write that you understand it the same way as your party leaders (otherwise you are doomed).
:twisted:

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Don't know what's worse really - burning books or subverting them. :x

From an historical viewpoint it's kind of interesting to see how societies view their classics - especially when they weren't classics but new and in some cases with dangerous/toxic ideas.

 

[AndieKry]

To be honest, Classics is nothing to do with them.
if you look at the books, The Bible is a good example of such a classics.
Jews (own the first 5 books) - say they understand it their way (Rav said they were chosen);
Christians - it is even worse - still didn't come to an agreement if there is a place for women priests (not mentioning other disagreements between different groups that are ready to kill to prove that they are right - fun, don't their God knows better), etc.
Not going any further - already seeing some people hate me.
P.S.: my apologies to all - never wanted to be rude or offensive. but some people are offensive to me when I say that I am a follower of my Gods.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Andie - I didn't mean to imply that I hate you at all (if that is what you meant) and I don't think anyone on here does. What I meant was that books are precious things and should never be destroyed or censored and condemned just because some people think they're wrong for some reason, or are sending out the 'wrong' message and spreading new ideas that could be good for people to know about.

The Bible, as you're saying, is a good case in point and people should be free to take what they want from it, if it gives them comfort and shores up their own beliefs and helps them make sense of the world and how to live in it. I don't personally agree with or believe everything the Bible tells us, but there's a lot of history and cultural richness in there that's interesting and useful too, and the message of the Gospels is something that has sustained people for 2 thousand years and taught them to love and appreciate others. It's caused a lot of conflict too, but the core message is one I think very few sensible people (and despite appearances there are a lot of them on this forum) would say the Bible is a bad book, or that any Christian is bad person just because they believe in Jesus and his teachings.

I don't think you've been rude or offensive at all in this thread or any other come to that - you've brought up a lot of interesting points which is something we enjoy debating on this site. I'm sorry if you thought I was reacting badly to your remark about having to be careful what you wrote about the classics when you were at school. What I was trying to say was it's sad you had to be careful what you said in case you upset the people in charge - they were the ones at fault, not you at all.

 

[Tonyblack]

To be honest, Classics is nothing to do with them.
if you look at the books, The Bible is a good example of such a classics.
Jews (own the first 5 books) - say they understand it their way (Rav said they were chosen);
Christians - it is even worse - still didn't come to an agreement if there is a place for women priests (not mentioning other disagreements between different groups that are ready to kill to prove that they are right - fun, don't their God knows better), etc.
Not going any further - already seeing some people hate me.
P.S.: my apologies to all - never wanted to be rude or offensive. but some people are offensive to me when I say that I am a follower of my Gods.

Huh?

I know I've not been around the last few days, but 'people hating you'??? I seem to have totally missed that. Is it possible that you have misunderstood what people here are saying?

I know that some boards can be very hard on newbies - but this one isn't and I'm proud of the fact that we do our best here to make everyone welcome.

People are going to have differences of opinion and they may even question your views - but that doesn't mean they hate you. It means that they want to try and understand your views better.

I hope you'll not give up on us - we really are a nice group of Pratchett fans here.

 

[raisindot]

...People are going to have differences of opinion and they may even question your views - but that doesn't mean they hate you. It means that they want to try and understand your views better.

I hope you'll not give up on us - we really are a nice group of Pratchett fans here.

This is totally true--up until the first time you get poohed upon.



J-I-B

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

That's just a rite of passage - being poohed on I mean

 

[poohcarrot]

Andie

I'm pretty sure that nobody hates you.
Most people usually save their hate for me.

Don't worry about any comments from Jan or J-I-B, they both think they know what they're talking about, but between you and me, they ain't got a clue most of the time.