And herein lies the paradox at the heart of “Watchman” that many white Americans still cannot or will not comprehend: that one can at once believe in the ideal of “justice for all” — as Atticus once purported to — and yet maintain a deeply ingrained and unexamined notion of racial difference now based in culture as opposed to biology, a milder yet novel version of white supremacy manifest in, for example, racial profiling, unfair and predatory lending practices, disparate incarceration rates, residential and school segregation, discriminatory employment practices and medical racism.
The argument that enlivens “Watchman” is one rooted not only in the class distinctions between “good white people” and “trash,” originally articulated in “Mockingbird,” but also an argument among all white Southerners anxious about the tumultuous times of court-ordered desegregation and apprehensive about the future. The action by the court, and the federal government enforcing the court’s edict, is presented as an affront to the way things were, to the status quo — the warm, comfortable past — and the paternalism that allowed many Southern whites to love the negro as long as he stayed in his place. This is a white South trying to hold on to its rights — a troubling adherence to the uses of the doctrine of states’ rights — once to maintain the institution of slavery, later to maintain Jim Crow laws.
A deep disappointment runs through the heart of the novel as the Finch family struggles with personal conflicts brought on by the social upheaval of the 1950s South. If Atticus is not willing to accept desegregation, Jean Louise also is resistant to change and anxious about it, even as she knows it must occur. A significant aspect of this novel is that it asks us to see Atticus now not merely as a hero, a god, but as a flesh-and-blood man with shortcomings and moral failing, enabling us to see ourselves for all our complexities and contradictions.
Don’t you think it is naïve for people to think that Atticus was all good and everyone else was all bad? If Atticus Finch had been a real life person, he would have been about the age of my grandfather or perhaps a little older. That is important for me to remember when I think about these things.
I think most people are generally pretty schizophrenic about race issues, in particular, southerners. Most of us are products of our culture, our customs, and of people who for whatever reason, had their world turned upside down and inside out. I don’t just necessarily speak of white people.
I also know people, who because of their location, have had very few dealings with any people of color. Their own cultural exposure has been simply 99.9% white people. It’s very difficult to even have a conversation with these people about anything racial. Conversely, I once had an acquaintance who was Native American from the Dakotas. He simply couldn’t understand when I told him that people around here didn’t have prejudices against Indians. He didn’t believe me.
meanwhile, I have fired up my kindle, made sure the battery was fully charged, in great anticipation for To Set a Watchman. I am not even sure what the title means but by George, I am going to start that book at the stroke of midnight, when it magically appears on my Kindle.
I am not sure what my reaction will be, or course. Will Atticus bother me? Too soon to tell. He might just end up being another racially schizophrenic Southern like those I grew up with. We shall see.
Is anyone else starting the book at midnight? I will be interested in hearing other opinions.
I’ll definitely read it – might even get a hard copy.
Moon – here is an explanation of the title. I am in line at the library to borrow a copy.
The title comes from the Book of Isaiah: “For thus hath the Lord said unto me / Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth.” Every man’s watchman, a character says in the book, is his own conscience.
Did you get it? (or were you in digital line?)
So a watchman is a moral compass or put in modern terms, Jiminy Cricket?
I’d feel a little better about this if I understood clearly what Miss Nelle’s wishes were about publication. That seems a bit murky and it’s not clear to me (watching from an immense distance, so what do I know?) that she wanted this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/what-harper-lees-attorney-doesnt-say-in-an-op-ed-is-revealing/2015/07/13/282e7b04-29b0-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html?hpid=z14
I think I smell a rat here. Harper Lee was very adamant for years that she was done with publishing. I wonder what this wonder woman lawyer get out of the deal.
@Scout I agree Scout. Ms. Lee’s wishes are unknown. We only have the trustee of her estate”s word that Lee wanted this novel published.
This seems similar to the brouhaha/lawsuit over Vivian Maier’s estate. Would the artist want the work published and who profits?
I don’t think there are any descendants are there?
Someone is going to get it. It’s awfully public to be pulling a fast one.
It does not appear that Ms. Lee’s wishes are genuinely known, much less being honored. I haven’t read this book but from the reviews and comments I have read, it changes completely the character of Atticus Finch, whom Lee treasured in “Mockingbird.” She chose not to publish further after “Mockingbird,” I believe, because she did not want to risk altering in any way the classic, beloved character and story she created.
This is another example of why everyone should do proper life planning so that their wishes are honored after they become incapacitated or deceased. That includes a will and trusts directing how all assets are to be distributed, a living will and powers of attorneys to direct the kind of medical treatment we receive if we are unable to communicate those wishes ourselves, and other binding legal documents.
This book publication may even rise to the level of elder abuse and exploitation. The attorney behind the publication of the new book has apparently found some legal justification to allow her to do what she has done. I don’t think it is consistent with what Ms. Lee would have wanted.
From the “Washington Post” article Moon, linked, “Lee is an 89-year-old stroke victim who is nearly deaf and blind, is living in a nursing home, and had long vowed she would never publish anything after ‘Mockingbird.’ Alice Lee, her sister, attorney, business manager and housemate, had shared that point of view.
But then, just two months after Alice died in November, Carter, the only other attorney in the tiny firm in Monroeville, Ala., announced that she had found the “Watchman” manuscript a few months earlier.”
Ms. Lee’s only loyal advocate and protector, her sister Alice, dies and two months later the attorney says she found the manuscript and Ms. Lee wants it published? I don’t buy it. It looks to me like the Lee sisters trusted someone unworthy of that trust. This incident should serve as a lesson to everyone concerned with our elderly loved ones, and our own interests when we become unable to make decisions for ourselves.
What an excellent point. Now I feel exploitive even reading it. I do smell a huge rat.