HackerNews Readings
40,000 HackerNews book recommendations identified using NLP and deep learning

Scroll down for comments...

Prev Page 5/180 Next
Sorted by relevance

greenie_beansonNov 17, 2020

It’s very ironic to read this headline. I’m from the south and we learn about racism through To Kill A Mockingbird. Sounds like the teachers aren’t doing a good job contextualizing these texts.

bdatonApr 9, 2015

Just started reading Ubik and liking it so far. Before that I reread To Kill a Mockingbird. I really enjoy hacking on side projects in my free time but sometimes it's nice to step away. I've found getting deep into a book is a good way for me to do that.

baldfatonFeb 19, 2016

She wrote one Great Novel "To Kill a Mockingbird" lets focus on the greatness of that work right now.

WillPostForFoodonMar 1, 2021

That is a reasonable and sensitive way to handle it. Things have change though, now To Kill a Mockingbird is being removed from curriculums for being racist.

https://www.newsweek.com/kill-mockingbird-other-books-banned...

grecyonFeb 19, 2016

To Kill A Mockingbird is still one of my all time favorite books and movies. Sad news.

Has anyone read the newly released book? Thoughts?

ck2onFeb 19, 2016

Author ONLY of "to kill a mockingbird" (seriously, she only ever wrote one book, weirdness)

bilbo0sonDec 15, 2012

No one is seeking to take away freedom of speech. Only to protect the rights of the accused.

For a more complete elaboration of the difference...

please refer to "To Kill a Mockingbird". A book you can find on Amazon. The author is Harper Lee.

pervycreeperonFeb 3, 2015

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.

flargonMar 5, 2021

I sat in class while we learnt a carol which included the lines 'even if he's black sir'. It sucked. Not just offensive. To kill a mockingbird is a great book but not suitable for kids in it's current form but I don't think it should be rewritten. This isn't woke, it's decency and kindness.

AssossaonMay 1, 2020

One of the best books I ever read in school was "To Kill a Mockingbird." It's filled with racism, n-words, cursing, violence, etc. However, the overall message is extremely positive. It teaches you that just because others are hateful and violent, that doesn't mean you should be too.

ThorentisonNov 17, 2020

Isn't To Kill a Mockingbird meant to combat racism? I read it in school and thought it was fantastic. What on earth have they found in this classic that is so bad, it needs to be banned? Banning books is dangerous territory that should be entered into very, very carefully.

celticninjaonFeb 3, 2015

Why hate harry Potter? it probably encouraged many more people to pick up a book, some of whom may never have read a book otherwise, and then they may have gone on to read classics such as To Kill a Mockingbird.

unreal37onFeb 3, 2015

Apparently, they only just found this manuscript hidden in a box "in the fall of 2014", so it was probably not the new book that person was talking about. In fact, this was the original book before "To Kill a Mockingbird" was written.

rdlonApr 26, 2018

Reading the Editors' picks there vs. the Readers' picks is amusing.

I could probably do without Ulysses or The Great Gatsby from the Editors list, but 4x Ayn Rand, 3x L. Ron Hubbard? 1984 is probably the only truly great book on the Readers' list, although Tolkien and To Kill a Mockingbird belong on a top-100 list.

SerpentJoeonFeb 3, 2015

There's nothing unfortunate about acknowledging the racial themes in To Kill A Mockingbird, and doing so doesn't diminish any of the other messages. It would be a shit book if it were only about one thing. One of the things it's about is race, unpleasant as it may be.

klmadfejnoonNov 17, 2020

> However, people aren't complaining about To Kill A Mockingbird being replaced, they are complaining about To Kill A Mockingbird being explicitly barred from even potentially being used in a curriculum with no argument as to the merits of any alternative.

Well the good news is, the kids are probably reading another book instead.

AnthonyMouseonMar 2, 2021

Kind of a sad irony that they ban To Kill a Mockingbird over "racism" when it's a book about the importance of extending due process to a black man falsely accused of rape, happening at the same time as "Believe All Women" etc.

jjk166onNov 17, 2020

If you can't get kids to take away "racism is bad" from To Kill A Mockingbird, you have no business being a teacher.

Banning books so we can keep the people who can't teach those books competently in place is insane.

varunacharonMay 21, 2008

I was quite touched by the book "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee. Its central character, Atticus Finch, has become to me somewhat a role-model. If and when I raise children in my life, I'll be extremely contented if I manage to do it like he does in the story, and if my kids turn out like his.

closeparenonMar 5, 2021

Language is such a weird reach for a progressive critique of To Kill a Mockingbird. It's a book about a false rape allegation!

kp25onAug 8, 2016

"The Fault in Our Stars" by John Green,

"P.S. I Love You" by Cecelia Ahern,

"To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee,

chrischenonMay 22, 2019

This reminds me of a scene in the book To Kill a Mockingbird where some old white ladies are talking about the poor people in Africa while they treat their own Black servants poorly.

jmcgoughonAug 7, 2017

Publishers do this every time a famous author dies or becomes incompetent (in the legal sense of the word). Go Set a Watchman was a very early draft of To Kill a Mockingbird but sold to the public as an uncovered sequel novel a short while after Harper Lee's sister Alice died.

eriknstronJan 21, 2017

I don't understand why this comment in particular was downvoted.

It's referring to the character Atticus Finch in the book To Kill a Mockingbird.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird

timwisemanonMar 20, 2012

Perhaps I'm misreading the parent, but I think he said "to Kill a Mockingbird" was one of the first required readings in school that did not fall into the drivel category.

officemonkeyonMay 11, 2019

Well, "To Kill a Mockingbird" has never been out of print (since 1960) and Capote isn't known for his novels. "In Cold Blood" (1966) was his most successful work. One could argue that she was the more successful novelist.

Capote's fame is mostly due to his "jet set" social life, not the quantity or quality of his work.

ubernostrumonJune 25, 2009

I read "To Kill a Mockingbird" in fourth grade. I liked it. I still like it.

Personally I think it's a book that grows with you.

dgabrielonJan 28, 2015

No... that's not true at all. Books like Lolita, Catch-22, Animal Farm, and To Kill a Mockingbird are all considered literary fiction.

pjscottonMar 20, 2012

According to the American Library Association, To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the more frequently challenged and banned books in the US. This page lists the dismaying details of what people saw fit to complain about:

http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=bbwlinks&Templat...

cbd1984onFeb 4, 2015

Then you have High School AP English, where "As I Lay Dying" is a standard text.

I think "Catch-22" is as well.

Say what you will about those books, they're not necessarily essay-ready in the same way "To Kill A Mockingbird" is.

kbutleronFeb 8, 2016

Reading 'To Kill a Mockingbird' is totally worth it. And doesn't take very long...

davegardneronSep 3, 2018

I personally enjoyed (and was certainly impacted by) many of the books that I was forced to read during high school. The most memorable ones for me all fell into the "modern classics" category - To Kill a Mockingbird, Animal Farm, 1984, A Clockwork Orange, Lord of the Flies, Brave New World, The Diary of Anne Frank, and so on.

PigoonJan 16, 2020

An interesting aspect to me is that a collective intelligence can easily create a diffusion of responsibility. It's a lot easier to kill or give into base impulses when the blame is shared by the whole. Bees and ants don't tolerate nonconformity, they'll kill a queen if she's not filling her role.

I didn't enjoy To Kill a Mockingbird, but I think it's good for kids to read it.

nzealandonFeb 3, 2015

"In the mid-1950s, I completed a novel called 'Go Set a Watchman,'" the 88-year-old Lee said in a statement issued by Harper. "It features the character known as Scout as an adult woman, and I thought it a pretty decent effort. My editor, who was taken by the flashbacks to Scout's childhood, persuaded me to write a novel (what became 'To Kill a Mockingbird') from the point of view of the young Scout.

"I was a first-time writer, so I did as I was told. I hadn't realized it (the original book) had survived, so was surprised and delighted when my dear friend and lawyer Tonja Carter discovered it. After much thought and hesitation, I shared it with a handful of people I trust and was pleased to hear that they considered it worthy of publication. I am humbled and amazed that this will now be published after all these years."

nish1500onJune 7, 2015

I am biased towards fiction.

To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee. The timeless beauty and innocence of the book remains unparalleled.

Light in August, by William Faulkner. It is the opposite of the above, dealing with complex emotions. Faulkner's prose and characters are unmatched in their depth.

seeingfurtheronFeb 4, 2015

Surely it is plain to the simplest intelligence that To Kill a Mockingbird spells out in words of seldom more than two syllables a code of honor and conduct, Christian in its ethic, that is the heritage of all Southerners ~ Harper Lee

You need to read it again bub.

colkassadonMay 4, 2013

Mine was "He's a she?"

I knew Harper Lee was alive from listening to the excellent audiobook On Writing, authored and narrated by Stephen King. He stated his astonishment that To Kill a Mockingbird was the only novel she ever wrote, but in a manner that never conveyed her gender (that I recall, anyway).

I even read the book years before without realizing that the author was a woman. It's the only assigned reading I have ever had that I couldn't put down.

ambivalentsonMar 5, 2018

By virtue of it being your favorite, I would think it's doing something right. But glibness aside, you could think about as you read: Is it fully engaging you? Is it communicating a complex idea in a simple and/or novel way? Is it making you feel something? Does it make you want to do something? These are all good markers, because writing is really just about communicating ideas well.

And if you don't trust your own judgment, you could look up some of the time-tested classics. Some of my favorites: The Great Gatsby, To Kill A Mockingbird, 1984 (fiction); Warren Buffett/Berkshire Hathaway shareholder letters (business/sales writing).

sct202onMar 1, 2021

I don't think this is a new thing. I was raised in the 90s in a very suburban area and I never heard the n-word spoken and it was always censored when spoken when we read To Kill a Mockingbird.

garnerwoodsonDec 17, 2008

Usually I will find out what book famous people has read, what are their favorite books, hope that any book which bring influence on them, will bring good influence on me too.. also, as famous n successful people combined with their experience, I'm sure they have better taste on their choice too.

Stephen King's Favorite:
This Book Will Save Your Life by A. M. Homes
Saturday by Ian McEwan
The Mad Cook of Pymatuning: A Novel by Christopher Lehmann-Haupt
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson
The Tenderness of Wolves: A Novel by Stef Penney
When Will There Be Good News?: A Novel by Kate Atkinson

J.K. Rowling's Favorite:
The Five Red Herrings by Dorothy L. Sayers
I Capture the Castle by Dodie Smith
Skellig by David Almond
The Woman Who Walked into Doors by Roddy Doyle

Jeffrey Eugenides, author, Pulitzer prize winner
"Herzog," by Saul Bellow
"Love in a Fallen City," by Eileen Chang
"The Lay of the Land," by Richard Ford

Oprah Winfrey's Favorite:
White Oleander by Janet Fitch
The Color Purple by Alice Walker
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith
The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison
The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck

For complete list visit http://www.famouspal.com

bfrancom01onFeb 19, 2016

I couldn't stand most of the books I had to read in high school, especially To Kill a Mockingbird. Others included The Great Gatsby, & Lord of the Flies. All awful books IMO, & still dreadfully awful. I can't believe American culture thought (still thinks?) those books were good. Luckily I read books that I liked on the side to make up for it.

BalgaironOct 4, 2020

Aside: To Kill a Mockingbird famously had the character of Mrs. Henry Lafayette Dubose, a virulently racist morphine addict.

Despite Mrs. Dubose's hatred of Atticus, he calls her the bravest person he ever knew. This is due to her resolve to break her addiction before her death, likely a horrifically painful experience due to her terminal cancer.

In a book chock full of memorable people and events, these scenes still speak across the decades as the US struggles with the damnable effects of the Sacklers' unmitigated avarice. The book remains a must read to this day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_To_Kill_a_Mockingbird_...

joshuamortononNov 17, 2020

Many schools give teachers freedom to modify their curricula. As such, you cannot replace to kill a mockingbird at the district level without banning it. I'm sure some teachers were already using a different novel (The Hate U Give is apparently popular, but is also banned in some places because it is supposedly anti-police). By barring the book from the curriculum, they force teachers to use better tools.

> Only someone completely incapable of critical thinking would lump To Kill A Mockingbird into the same category as Mein Kampf.

I don't see anyone doing that.

serfonFeb 19, 2016

Storytelling uses any avenue possible to express the story.

Shamans dance around a fire, play-actors get on stage, Film
directors use CGI , actors, puppets, sets, and so on.

A writer writes. A good writer uses all of the tricks available to them that their language provides and is capable of doing so in a consistent manner to create their own written voice.

'To Kill a Mockingbird' was both well-written and a good story; the social impact it created reflects that.

I've read plenty of works that are either exclusively well-written, or exclusively a good story. It's not rare.

AqueousonMay 4, 2013

@droithomme
I was using Harper Lee as an example. I didn't actually take an ebook and read it without paying her. I read To Kill a Mockingbird from a print book I bought a long time ago, but will gladly send her a donation anyway to offset the thievery of Mr. Pinkus.

Substitute any of the other names I mentioned in there and my argument still holds. I have bought a subscription to Andrew Sullivan's blog, voluntarily paid substantially more than $0 for In Rainbows, and paid for Louis CK's latest online only comedy special. Gladly.

tjronFeb 3, 2015

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.

OutdoorsmanonFeb 19, 2016

Many have said To Kill A Mockingbird made Harper Lee a "one hit wonder"...but, wow...the hit was a home run...

Brilliant characterization--Scout, Jem, Dill, Atticus, Calpurnia, Boo Radley, the Ewells, Tom Robinson...

The setting...the Deep South, small town flavor, racial tensions...

This novel has it all...the Great American Novel, personified...

Sad news...great writer...

rubyrescueonApr 24, 2013

I read it this morning in the english Wikipedia entry for "To Kill A Mockingbird" - it's relatively common in that context.

jones1618onApr 22, 2020

It's not explained well but this allows you to own the "original" photo/painting/document, etc. in a provable way.
An artist could offer a limited edition digital "print" and you could collect it, exhibit it and resell it because your ownership is certifiably authentic.

If you don't think that's valuable, consider the value that humans put on first edition books, signed original works, ownership of exclusive editions, etc. Everyone can own a copy of "To Kill a Mockingbird" or "Dune" for a few dollars but signed, first editions goes for thousands of dollars.

habermanonFeb 19, 2016

I loved "To Kill a Mockingbird" so much when I read it as a kid. The moral of the story seemed really obvious. In the last few years I came across this article which blew my mind and changed my perspective about the book's meaning a lot:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/08/10/the-courthouse-...

tachyonbeamonJune 7, 2021

When I went to high school, I remember having to take philosophy schools, and we went into the art of debate, etc. How to argue about different viewpoints without getting emotional, respecting your opponent, proper protocol for discussion.

Liberal values used to mean being tolerant of different view points, being open minded, being kind, respectful, and being aware of the dangers of censorship. We were given banned books to read (e.g. To Kill a Mockingbird). It makes me sad that, as a society, we seem to be losing such values.

fernandokokochaonSep 16, 2018

1. "The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg. Gave me a better perspective on how to tackle my bad habits like endless watching YouTube after work, drinking too much coffee etc.

2. "The Power of Your Subconscious Mind" by Joseph Murphy. Sold me on the idea of positive thinking, but generally I found the book crappy.

3. "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee. The only nover on the list. Definitely a good read.

4. "The Pragmatic Programmer". I fell in love with the idea of "the network" of views and controllers.

5. "The Software Craftsman" by Sandro Mancuso. Great one. Made me recosinder a few (quite a few!) things in my workflow and project.

6. "Deep Work" by Cal Newport. Amazing one. Can't wait for Monday to implement some at work. I even ordered 3 more copies for my team.

nhebbonDec 24, 2012

Looking at my GoodReads favorites that qualify as classics, these are the ones that I enjoyed the most:

  - Anything by Jack London
- Anything by Ernest Hemingway
- *One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich* by Solzhenitsyn
- *The Fixer* by Barnard Malamud
- *Northwest Passage* by Kenneth Roberts
- *To Kill a Mockingbird* by Harper Lee
- Anything by Nikolai Gogol
- Short stories by Guy de Maupassant
- Most of John Steinbeck's works
- *Lord of the Flies* by William Golding
- *The Great Gatsby* F. Scott Fitzgerald

Also, if you're reading Kafka, In the Penal Colony is a short story I enjoyed that I don't see mentioned much.

XdesonMay 12, 2014

I do not see the problem. I have never read books for pleasure. Most of the books I own are technical or reference material that have practical applications. Why would I want to read for pleasure? I did not find anything interesting about The Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies, or To Kill a Mockingbird which were standard readings when I went to school. Maybe I do not have the imaginative capacity like those people that "get lost" in books.

electromagneticonMay 23, 2010

The 'readers' list of novels is a big a crock of shit as the non-fiction. I might be a little pessimistic, but of the top ten:

4. THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkien
5. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee
6. 1984 by George Orwell

Are the only credible novels there. I'm sorry Ayn Rand and L. Ron Hubbard are not and never have been popular enough amongst the populace to hit 7 out of 10 of the top 10 spots.

Radcliffe's Rival 100 Best Novels List (http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100rivallist.html) doesn't have Hubbard anywhere and has Rand's two most read and best respected novels. I'm a wide reader and I can say every novel on this list has been recommended to me by someone or has gotten itself known to me by its own merits. No one has ever recommended me Hubbard, save for once at a garage sale when someone tried to sell me a dozen of his books for a quarter; I opted to pay $10 picking up the Red/Blue/Green Mars series, some Heinlein, Asimov and Clark. The woman joked that she doubts the bookstore will take them; incidentally I've got friends who've worked at Savers/Value Village and they can't shift the books and don't accept them.

BrushfireonFeb 23, 2009

This list is somewhat dated. After looking through the editor's top 100, many of these are indeed very good. However, a cursory glance through the 'Readers' list reveals some strange/unexpected list members, that might suggest strange/skewed sample population.

Things that immediately stood out as different:

- 3 Rand books in the top 6? Really?

- 2 Scientology / Anti Psychology books near the top (#2, #11)

A look at the fiction list reveals the same bias:

Top 10 from the 'Novels List'

  ATLAS SHRUGGED by Ayn Rand
THE FOUNTAINHEAD by Ayn Rand
BATTLEFIELD EARTH by L. Ron Hubbard
THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkien
TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee
1984 by George Orwell
ANTHEM by Ayn Rand
WE THE LIVING by Ayn Rand
MISSION EARTH by L. Ron Hubbard
FEAR by L. Ron Hubbard

There are still gems in these lists, I'm just surprised that many of these made the list, especially some of the high ranking ones. Something seems off.

mattlutzeonFeb 25, 2016

A few reporters, and law folks, might need to re-read To Kill A Mockingbird and think on what they're doing.

bladegashonNov 18, 2020

Maybe it’s just me, but race relations was only one of many arguably more universal themes in “To Kill a Mockingbird”.

I always saw it in terms of its broader themes such as integrity, prejudice (in genera), doing the right thing even against unpopular opinions, human nature (both good and bad), injustice, etc.

Then again, I felt similarly about “The Catcher in the Rye” and loved that book as a teenager as well. So perhaps I’m an exception or missing something.

atulatulonDec 19, 2017

Update: added a few lines about the books than just a name listing

From the ones I read in 2017, I would highly recommend (non-IT):

1. The hidden life of trees- Peter Wohlleben Why forest trees are different than the ones you plant, how the communicate, how they care for their friends when they are not well, how mother trees protect their young ones by not letting them grow too fast, the fungi network, etc. The book is very easy to read- there is no scientific terminology overload. Things are told very simply. Not restricted to students of the subject. Learned something interesting every couple of pages.
Another aspect is that the love shows. It is very clear that the author is in love with the subject. The author manages a wild forest in Germany and talks mainly about trees in terms of beeches, firs, oaks, etc. The author is politely insistent that we should protect the natural wild forests and let them be.

2. Why the allies won- Richard Overy Probably the best book I read on WW2. So many more factors went into winning the war than actual fight. Probably appealed to my analytical mind.

3. India After Gandhi- Ramachandra Guha As the author says history ends for many Indians with freedom. Very good chronicles. Started appreciating Nehru more.

4. Re-read Gone With The Wind, To Kill a Mockingbird, the Godfather and a few P.G Wodehouse- all of which I like.

Currently, halfway through Stephen Fry's Mythos which seems good enough to recommend. I am pretty new to the Greek Mythology and he is a good story teller. Don't have much to compare it with, though.

Also, by choice, I read quite a few books in rural Marathi(an Indian regional language) and was surprised how good the story telling was. Also noticed that I had gone quite far from my mother tongue but was happy to see how easy it was to go back.

Please answer my similar question https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15960188

jjk166onNov 17, 2020

Well let's temporarily set aside the fact that the study of literature serves a purpose beyond a didactic lesson in morality, or that just because you read a message into a book doesn't mean that everyone else would come to the same conclusion.

If the problem really was simply that To Kill A Mockingbird isn't a good way to teach racial history, then the obvious thing to do would be to propose a better book for that purpose. No one would complain if a school said they would swap out To Kill A Mockingbird for some other book so long as that other book was better. While I'm not sure exactly what book that would be, I'm sure one has been produced in the past 60 years. However, people aren't complaining about To Kill A Mockingbird being replaced, they are complaining about To Kill A Mockingbird being explicitly barred from even potentially being used in a curriculum with no argument as to the merits of any alternative. There are countless books that could be but aren't in the curriculum because some better option took their spot, and they don't need to be specifically banned. To Kill A Mockingbird is at worst sub-optimal, but it is by no means inappropriate. Only someone completely incapable of critical thinking would lump To Kill A Mockingbird into the same category as Mein Kampf.

klmadfejnoonNov 17, 2020

The title says "Banned" which implies you are not allowed to read the book. What it actually means is "Banned from curriculum", meaning teachers shouldn't use it in the classroom. The latter seems far less controversial to me. You can still read the book. You just can't be required to read it.

I don't care about the racist "incident" they're flaming up with some dumb kid. If educational leaders think To Kill a Mockingbird is a poor, white dominant perspective that does not realistically portray black perspectives, then by all means, let's stop teaching it, and teach a more relevant book instead.

I liked that book. I read it in school and found it enjoyable and an interesting intro to racial issues beyond "Slavery is bad". But it definitely makes things all about white people. There's likely some much better source material out there for that conversation.

Saying you're banning a book is a lot dumber than changing your required curriculum.

jjk166onNov 18, 2020

Well given that the vast majority of schools can and do teach it effectively, the idea that it can't be done seems excessively fatalist.

But if we do accept that it's just too high of a bar to ask schools to contextualize To Kill A Mockingbird in such a way that the literal lynch mob killing a man are not presented as role models to be emulated, then shut the school down. The kids are better off at home staring at a blank wall 8 hours a day than being exposed to that level of incompetence.

Banning books to deal with teachers who can't teach is like sticking a "0 Trans Fat" sticker on an improperly stored barrel of radioactive waste - it is worse than not even addressing the problem.

christudoronSep 10, 2014

I don't think it's helpful to think in terms of the 'right' or 'wrong' kind of books. Notwithstanding the fact that it's quite hard to define what makes certain books better/more valuable than others, we should be commending/encouraging any reading of literature, as opposed to, say, just messing around on Reddit all day (I speak from great experience of this!)

We should be careful, also, not to be too disparaging of 'Young Adult' fiction. Yes, you may have some shockers in there at the moment, but Jane Eyre, To Kill a Mockingbird, David Copperfield (along with many, many other 'classic' works) would all probably have been considered Young Adult titles if the genre had existed back then.

For more: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/featur...

thedzonFeb 27, 2017

> When a fiction writer comes up with a plot, or even a turn of phrase that blows my mind, that's one of the best things about reading. Like "how did he think up all this?!"

Typically the answer is: hard work and iteration, and many times not by himself. I think you're partially falling for the fallacy of the singular author completing a perfect work with unflinching vision. IMO this is incredibly rare.

Take, for example, Harper Lee and To Kill a Mockingbird. It's an amazing book. It's a novel that might at once feel effortless and also an unaltered vision of the author. But it's actually the result of years of editing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_Lee):

> Ms. Hohoff was impressed. "[T]he spark of the true writer flashed in every line", she would later recount in a corporate history of Lippincott.[16] But as Ms. Hohoff saw it, the manuscript was by no means fit for publication. It was, as she described it, "more a series of anecdotes than a fully conceived novel".[16] During the next couple of years, she led Lee from one draft to the next until the book finally achieved its finished form and was retitled To Kill a Mockingbird.

Everything from the narrative structure to the title to characterization is refined, over and over again.

The goal with feedback and subsequent editing isn't the dilution of an author's vision, it's the opposite. It concentrates and clarifies the vision with each successive pass.

baddoxonFeb 10, 2018

I had never heard of that authorship controversy. The biggest one I’ve heard is the claim that Truman Capote and not Harper Lee wrote To Kill A Mockingbird.

anxiouspeteonJuly 12, 2018

I keep coming back to "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". I'd say these are my two favourite books!

MeinBlutIstBlauonMay 30, 2021

Too many 80s and 90s kids into goth when they went to college but came out as English majors. I think for the most part however instructors just follow a template teaching method and don't change it. I mean, why the hell else do we still make kids read Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn? They are some of the most boring pieces of American literature to date, not even good historical novels. To Kill A Mockingbird does a better job and even that goes way over kids heads.

spacemanakionJuly 23, 2010

And there's even more... My personal favorite is http://readernaut.com/ just because the design is more modern and simple. Although it has the same problem I had with GoodReads: poor consolidation of editions of the same book, so you end up with so many duplicates. Compared to Wikipedia where there is only one page for "To Kill A Mockingbird" but many on GoodReads and Readernaut.

shadowprofile77onNov 18, 2020

His criticism is valid. A bit ideologically baited maybe but please, a simple statement of hard-to-negate ideas is what it amounts to. Who pushed for the removal of these books? Conservative Trump supporters? Nazis? Jehovah's Witnesses? No. It was people who would very probably self identify as social justice progressives with a leftward lean, and this sort of behavior is a notable part of a persistent trend that many different but in many ways similar cases bear out; namely, missing many forests because of their trees, by pushing for absurd things....... like banning "To Kill a Mockingbird" because it contains racially charged themes. despite it's very obviously anti-racist central message. Curious conversation does not and should not rule out plainly spoken criticisms of obvious stupidities, so long as it doesn't degenerate into the irrational.

greggmanonMay 12, 2014

I was similar to you? When I was ~19 I had never read a novel except stuff required by school. I hated it. I only read non-fiction stuff about Space and computer manuals/books/reference.

I asked my best friend that loved to read what book would get me to like reading. He recommended H.Beam Piper's "Little Fuzzies" and I couldn't stop reading until I finished. I think his next recommendation was Ender's Game which I also couldn't stop reading. I never quite got addicted to reading but when something does catch me I can't stop, often not getting enough sleep until I finish.

I agree with you, The Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies, To Kill a Mockingbird, are not for everyone. They weren't for me either. Many "classics" seem very out dated to me. But, I'm going to guess if you found the right books you'd at least really enjoy them even if like me you never become an avid reader

chengizonFeb 3, 2015

It seems everybody here loves "To Kill a Mockingbird". To me, it's a well written but ultimately shallow novel. Finch is your typical woman's fantasy man: great at fatherhood, great at his work, morally upright, totally scrupulous, and yes, best shot in the county. The black people in the novel rarely get a voice, except one of platitudes, and the race relations stuff is totally black and white (excuse the pun), with no particular insight. It counts as literature only because of its propitious timing around the Civil Rights movement. It's a fine school reading list book but that is all it is.

riffraffonJuly 14, 2018

Eh, fellow italian I presume, and I concur half-way.

But did you really have "Promessi Sposi" as 12yo? I recall having it in the high school curriculum, some 5 years later.

It is downright illegible for a small kid anyway, I 100% agree.

For me, the teachers' recommended readings for the summer were things of the "good educational readings" kind (To Kill a Mockingbird, Fontamara, Cronache di Poveri Amanti, Il Giardino dei Finzi Contini etc) which are terribly boring for kids.

On the other hand, my class had a class library with more enjoyable stuff in it (Tolkien, Calvino, YA stuff).

newscrackeronFeb 19, 2016

> Until last year, Lee had been something of a one-book literary wonder. To Kill a Mockingbird, her 1961 epic narrative about small-town lawyer Atticus Finch’s battle to save the life of a black resident threatened by a racist mob, sold more than 40 million copies around the world and earned her a Pulitzer prize.

That book by the "one-book literary wonder" was unforgettable for many things, including the fact that it was one of the first books I read twice. I'd say that that one work that stood strong for decades across generations should probably not be used to diminish the author using terms like "one-book wonder".

pjc50onJuly 28, 2021

It only works with a lone police officer. It's extremely hard to cope with being totally socially excluded on a remote island. Any situation where the police themselves can form a community because there's enough of them, this approach won't work.

(I would note that one of the great American novels, To Kill A Mockingbird, deals precisely with the loneliness of trying to administer justice without community support)

Then there's horror classic The Wicker Man, about a police officer sent to a remote island to investigate a vanished girl and wall of silence ...

jaysonelliotonJuly 31, 2012

I'm just trying to imagine how a book like Catcher in the Rye, Finnegans Wake, or To Kill a Mockingbird would have been changed if it were subjected to these sort of analytics by its publisher.

I can easily see future books being edited and re-written from edition to edition (not that "edition" will continue to have any meaning) in response to analytics on reader behavior.

30% of readers failing to finish a book, and dropping off near the same place? Let's rewrite that chapter to keep people turning the pages. Lots of people highlighting a controversial passage, then not buying any more books from that author? Tone it down, smooth out the "problem areas." A surprising number of young women reading a particular book? Let's "pink it up" and throw in some romantic subplots that tested well in focus groups. How about embedding some multimedia into the book, and some product placement while we're at it?

Literature will survive this latest attempt to measure the creativity right out of an industry. Good movies still make it on the indie circuit despite the focus-grouped blockbusters, good games still get made by small shops. I just can't help but feel a tinge of sadness as I watch books and literature get consumed by obsessive measurement and cold-blooded analytics.

thaumasiotesonMar 5, 2021

I don't agree; I think this is basically a case of different people trying to do different things. There's one longstanding and well-organized interest group promoting the idea that blacks shouldn't be treated badly just because they're black. That group's goals are advanced by making people read To Kill a Mockingbird.

There's another interest group promoting the idea that they should have the power to denounce other people and objects. Their goals are advanced by denouncing To Kill a Mockingbird; if it works, it's evidence that they really do have that power. The more they can denounce, the stronger they are.

The first group is concerned with the content of the book; the second group has no particular reason to be.

lqetonMay 10, 2019

On the other hand, there are people who think that Capote heavily edited "To Kill a Mockingbird". Which is interesting, because the character of Dill is of course based on him.

I always thought Lee and Capote were just very close childhood friends, who read each others works before anyone else, and suggested changes. Nothing more, nothing less.

cm2012onFeb 19, 2016

You are in fact being a huge literature snob saying that it's insulting to even compare the two. To Kill a Mockingbird was culture changing because it touched on such an important issue to American culture (race relations, etc.), while also being a well written book grounded in the human spirit. It is not objectively better written than ASOIAF, which has surprising depth and a keen understanding of the human spirit in conflict with itself.

ASOIAF has flaws, but so does TKAMB. Atticus could be argued to be quite a one dimensional character (not counting the sequel, which comes out of nowhere and is widely regarded to NOT be well written).

rm_-rf_slashonFeb 19, 2016

They say an artist is never appreciated until they die, but I believe Harper Lee was one of the most rightfully appreciated authors of our time. Most of us have read To Kill a Mockingbird, at least, and for those of us who did, it was a powerful indictment of America's eternal and original sin of race and exploitation. A book or a death changes little in a broad cultural context, but it serves to remind us how we can and should all be better to each other. Rest in peace.

TheCondoronMar 5, 2021

Mild point of clarification here. In most recent times, To Kill a Mockingbird wasnt “banned” so much as removed from classroom curricula. Many places that removed it didn’t pull it from the library. Likewise, many public schools have bibles and other non-required reading in the library.

There are levels here. you’re legally obliged to have schooling up to age 16, the state provides it to most. The removal is about the state “mandating” the reading of a book. That and the maturity of the audience. How many public schools require the reading of the Bible, Koran, Marx, hitler, or Nietzsche?

You’re right, context is everything. In the current us political climate, that might be very hard to achieve right now.

jakevoytkoonOct 3, 2010

If you liked "Atlas Shrugged", you will love "East of Eden" by George Steinbeck. It has some passages on self-determination that puts anything found in Rand to shame. It's a tome, and it starts slow - do yourself a favor and make it through the introduction of one of the villains, Kathy (chapter 8 or so). It doesn't slow down after that.

"The Watchmen" by Alan Moore. It may be a graphic novel, but the issues it raises on ethics and morality are chilling. I still think about the ending every now and then, and I haven't read it in over a year.

"To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee. In addition to the primary themes on class, race, and the killing of innocents, it has an interesting thread on living with your own moral code.

"Catch 22" by Joseph Heller. Ostensibly a satire of the military, this is a good self-reflection on the American soul (circa 1961).

"Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!". The life of a Nobel winning physicist and renowned professor doesn't have to be boring.

"Everything is Illuminated" by Jonathan Safran Foer. The premise is too complicated to describe here, but it really delves into the cruelty and self-protectionism of the human heart. Plus, its hysterical!

"Slaughterhouse Five" by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. Describes the horror of war and the effect it has on the rest of your life.

"Chronicle of a Death Foretold" by Gabriel Garcia Marques. Tells the story of a murder that everyone in town knew would happen, but nobody tried to stop.

dalkeonMar 24, 2012

Agreed! "Of Mice and Men" is ranked as a grade 4.5 book? "To Kill a Mockingbird" is grade 5.6. "Lord of the Flies" is grade 5.0. These are not books at an elementary school letter. The method used is simply inappropriate, which means the article was published with publicity strongly at the forefront. A real analysis would have shown the change in reading level over time. I and my wife read those books while in our respective high schools in the 1980s/1990s, and a quick search says that non-US high schools do the same.

veddoxonDec 24, 2016

Well, "fiction" is an incredibly broad category (if it can even be called that). And "must read" is highly subjective ;-)

If you're just looking for some light entertainment, go for sci-fi or fantasy (Lord of the Rings, anyone?). But if you don't mind some slightly "heavier" reading, have a look at the classics. In some cases they can be a little tricky to understand, but they are called "classics" for a reason...

Specific suggestions (incomplete and in no particular order): Shakespeare's plays, Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice", Daniel Defoe's "Robinson Crusoe", Harper Lee's "To kill a mockingbird", JM Barrie's "Peter Pan", Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories...

jandreseonAug 21, 2018

I was more comparing to early 20th century works. There seemed to be a period where pages were expensive and authors more often felt the need to get to the point. Novels were considered long if they were more than an inch thick. The Lord of the Rings was considered epic length (it is dwarfed by a Song of Ice and Fire, especially if you count the unfinished works).

When you pick up a copy of Fahrenheit 451 one thing you notice is how thin it is. To Kill a Mockingbird is another example. There are plenty of others.

Now I wonder if that wasn't an indirect response to ponderous tomes like Moby Dick and War and Peace? Maybe the authors who grew up with those books realized that brevity was a virtue and learned to tamp back their natural urges to digress into long rambling and ultimately pointless interludes?

djsbakonMar 5, 2021

“very racist books“

Really? Very racist? You don’t think you’re exaggerating with the “very”?

If “what I saw on Mulberry street” counts as “very racist” where do you put “Huckleberry Finn” or “To kill a Mockingbird” with their colorful language?

I mean you have two great American classics unapologetically using the n-word vs a cartoon of a Chinese kid dressed as he did a few decades before the book was written.

N-word vs. kid dressed as he dressed.

Don’t you think “mildly discomforting depiction of a foreigner?” is more proportional?

shaneljaonDec 25, 2012

Not exactly a new release, but 'Dissolution' by C.J. Sansom was without a doubt the best book I read this year. [1]

That aside, I reread the Dan Brown 'Angels & Demons' and 'The Da Vinci code' novels, worked my way through 'To kill a Mockingbird' for the first time since high school and read the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church' - to better understand the religion my girlfriend is choosing.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dissolution-Shardlake-C-J-Sansom/dp/...

tjronAug 7, 2014

Why stop at a CS degree? Perhaps every undergraduate degree should include a (possibly optional) series of courses covering, well, how to make money. Have a course on employment, including the pros and cons of a regular job, advice on preparing for a job and presenting yourself as an applicant. And a course (or two) on starting businesses, from small service-oriented shops like restaurants and individual construction work, to selling digital products, to investor-funded startups. And then include a course on what to do with your money, covering concepts of savings, personal investing, pros and cons of buying a house vs. renting.

Something like this might be a three- or four-course sequence that I suspect would make college graduates much better off out of school. And maybe some students would decide to switch majors, out of selecting a more financially viable path to follow.

For that matter, make this a sequence of courses in high school. Or both high school and college. Some high school students may decide they don't need to go to college. Other high school students may decide that they do need to go to college. I had a class in high school that covered elementary personal finance, like how to manage a checking account and how to do taxes (by hand, on paper!). While I'm happy to have studied some geometry and read To Kill a Mockingbird, personal finance was probably the most useful high school class I had.

applecrazyonApr 14, 2018

As a high school student at a relatively high-performing school, I see this all the time. Many people even skip reading the book entirely and write an essay based solely on online summaries of the book. It’s quite disappointing, as the literature we read actually holds some cultural value. For example, To Kill a Mockingbird highlights racial tensions in the 60s and Animal Farm highlights the dangers of an authoritarian society.

I also could get into studying a subject for the sole purpose of passing a test and then forgetting the content after (meaning the topic held no significance to the student). This is a huge problem in high schools all around the US.

Edit: fix mobile formatting

iuguyonDec 5, 2010

My younger self wouldn't have been interested in the books that interest me now. Instead I'd have to settle for some good fiction.

Going back in time to around 12-16, I'd send one of:

* Brave New World - Aldous Huxley

* 1984 - George Orwell

* To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee

* Catch 22 - Joe Heller

* Slaughterhouse Five - Kurt Vonnegut

* Of Mice and Men - Steinbeck

* Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury

* The Call of Ctulhu - H.P. Lovecraft

* Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card

Some of those I actually read in school and loved (but wish I read earlier), others I didn't. I think any of those books would've interested me at the time. There's plenty of time for Rich Dad, Poor Dad, SPIN Selling and all the business books later in life.

shaunxcodeonJune 27, 2008

Escape from Freedom by Erich Fromm

The Denial of Death by Ernest Becker

The Revolution of Everyday Life by Raoul Vaneigem

The Society of the Spectacle by Debord

Nihilist Communism by Monsieur Dupont

The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin

On the Road by Jack Kerouac

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

And other classics: 1984, brave new world, planet of the apes, huckleberry fin, slaughter house five (anything by vonnegut actually!). Anything I have managed to get by Stafford Beer has been incredible as well not only as a work of relating to systems analysis but on a philisophical and political level at the same time. Too bad most of his books are in the hundreds of dollars. If you get the chance download Designing Freedom. I will see if I can find a link again.

vitaminjonAug 24, 2008

I read Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies and To Kill a Mockingbird years after I finished school. I'm by no means a literary snob and read all sorts of fiction (except I haven't gotten around to Harry Potter yet), but there's a reason why these books are taught in school over say Dan Brown... they're damn good. Especially without the burden of school assessment.

I think back to the books that I did read at school, like Conrad's Heart of Darkness and Fitzgerald's Gatsby, and I can instantly see the quality in those works. Same goes for "classics" I've read in recent years, like Marquez, Camus, Frank Herbert, Huxley, etc.

That said, there have been some classics I've found tiresome. I've never been able to finish a Dostoyevsky book, and Kafka was hard going without being very fulfilling. But in general, the classics are really fucking good.

shawndumasonDec 21, 2010

5. To Kill a Mockingbird – Harper Lee

eucryphiaonFeb 5, 2019

Prescribed reading for Australian English secondary school classes in 1972-5: Animal Farm, 1984, Catch 22, Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird. I didn't get very good marks in English but I really enjoyed reading the books. The clear warnings of the evils of socialism are just as valuable today. Surprisingly our teachers were all hopeless socialists; 'just hadn't done it properly'.

ijkonFeb 3, 2015

I'm certainly thinking of running the ebook through a statistical analysis to see if the patterns in the writing match. If they were both written in the same time period by the same author, they should be pretty similar.

I do hope there's nothing untoward going on here and that this book lives up to the legacy of To Kill a Mockingbird, but the possibility is at least worth examining.

fnordfnordfnordonFeb 4, 2015

>It's a fine school reading list book but that is all it is.

The book has been banned from many schools.

Racial slurs, profanity, and blunt dialogue about rape have led people to challenge its appropriateness in libraries and classrooms so often that, today, the American Library Association reports that To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the most challenged classics of all time and still ranks at number 21 of the 100 most frequently challenged books of 2000–2009. Even as recently as 2011 and amid 326 other book challenges for that year, it ranks in the top ten more than 50 years after seeing print.

http://bannedbooks.world.edu/2012/07/30/banned-books-awarene...

http://www.marshall.edu/library/bannedbooks/books/killmockin...

nathanbonFeb 3, 2015

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!

nullconNov 17, 2020

In Florida a significant portion of the mandatory reading books when I was in school were books that were previously banned.

Including, 'To Kill a Mockingbird'-- for that matter.

A number of books listed in the article are in the ALA list, which gives a historical perspective on attacks on these works: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks...

Books from this list that that aren't on the current ALA classics list (though they're also elsewhere on the ALA site but without context, e.g. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks...):

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/789/adventures-...

http://collectingchildrensbooks.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-on...

buugsonJune 25, 2009

The only problem I found was Lord of The Flies and To Kill a Mockingbird in 6th grade because we were in an advanced english class, not really the best books for a younger audience.

On the other hand I read the Rye in 9th grade and found it to be a very interesting and relatable book and even though it is not the best book for a young audience there is not much of a difference when you have reached high school.

MBCookonJan 14, 2020

1. The Snowy Day (Ezra Jack Keats)

2. The Cat in the Hat (Dr. Seuss)

3. 1984 (George Orwell)

4. Where the Wild Things Are (Maurice Sendak)

5. To Kill a Mockingbird (Harper Lee)

6. Charlotte’s Web (E.B. White)

7. Fahrenheit 451 (Ray Bradbury)

8. How to Win Friends and Influence People (Dale Carnegie)

9. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (J.K. Rowling)

10. The Very Hungry Caterpillar (Eric Carle)

chimeracoderonFeb 3, 2015

I was incredibly excited to see this news upon seeing the headline in the New York Times, and surprised, because Harper Lee has been a recluse for almost her entire life since writing To Kill a Mockingbird, and has repeatedly insisted that she had no desire to publish another book ("I wouldn't go through the pressure and publicity I went through with To Kill a Mockingbird for any amount of money. Second, I have said what I wanted to say and I will not say it again."[0])

After doing a bit of digging, however, I'm a bit concerned. Now, Lee is almost 90, and has suffered a stroke that seems to have had lasting effects. She filed a lawsuit in 2007 against the son-in-law of her former agent, claiming that he took advantage of her mental state during her recovery and duped her into assigning him the copyright to To Kill a Mockingbird[1]. For much of her adult life, her sister handled press relations and shielded Lee from these pressures. Her sister passed away three months ago, and suddenly this new book comes to light[2].

I really hope these suspicions are wrong, and that there's nothing shady at play here. I'm excited to read the book, but I can't help but be skeptical of the timing.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_Lee#After_To_Kill_a_Moc...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_Lee#Lawsuit_to_regain_c...

[2] (I dislike linking to Gawker Media sites on principle, but Jezebel actually wrote a good post digging into the details of this - "Be Suspicious of the New Harper Lee Novel".)

kitbrennanonFeb 3, 2015

I think you missed the point. The brilliance in To Kill a Mockingbird is the way it makes us feel the confusion felt by a six year old looking at an adult world.

At the time, many people did see race relations as 'black or white', and people thought there was a perfectly legitimate debate to be had about whether someone that was black was 'less of a man' that someone that was white. What Scout really shows us is that children are not born with this pre-conceived notion, and are generally confused by it... and we should be too.

To address your specific points: the black people were not supposed to have much of a voice in the novel, because black people didn't have much of a voice back then. There wasn't much insight (in terms of speeches or things said) around race relations, because to a six year old girl the insight doesn't matter. All that matters is one of fairness - that a child cannot fathom how crazy adults must be to not give black people a voice or to treat them differently, just because of their skin.

PS: In response to your comment about Finch, you're right. Finch is perfect - because he's Scout's father - and most six year old girls do think of their father as perfect; if Scout hadn't been written that way then her character would have seemed shallow and wrong.

PPS: I've clearly thought about this too much and what I've wrote seems a bit preachy - as with any book, it all comes down to personal taste.

thomastjefferyonMar 30, 2017

> IIRC the main character of To Kill a Mockingbird was Atticus Finch, who is male.

The story is told from the perspective of his daughter Jean Louise Finch, who ambiguously introduced herself by her nickname "scout".

> would "not bat an eye to learn that there are female surgeons"

I can see where I miswrote "learned". I meant that in the context of reading a story, as in reading that in some particular context (like this riddle) that a surgeon is female.

> hearing otherwise would be news to you, which of course would be hugely biased.

Of course that is not the case. I am well aware that there are totally competent female surgeons. That is what I mean by saying "I would not bat an eye". The context in which I would be surprised is the context of this riddle: Since I am male, and since English grammar has historically assumed a male descriptor, my first assumption in this riddle is that the surgeon is male. My point is that that assertion does not stem from the word surgeon, and the historically significant gender gap with surgeons. The assertion that the surgeon is male stems from the ambiguity of "surgeon". The riddle does not state, or even directly call into question the gender of the surgeon. In order to answer the riddle, the gender must be assumed to be either male or female. The answer to the riddle is the most likely conclusion, but because of the grammar used, it is not my first conclusion. My first conclusion (that "father" meant someone with children other than the "son"), was in fact not incorrect, but was indeed less likely.

TheAdamAndCheonNov 17, 2020

To Kill a Mockingbird portrays the situation as a white people problem, with the blacks as passive victims requiring good, white actors to save them.

No it doesn't. It portrays a trial from the perspective of a lawyer's daughter. The fact that it's portrayed from a white person's point of view doesn't somehow invalidate the story unless you're just anti-white.

they support the continuation of power structures that make it systematically difficult for minorities to have equal levels of opportunity. This is a nuance that most people on both sides generally fail to understand.

You're projecting an opinion that people with different political opinions are just ignorant of the facts, which is itself ignorant. There are plenty of educated people who disagree with you.

To ban this book is to further narrow the field of political opinions acceptable to the liberal educational elites.

rhino369onJan 3, 2018

One reason is that patents are much broader than copyrights. A copyright only prevents someone from copying your specific work. You can copyright Batman, but someone else can make Black Panther.

Patents cover independently developmed products and can cover fundamental methods or products. Inventions are often nearly developed by diffrent people. If the Wright Brothers didn't invent the airplane, someone else would have within ten years.

Someone else wouldn't have written To Kill a Mockingbird. Some other novel may have captured the same fame and critical praise, but that copyright doesn't stop that novel from exisiting.

fjarlqonJan 2, 2017

Website overloaded... here's a cache.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttps...

"What books would be entering the public domain if we had the pre-1978 copyright laws?"

  Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird
John Updike, Rabbit, Run
Joy Adamson, Born Free: A Lioness of Two Worlds
William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany
Friedrich A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty
Daniel Bell, The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties
Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Politics of Upheaval: The Age of Roosevelt
Dr. Seuss, Green Eggs and Ham and One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish
Scott O’Dell, Island of the Blue Dolphins
John Barth, The Sot-Weed Factor
Jean-Paul Sartre, Critique de la raison dialectique

"Consider the films and television shows from 1960 that would have become available this year."

  The Time Machine
Psycho
Spartacus
Exodus
The Apartment
Inherit the Wind
The Magnificent Seven
Ocean’s 11
The Alamo
The Andy Griffith Show (first episodes)
The Flintstones (first episodes)

Also listed: songs from 1960 (e.g. Elvis's "It's Now or Never"), and copyrighted scientific research from 1960 still behind paywalls (e.g. 1960 papers on the structure of hemoglobin and myoglobin).

droithommeonMay 4, 2013

"I'm no fan of copyright and this is why"

So without copyright anyone can print To Kill a Mockingbird without paying royalties to Harper Lee. How would that be a better system. Should she make her money charging admission to public readings of her work, as is proposed for musicians (making income from giving concerts rather than selling recordings) in a copyrightless world?

TwiztidKonFeb 3, 2015

A writer working on a biography of Harper Lee came to my high school 6 or 7 years ago to give a presentation about her. He told us that she had written another book but didn't want to publish it due to the pressure she felt from the success of To Kill a Mockingbird, so she planned on having it published after she died. This is probably the book he was talking about.

I can't remember exactly who the writer was, but he spoke about his experience interviewing Kurt Vonnegut for his biography, so it was probably Charles Shields.

jowiaronMar 20, 2012

One of the biggest things stopping kids from developing a lifelong love of reading is the "let's not offend anyone" drivel they are forced to read in the lower grades. It took until about 8th grade to actually come across required-for-school reading that I enjoyed - 'To Kill a Mockingbird' and 'Flowers for Algernon' - and that was in a suburban, progressive school district. When reading is "the thing that teachers make you do," and with the material that is typically chosen, the thought that picking up a book could be done willingly is a foreign concept.

cabbeeronDec 26, 2013

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison
Slaughterhouse-5 by Kurt Vonnegut
1984 by George Orwell
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway
An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser
Midnight’s Children by Salman Rushdie
My Antonia by Willa Cather (1918)
On the Road by Jack Kerouac
The Heart is A Lonely Hunter by Carson Mccullers
The Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller (1934)
Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston
To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf
Ulysses by James Joyce

major505onMar 5, 2021

I don't know any culture that banned books independent of their content that people didn't regret in the future.

A few months ago I was reading about schools banning the book "To Kill a Mockingbird" because it contains basically the "n" word. I'm not american, and and havent read that book. I watched the movie, through, and it seemed to me to be a very anti racism message.

I think instead of banning, schools should work provide context to kids and teens that read this books, of how society was when they where written, so people don't forget the past, but are able to make better decisions to the future.

thomastjefferyonMar 30, 2017

It took me a minute to get the riddle (if you haven't tried, go read it now), but I don't believe that means I am biased. My first thought was that the "surgeon" was the son's father, and the "father" was just someone who had children. In a literal sense, that could be a valid answer, but the focus of the riddle is whether I considered the surgeon to be the son's mother.

Does the fact that I consider a surgeon to be male when there is no gender specified mean that I am biased? Of course not! I would not bat an eye to learn that there are female surgeons. That is not where the ambiguity comes from. My assumption that a character is male derives from both the fact that I am male, and the fact that the majority of English writing, and indeed, English grammar assume male gender.

When I read "To Kill a Mockingbird", I assumed the main character to be a boy until several pages in, where, to my surprise, the gender was specified to be a girl. Of course it was easier to read a first-person story from the standpoint of my own gender. Did I have a problem that the main character was female? No. That did not matter to me. Did I wish that gender was specified as soon as the character was introduced? Yes. That would have made the writing much easier to comprehend.

TL;DR The fact that gender bias exists in language does not mean it exists in the mind of the reader.

EDIT: To those that are downvoting, would you care to explain your complaint? Just because I disagree with OP's argument does not mean I am not open to discussion.

pm24601onAug 15, 2017

> Suppress white supremecy from public discussion, and hope it dies out from loneliness in a few generations? Good luck with that.

Actually, ... yes. White supremacy used to be the norm. Slavery, lynch mobs, KKK, etc. all were considered normal. "To Kill a Mockingbird" was a book that talked about how normal such attitudes were (and still are in parts of the South)

White supremacy has been denormalized and it is dying says that continued denormalization does work.

In Durham, NC a confederate statue was pulled down. In the video, white people were seen abusing it. White people. That is what denormalization looks like.

irahulonSep 18, 2012

> gbog sounds a bit like the main character from Verne's Paris au XXe siècle, a classics scholar who is shunned for searching for timeless truth in a modernist, materialist world that focuses only on technology and business.

Search for whatever you want - I couldn't care less. But when you come out saying "I read Kant. Look at you simpletons and your not-real-books" then you deserve a slap. Let me re-iterate, no one is stopping you from reading whatever you want. But when you come out categorizing books as real and non-real based on a handful of old books you read, you are a douchebag.

> they are universal and timeless

I am neither universal nor timeless and I have a very limited amount of time which I have to invest accordingly. You carry on with your Hamlet, I will carry on with my "To Kill a mockingbird".

> and contain deep truths about the human condition that resonate forever

And are you assuming these so-called "deep truths" of yours are exclusively found in your 1000 year old obscure books? Care to list me a few of these deep truths?

> If Gates had read them early in life, maybe he would not have developed the predatory personality that characterized his business career and Microsoft in general?

Armchair theorizing much?

Built withby tracyhenry

.

Follow me on