To Kill a Mockingbird

add news feed

tweet a story

The only films from the BFI's list that you must watch are Some Like It Hot, The Godfather and Singin' in the Rain. Of 100 Greatest Novels, you can happily ignore all of them except Scoop and The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie. I am assumin...
The only films from the BFI's list that you must watch are Some Like It Hot, The Godfather and Singin' in the Rain. Of 100 Greatest Novels, you can happily ignore all of them except Scoop and The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie. I am assuming you've already read To Kill a Mockingbird for O-level. You must never swim with dolphins. If they ever want to swim with you, I'm sure they'll let you know.
about 8 hours ago
The internet these days is chock full of must-reads, must-sees, can't-live-withouts, and lists (oh, the lists!) of things you need to do before you die. As I understand it, we are now all legally obliged to watch Breaking Bad by the end...
The internet these days is chock full of must-reads, must-sees, can't-live-withouts, and lists (oh, the lists!) of things you need to do before you die. As I understand it, we are now all legally obliged to watch Breaking Bad by the end of 2013. Our prisons are already full to bursting with people who failed to watch The West Wing or The Wire when they were expressly told to. I even saw a woman prosecuted last week for not having read Gone Girl. What was she thinking? Richard Osman offers a way out of the must-see mess so that you can enjoy life again. Of 100 Greatest Novels, you can happily ignore all of them except Scoop and The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie. I am assuming you've already read To Kill a Mockingbird for O-level. Read Shakespeare if you want to, but you don't have to. (Though if you don't ever read him, you're not allowed to say he's rubbish. Deal?) You should probably read Great Expectations, but feel free to leave Dickens there. And I think Wuthering Heights is the only Emily Brontë novel worth reading (someone will rise to this, just you wait and see). Tags: lists Richard Osman
about 8 hours ago
Books, both old and new, are great things, but our culture emphasizes that “newer” things are often better. It’s hard to say no to your favorite contemporary writer or an amazing up-and-coming author’s latest publ...
Books, both old and new, are great things, but our culture emphasizes that “newer” things are often better. It’s hard to say no to your favorite contemporary writer or an amazing up-and-coming author’s latest publication, but I’m inclined to read the classics first. It can be a little daunting when there’s so much out there and you have a million things on your to-do list, but it’s always worth it to pick up an old book between reading newer ones. Here’s why old classic books stand out from new books. 1. They are free The old classics are usually free or deeply discounted at used book stores, book fairs or thrift stores. There are many ways to go about finding these free books: The first obvious place would be your local library, which I think is the most underrated institution of our time. There are some lovely “free bookstores” online such as Project Gutenberg and Bartleby, which provide free e-books, and Librivox, a website providing free audio books. 2. They show a different way of life from another time Older books are valuable because they show life from another time. Many books are stories or myths from the past, stemming from titles like Beowulf and To Kill a Mockingbird. Everyone knows about these stories. Each book has a tale to tell from that point in history, animated in the color of your imagination. In this sense, reading an old book is almost like visiting a highly interpretative museum. 3. They are for everybody Old books do not discriminate against age. Some of the best stories of all time were stories for children, such as anything written by the Brother’s Grimm or Beatrix Potter. Pretty much any movie produced by Disney (The Little Mermaid, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan) has probably come from a really awesome kid’s book. Even The Hobbit was initially written for children. What’s great is that you don’t have to be a child to enjoy these books as an adult. Pick up The Princess and the Pea or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and tell me that there isn’t a moral you can’t learn from those story. 4. They provide context Classics can give you a new perspective on an old idea. Reading an old book helps you understand references and conversations, no matter how high-brow or low-brow they are. In fact, old books can provide a huge sense of inspiration, and you don’t necessarily have to be a writer to be inspired. Filmmakers, costume designers and academics rely on classic novels to learn, understand, re-create a story, or prove a point. 5. They will be relevant for future generations Invest in reading a quality old book for literature class or leisure and you’ll remember it forever. Chances are it will even be referred to in pop culture either implicitly or explicitly. How many Simpsons episodes have you watched that had literary references in them? I bet there are more references in that show than you can shake a stick at. Just because a book is old, it doesn’t mean it has lost its relevance. 6. They don’t need to prove themselves The best old classical books have stood the test of time, but new books are still in a probationary period with readers. “The ages bear testimony to the validity of their ideas,” Michael Hyatt writes about old books. Ideas and thoughts constantly float through our heads daily, but the best ideas are solidified and executed. There is no test for old novels to pass because the best ones have been passed on by many generations. Can't decide which book is for you? Find out the 17 Ways To Find Good Books To Read The post Why Old Books Are Better Than New Books appeared first on Lifehack.
about 10 hours ago
Excellent word of mouth on A Time to Kill reached my ears last season from friends in DC who caught its regional tryout at Arena Stage. So I hastened to the first preview on Broadway. (“First New York preview” is the euphemis...
Excellent word of mouth on A Time to Kill reached my ears last season from friends in DC who caught its regional tryout at Arena Stage. So I hastened to the first preview on Broadway. (“First New York preview” is the euphemism for “out of town” for those who used to go out of town to report back to those in town.) I also hastened after a person next to me at the bar of Joe Allen’s last week, working on the production, urged me to see it. He could sell me Kathy Bates as Peter Pan. Well, the Oracle of Joe Allen’s spoke the truth. A Time to Star: Sebastian Arcelus Broadway, I am happy to report, may have a solid hit in Rupert Holmes‘ skillful adaptation of John Grisham‘s popular bestseller of the same name. Installed in the Golden Theatre, it’s a grand, old-style evening of pyrotheatrics, bringing to mind Inherit the Wind and To Kill A Mockingbird; it’s the sort of taut, tense courtroom drama Broadway hasn’t had since old Mary Dugan went to trial. There’s also a real fire on stage that sends chills through the audience and is a great deal more frightening than that silly falling Phantom chandelier at the neighboring Majestic Theatre. Time boasts a splendid ensemble cast led by Sebastian Arcelus in a star-making role, the wonderful Patrick Page and a delicious newcomer Ashley Williams, whom I want to see in a Philip Barry play. Kudos to Fred Dalton Thompson, who has always struck me before as a very limited actor but here does a solid job as the judge, and to that true American stage treasure, Tonya Pinkins, who is superb in an all-too-brief role. Why this actress isn’t playing leading roles is one of the great mysteries of the American theater. I would love to see her sink her teeth into such current offerings as The Glass Menagerie or even the inept Lady Day, soon to flop Off-Broadway at the Little Shubert. The parts for her are there — it’s the producers who’ve gotten dumb. Pinkins is to be treasured, adored and, above all, seen, even if she merely walks across a stage. So this hat, which has, lo, these many months become more rooted about my ears — what with New York City Opera closing after 70 years, Carnegie Hall strikes, decreasing Broadway attendance, dark theatres and inept new productions — is once again lifted to A Time to Kill and company. I am once again available for dancing in the streets. Now I must look up that Oracle fellow. I wonder if he knows anything about all this new healthcare nonsense I must get. Addison De Witt lives in the Theater as a Trappist monk lives in his faith. He has no other world, no other life. His native habitat is the Theater — in it he toils not, neither does he spin. He is a critic and commentator. He is essential to the Theater. Once in a great while, he experiences that moment of Revelation for which all true believers wait and pray: Theater that is full of meaning, fire and music!
3 days ago
Gay
There are many milestone movies that I have not gotten around to seeing. I have never seen The Graduate, Casablanca or Lawrence Of Arabia, & I have only first viewed To Kill A Mockingbird, The Women, & Double Indemnity, all 3 are now fav...
There are many milestone movies that I have not gotten around to seeing. I have never seen The Graduate, Casablanca or Lawrence Of Arabia, & I have only first viewed To Kill A Mockingbird, The Women, & Double Indemnity, all 3 are now favorites, in the past half decade. I don’t know why I get embarrassed, but as a film fan who has taken Film History & Film Theory classes, I had not seen one of the best films about an election, the original The Manchurian Candidate until 2012, but had managed to fit in Drive & Crazy, Stupid, Love (both of which I loved), because Ryan Gosling was shirtless.Thin, dry, sexy Laurence Harvey was one of Hollywood's stranger success stories; never a major star, or even the subject of a cult following, his films were rarely hits, & those that were often seemed to achieve their popularity in spite of him. A cold, remote actor, he proved highly unsuited to the majority of the roles which came his way, & his performances were often the subject of unanimous critical dismissal; even his fellow actors derided his abilities. Yet, Harvey had a career much longer & more prolific than many of his contemporaries. He was one of the most important screen presences of the 1960s. His resumé includes at least a one single classic- 1962's The Manchurian Candidate.In his late teens, Harvey became involved with Hermione Baddeley, an actress, 2 times his age. He was married 3 times, in 1957 to actress Margaret Leighton, a woman of style, but old enough to be his mother, in 1957, to Joan Perry Cohn in 1968, the very rich widow of movie mogul Harry Cohn of Columbia Pictures & to Paulene Stone. Harvey had met Stone on the set of A Dandy In Aspic, & while still married to Cohn he became a father for the first time when Stone gave birth to a daughter in 1969. Eventually, Harvey divorced Cohn to marry Stone in 1972.But shockingly, Laurence Harvey was actually bisexual. Frank Sinatra's valet, George Jacobs, author of Mr. S: My Life With Frank Sinatra, recounts that Harvey often made passes at him while visiting Sinatra. According to Jacobs, Sinatra was aware of Harvey's sexuality but did not mind, joking that: “He has the handicaps of being a homo, a Jew, & a Pollock, so people should go easy on him."In his memoir- Close Up, British actor John Frasier wrote that Harvey was gay & that his long-term lover was his manager- James Wolfe, who "discovered" Harvey in the 1950s.A heavy drinker, Harvey died from stomach cancer at age of 45. Domino Harvey was his openly gay & disarmingly beautiful daughter. She became a Beverly Hills socialite & later launched a career as a model in NYC. She eventually became a famous bounty hunter & also died at an early age from drug abuse. They are buried together in Santa Barbara Cemetery in California.
6 days ago
When you check out the lists of young adult books that have been banned over the years, it's almost like a who's who of some of my favorite YA novels and authors. Which might be funny if it didn't also mean books are still be...
When you check out the lists of young adult books that have been banned over the years, it's almost like a who's who of some of my favorite YA novels and authors. Which might be funny if it didn't also mean books are still being censored and pulled from library shelves. Ugh. The antidote to that? Turning Banned Books Week into a celebration of reading.  Earlier this week, my fellow editors each chose a book from the list to defend, from classics like Fahrenheit 451 to the graphic novel Persepolis.  Since there are so many YA books that have been challenged, I decided to choose three for my own mini list: Banned Book: Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher Suicide, sex, drugs.  Okay, I get why Thirteen Reasons Why might make some parents uncomfortable, but these are topics that frequent teenage minds and hallways.  The story is intriguing: Clay Jensen receives a box of audiotapes recorded by Hannah--a classmate and love interest who recently committed suicide.  The tapes take him on a journey of the 13 incidents--and the people who perpetrated them--that led to her decision to end her life.  Some are big things, like a date rape. Most, however, seem mean or hurtful but individually not enough to push someone over the edge. That is one of the great things about this book--you see the effects of individual acts of unkindness and how devastating rumors, lies, and staying silent can be. I also appreciate that rather than glorifying suicide as revenge or martyrdom, it was obvious that Hannah's stubbornness and pride ultimately decided her ending, which was a waste and a regret.  Banned Book: The Hunger Games  by Suzanne Collins I won’t argue that The Hunger Games isn’t violent, because it is. These are, after all, kids being forced to kill each other in a death match, while the rest of the country watches and bets on the outcome.  But I would argue that the ends justify the violent means.  Besides exploring important themes of oppression and sacrifice, the Games satirizes our obsession with reality television which has only gotten more obnoxious since the book released in 2008.  Teens (and adults for that matter) who were not readers came to the party for The Hunger Games and then returned for the next book, and the next.  In my opinion, a  book that demonstrates the entertainment value of a great story, and gets kids reading, deserves a place on the shelf. Banned Book: To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee I don't even know what to say here. REALLY? But yes, as recently as 2011, To Kill a Mockingbird made the list of ten most challenged titles. And yet, this novel is frequently listed as a favorite book of all time. People name their children (and I’ve met several personally) Harper, after the author, and Scout, for the young protagonist. Obviously, this is a book that touches many readers in a deeply profound way. The themes of racism and inequality, seen clearly through the eyes, and innocence, of an eight-year-old, are every bit as powerful--and relevant--today as when the book was first published in 1960. In this age of unprecedented bullying, we need to encourage kids to stand up for what they know is right, even if it's unpopular. And I can't think of a better role model than Atticus Finch.
12 days ago
When I saw Melissa post this on Avid Reader’s Musings, I saved it for a rainy day. It’s not actually raining outside, but I don’t have any reviews ready, so why not? Author you’ve read the most books from: Probabl...
When I saw Melissa post this on Avid Reader’s Musings, I saved it for a rainy day. It’s not actually raining outside, but I don’t have any reviews ready, so why not? Author you’ve read the most books from: Probably Sue Grafton. Her Kinsey Milhone mysteries are up to W, after all. Best sequel ever: The Ask and the Answer by Patrick Ness Currently reading: Songs of Willow Frost by Jamie Ford; Cold Comfort Farm by Stella Gibbons; Touchstone by Laurie R. King; Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien Drink of choice while reading: Coffee or wine E-reader or physical book: I don’t own an e-reader. Fictional character that you probably would have dated in high school: Augustus Waters from The Fault in Our Stars Glad you gave this book a chance: The Passage by Justin Cronin Hidden gem book: Fieldwork by Mischa Berlinski Important moment in your reading life: The first time I read anything by Wendell Berry Just finished: In print – Lineup by Liad Shoham; on audio – My Latest Grievance by Elinor Lipman Kind of books you won’t read: Erotica; self-help Longest book you read: Hmmmm…probably whichever of the Outlander series books is the longest. Unless Pillars of the Earth is longer than all of them. Major book hangover because of: Most recently – Night Film by Marisha Pessl – I haven’t found a book that really grabs me since finishing it. Number of bookcases you own: Two One book you’ve read multiple times: Trinity by Leon Uris Preferred place to read: On the couch Quote that inspires you: “I am a man, who has hoped, in time, that his life, when poured out at the end, would say, ‘Good-good-good-good-good!’ like a gallon jug of the prime local spirit. I am a man of losses, regrets, and griefs. I am an old man full of love. I am a man of faith.” ~ from Jayber Crow by Wendell Berry Reading regret: Waiting so long to read The Lord of the Rings Series you started and need to finish: Wicked Lovely by Melissa Marr. I read the first book ages ago, loved it, then never continued on with the series. Three of your all-time favorite books: Persuasion by Jane Austen; Jayber Crow by Wendell Berry; To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Unapologetic fangirl for: Wendell Berry Very excited for this release: Written in My Own Heart’s Blood by Diana Gabaldon Worst bookish habit: Buying too many books that languish unread on my bookshelf. Xmarks the spot! Start at the top left of your shelf and pick the 27th book: The Go-Between by L.P. Hartley Your last bookish purchase: One of the Agatha Raisin mysteries – bought for 99 cents on Half.com Zzzz-snatcher – which book kept you up way too late: Night Film by Marisha Pessl That was fun! Let me know if you play along so I can check out your answers. If you are reading this anywhere other than Books and Movies or a feed reader, then this content has been stolen. Please read the original Books and Movies and help stop content thieves. Books and Movies is an Amazon affiliate. Purchasing through Amazon links from Books and Movies will pay me a small percentage in commission. © CarrieK for BOOKS AND MOVIES, 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: memes, reading Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh
14 days ago
I see a lot of stuff on Facebook that irritates me and I almost always let it go. I have no intention of starting fights with friends or family. There’s really no up side to it. But sometimes something just sticks with me.That happene...
I see a lot of stuff on Facebook that irritates me and I almost always let it go. I have no intention of starting fights with friends or family. There’s really no up side to it. But sometimes something just sticks with me.That happened again last week, and as usual, I didn't comment. I didn't want to make the poster look bad, but there was just so much wrong with it, I couldn't let it go. So here we are. As usual, it was one of those picture memes, with some pseudo-wisdom printed over it. This was the post.The poster's comment: “I’m not really religious, but I agree. I think we should have had a morals class or something that teaches common sense cuz my generation is lacking big time.”My disagreement doesn't have anything to do with religion, but with misapplied logic and incorrect facts.“Bibles aren't allowed in school anymore…”It is untrue that Bibles are not allowed in schools. Any kid can bring a Bible to school and read it on his own time. It’s the schoolthat’s not allowed to require it, nor sanction Bible study groups. Public schools are not in the business of promoting any one religion, period. That’s what church and private schools are for. So right off the bat, the whole premise is off base. “…but are encouraged in prison.”Are prisoners encouraged to read Bibles? I don’t know. I've never been in prison. But what would you have them read, "Fifty Shades of Grey?" What’s the problem?There is none, but it forms a bridge to the next fallacy.“If kids were allowed to read it at school, they may not end up in prison.”“May not.” Also, if kids are allowed to read “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Jaws,” or “The Kama Sutra,” they “may not” end up in prison. “May not” is an ambiguous term and completely useless in this instance. It infers a causal relationship without providing or even claiming any factual basis.Also, it’s complete horse pucky. The biggest Bible-thumpers in Congress are trying to cut Food Stamps, pour billions into more missile systems and fighter jets, and further enrich the richest people in the country. Where is it in the Bible that Jesus said, “Let there be a strong national defense, and persecute the poor?”Reading the Bible is just like reading any other “how-to” book. People take it under advisement and then go out and do whatever they feel will benefit them. I’m not saying there’s not any wisdom to be found within, I’m saying it certainly isn't some kind of inoculation that will keep a person out of jail. If it were, it would be a national reading requirement.I’m not sure how it would work on Jews, Hindu, Buddhists, Muslims, Sikhs, Wiccans or Atheists though.As for what the poster wrote, I think “Morals class” would best be conducted at home. There is no one set of “morals.” Believe me, there are a lot of people who would not want ME deciding what morals to teach children. So how exactly would any school board or teacher decide what to present as “moral” to our children, without setting off neighborhood riots?They couldn't do it. That’s why moral training and guidance belongs in the home and not school. Sure, the little kids can learn to share and not bully and not speak out of turn, but that’s about it. (Not that it lasts very long, judging from our schoolyards.) But there are no easy bromides that will fix our broken culture, no matter how simple it looks on Facebook…I think requiring classes in applying logic and critical thinking would certainly help.Facebook isn't all bad though. To end on a high note, I also saw this…
15 days ago
Originally posted on September 28, 2010.~Tuesdays with MorzantExperiment 451.0: Determine the Dangerous Properties Inherent in Banned Books[Bigfoot enters Morzant’s lab.]BIGFOOT: What’s going on? You look frustrated.MORZANT: I am. The re...
Originally posted on September 28, 2010.~Tuesdays with MorzantExperiment 451.0: Determine the Dangerous Properties Inherent in Banned Books[Bigfoot enters Morzant’s lab.]BIGFOOT: What’s going on? You look frustrated.MORZANT: I am. The results of my latest experiments don’t make sense.BIGFOOT: I appreciate your hard work to figure out why all my photographs turn out blurry, but it’s not worth getting upset about.MORZANT: This isn’t about your photography impediment. It’s to do with banned books.BIGFOOT: Banned books?MORZANT: Yes. I’ve been hearing a lot about books that have been banned from schools and libraries. Apparently it’s not uncommon for a defect to be found in a book after it has been published. It then becomes necessary for those potentially dangerous books to be recalled. It seems that Earthlings are frequently careless in the manufacturing of their goods.BIGFOOT: No, you don’t understand—MORZANT: I’m appalled at my negligence. It never occurred to me to that Earth books could be hazardous. I assumed because Zeentonian books are made with inert materials, Earth books would be as safe. A reasonable assumption, perhaps, but one that would have offered no consolation if little Mortimer had been hurt. I’ve been recklessly reading TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD to him.BIGFOOT: Wait—MORZANT: I take my studies of Earth literature seriously and, as in any scientific pursuit, safety is a primary concern. I can hardly evaluate a book objectively if it causes me injury. Therefore, over the last week, I’ve been conducting a series of experiments in an effort to learn what properties banned books exhibit. Once I’ve isolated them, I’ll be able to test for those same properties in other books. No offense to those in charge of banning books—I’m sure they’re quite diligent—but there doesn’t seem to be a comprehensive inventory of these dangerous books. I’ll feel more secure if I can identify them myself.BIGFOOT: There’s nothing different about—MORZANT: My first step was to collect as many banned books as I could. I assumed it would be difficult, but most of these books are easily accessible. Even so, nobody at the library seemed the least bit concerned for their safety.BIGFOOT: That’s because books aren’t—MORZANT: I collected a sampling of banned books from several locations, as well as books that have not been banned. It occurred to me that there might be variations in inks and papers used, so I also collected several editions of the same book. If there were any outward indications of the books’ dangerous propensities, I could not detect them, even with my keen powers of scientific observation. I then began systematically testing for combustibility…BIGFOOT: Oh, no.MORZANT: …radiation, chemical and biological toxins…BIGFOOT: Please stop.MORZANT: …pathogens, allergens, and parasitic infestations. I even ran a rigorous round of tests to determine if banned books are more predisposed to giving paper cuts than non-banned books.BIGFOOT: You’ve been wasting your time. Books aren’t—hey! Is that my first edition CATCH-22?!MORZANT: Of course not. I was very careful to separate—oh, dear.BIGFOOT: It’s ruined!MORZANT: I’m so sorry. But I’m sure you’ll be pleased to discover that your copy of CATCH-22 seemingly presents no more danger to you than this copy of THE HAPPY CHILDREN OF SAFEVILLE. In fact, I could find no harmful properties in any of these banned books. None of my tests yielded any recognizable differences between the banned books and the books that have not been banned. I’m at an impasse. How can I test for a quality that is outside my circle of knowledge?BIGFOOT: You can’t.MORZANT: Exactly. That’s why I’m frustrated! Discerning what constitutes a book that needs to be banned is beyond my scientific ability.BIGFOOT: No. I don’t mean you can’t. Nobody can.MORZANT: I don’t understand. Clearly some scientific standards of evaluation are applied to determine whether a book is deleterious or innocuous. Otherwise there would not be banned books.BIG
15 days ago
The Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "To Kill a Mockingbird," Harper Lee, is locked in a dispute with a museum in her Alabama hometown over the use of the novel's title.
The Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "To Kill a Mockingbird," Harper Lee, is locked in a dispute with a museum in her Alabama hometown over the use of the novel's title.
16 days ago