Second Time Around

I first read To Kill a Mockingbird for GCSE English, so (ulp) a mere thirteen years ago. At the time, I thought it was very good, but with the caveat that it was hard to write about, when compared with the symbolism replete throughout Macbeth and Lord of the Flies, the other two major texts we studied.

Re-reading it has been extraordinary. No wonder it is in the top novels that people re-read, according to this guardian article. Yet re-reading is often because it will provide comfort; we know how the story ends, and the torment beforehand is worth it for the resolution. Here, the resolution is not that justice is done, and that makes it unbearable - I know what's coming, and there's nothing I can do to prevent it. If anything, it's worse this time around.

But the book itself is wonderful, so rich in wry and amusing turns of phrase that I missed the first time around: when talking of her aunt and uncle's state of matrimony, Scout observes that Long ago, in a burst of friendliness, Aunty and Uncle Jimmy produced a son named Henry... It is full of one-liners that got forgotten - the writing itself was not remembered, just the story. Yet the writing has filled me with as much glee and emotion as the story itself, which is the revelatory aspect. Reading it this time around has been much like reading Lolita for the first time, the revelling in the language and its depth of perception, detail and humour. That has been particularly important given its subject matter.

Further, it really has brought home the rural nature of Maycomb County and the sheer, hellish poverty in which people lived. Perhaps having read Invisible Man in the intervening years has brought me a greater appreciation of the desperate circumstances in which people lived, and how poor white people clung onto segregation for the basic reason that they needed someone beneath them, to look down upon, just as the "respectable" folks did to them. Scout's portrait of Mayella Ewell's utterly lonely, miserable and hopeless life is heartbreaking. It is done with the perception of a child, but the wisdom and hindsight of an adult. It is horrific, and yet Atticus' closing argument brooks no sympathy for that fact as, quite frankly, she should have known better. Not for her sake, but for Tom's. Because Tom did not enjoy the luxury or privilege that she did: whiteness.

Of course, I am reading this within a course on perceptions and portrayals of the law by the artist. I'll report back on our class discussion and what Thane has to say next time around. But the pleasure of re-reading has been really rather striking, yet it seems that it is an entirely different, new book, so much more am I getting from it.

Legal Action

I'm taking a course on Law & Literature this semester. The idea is to think outside the external, tangible and, fundamentally, legal, to try to think about the intrinsic, the intangible, the moral. To see how artists perceive our career choice, our system, but most of all, concepts of justice - both descriptively and normatively. It should be interesting. At least, our prof wants to make sure that, at a cocktail party, we're "interesting."

Mostly, I'm just very excited about what we get to read; the book list, which I'm going to purchase this morning (those that I don't already own, obviously):

• Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
• Franz Kafka - The Trial
• Albert Camus - The Stranger
• Herman Melville - Bartleby and Billy Budd, Sailor
• Sophocles, Oedipus The King
• Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice
• Ei Doctorow - The book of Daniel
• Charles Dickens - Bleak House

We also have to watch Sidney Lumet's "The Verdict". Paul Newman. Shame.

British Talent

The Times today has a list of the top 50 authors to come from the British shore since 1945. Well, to have produced their "most enduring works" since 1945. It is fairly interesting; some are utterly familiar to me (Dahl, obviously, Pullman, Rowling, Orwell), whereas others I know of but haven't read (either Amis), or haven't really heard of (generally modern poets). However, it's a useful guide for things to try and have a crack at this year. I have friends who aver that the best writers / books in the past century (in English) have, generally, come out of the States. I'm not convinced entirely. The post-colonial literature of India and Africa is growing and remarkable; plus, this list shows that there have been more than a few decent homegrown writers. Still, not many recent ones.

However, my main point is that I'm not really in a position to comment, having read so few of these or, really, of the modern US folks. So again this year I shall attempt to catch up. Fat chance, but I may give it a good old try, for once.

Forum

One of the best presents I have ever received was my membership to the NFT. We saw many glorious movies; I fell asleep in at least two Kurosawa classics. Well, this year, we are attempting to recreate that through membership to the Film Forum in NYC. I have been taking a peek through the schedule for the upcoming months. Very excited about Anatomy of a Murder, which hopefully will be stellar entertainment as well as of geeky lawyerly interest. Of course, however, I've just noticed that it's tomorrow and Saturday and, therefore, I shall be missing it.

But there is a Sidney Lumet retrospective (The Verdict and 12 Angry Men - double lawyer geek!), along with a Preminger one that's already started. And a United Artists 90th Anniversary season, with notable films (that presumably will show) including Spellbound, Stagecoach, Rebecca, High Noon, The African Queen, The Night of the Hunter, 12 Angry Men (again) and, best of all Some Like It Hot (and that's before the 1960s have even started!). I must go and see things I've not seen. Hmm.

However, the other thing I've resolved to do is to watch more of the "classic" films due to the wonders of Netflix. So now just need suggestions as to which list of classic movies to use. After all, IMDB does have a bit of the "new" about it but, looking at it again, it's fairly reliable, it seems. Any other suggestions?