Yet ANOTHER Harper Lee Novel!

[BenG]

Originally Posted by pendragginp

Yes, I realize it was a prepared statement. I just wonder if it was actually her statement in any way at all.

Maybe her lawyer wrote it.
Her lawyer is her 102 year old sister, who last I heard was sharp as a tack.

[delph]

Originally Posted by ApK

The only thing I find alarming is the tabloid-like fud and word twisting on the part of the author.
The editor they insisted on interviewing is saying outright that he doesn't speak directly with Lee and is clearly not the decision maker on deals, and is apparently not doing any actual editing on this book. They work through her lawyer, and he's conveying what he's heard of that second hand info as honestly as he can. Big deal.

In my opinion, the "editor" (quotes as it doesn't seem like he will actually be editing) should have refused the interview if he's not actually involved.

FUD aside, the more I read on multiple sites, the more it strikes me as questionable that these are her wishes. As a reader, I would look forward to reading her work, masterpiece or no. As a person, the situation just doesn't sit right. I can understand their thinking the manuscript was lost. That's totally plausible. The timing is just...awfully coincidental. But humans look for pattern in coincidence, so perhaps this is nothing more than that. I guess we have no way to actually know.

Originally Posted by BenG

Maybe her lawyer wrote it.
Her lawyer is her 102 year old sister, who last I heard was sharp as a tack.

Her sister died in November, 2014. Different lawyer now.

[pendragginp]

Yes, her sister is gone now.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by delph

FUD aside, the more I read on multiple sites, the more it strikes me as questionable that these are her wishes. As a reader, I would look forward to reading her work, masterpiece or no. As a person, the situation just doesn't sit right. I can understand their thinking the manuscript was lost. That's totally plausible. The timing is just...awfully coincidental. But humans look for pattern in coincidence, so perhaps this is nothing more than that. I guess we have no way to actually know.

Her sister died in November, 2014. Different lawyer now.

But it makes perfect sense that because there is a different lawyer now, going through the material, the ms. would be rediscovered.

[Catlady]

Here's a new article debunking the notion that Harper Lee is a senile, helpless victim of exploitation.


ETA: Another article from The Atlantic with additional information.

[delph]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Here's a new article debunking the notion that Harper Lee is a senile, helpless victim of exploitation.


ETA: Another article from The Atlantic with additional information.

Thanks for posting this! As a teen, I had an elderly relative who was senile and relatives took advantage of the situation, so I think I was overly sensitive to the possibility.

[Froide]

"Harper Lee 'hurt and humiliated' by Mockingbird sequel controversy"

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Froide

"Harper Lee 'hurt and humiliated' by Mockingbird sequel controversy"

She could make a network TV appearance passionately avowing how excited and happy she is about having her old manuscript found by her trusted friend and lawyer, and how thrilled she is that it's finally being published like she wanted all those years ago when she first submitted it, and certain sections of the blogosphere and various forums would still be suggesting she was being manipulated, or that it was faked by the people who did Forrest Gump and the moon landings.

I'm more than sufficiently satisfied to be able to read the book in good conscience.

[Catlady]

I don't blame her for being "hurt and humiliated." Physical frailty does not mean loss of mental acuity, but it seems that the first flurry of articles all conflated the two, without any evidence.

[AnemicOak]

My library added the eBook to their catalog today as a pre-release. They must be expecting a huge demand as I've never seen them have 100 copies of any eBook.

[murg]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

My library added the eBook to their catalog today as a pre-release. They must be expecting a huge demand as I've never seen them have 100 copies of any eBook.

I don't see why libraries find it necessary to order in huge numbers of books like this. If people have to read the latest release, now, let them buy them, or they can wait a month or two.

The amount the library is spending for 100 library editions of the book could by a lot of other books.

[AnemicOak]

I don't know. I was shocked to see such a high number. Maybe the publisher is offering some kind of special pricing on this title? :shrugs:

The library does service a population of 1.2 million people (no idea what percentage use the eBook offerings) and waiting lists can sometimes be long, but...

[Catlady]

This is a HarperCollins book; doesn't HC still have an absurdly low limit on the number of times the book can be checked out? That could be the reason for the apparently high number of copies.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by Catlady

This is a HarperCollins book; doesn't HC still have an absurdly low limit on the number of times the book can be checked out? That could be the reason for the apparently high number of copies.

26 checkouts IIRC.

[AnemicOak]

They've also added 20 copies of the audiobook.

Harper Lee does seem pretty popular there. To Kill a Mockingbird has 23 eBook copies all checked out with 112 holds waiting (not sure how many copies they started with vs. if any have expired) and 6 audiobook copies with 74 holds waiting.