Variety: The upcoming Broadway adaptation of “To Kill a Mockingbird” — with a buzzy creative team that includes writer Aaron Sorkin and star Jeff Daniels — has been hit with a lawsuit by the estate of Harper Lee, the late writer who penned the 1960 novel.
8 comments:
I don’t quite understand the argument being posed in this article. What I could get from the description of the lawsuit is that Atticus is being portrayed differently from the book and movie in the new broadway production that starts previewing next fall. I remember growing up to the story of To Kill a Mockingbird and loving Atticus’s character for being so wise and noble in his fight against racism. However, when Harper Lee’s second book came out a few years ago, Go Set a Watchman, it unleashed a whole new outlook on Atticus’s character and the true racism he held in his character. It was that kind of tragic reality that I think this new broadway version is trying to portray and why some people might be so upset about this outlook on racism and his character. The argument is a difficult one since the broadway version wants to stick close to the original story which portrayed this righteous Atticus, yet in today’s social climate that story isn’t consider appropriate or accurate.
I feel like Harper Lee's legacy has really been tainted in her later days and after her death in a way that is just unacceptable. She was a woman who would not even sign autographs because of how reclusive she was. Just before she died, her sister published "Go Set a Watchman" against Lee's wishes, which to me is just a huge injustice. Granted, that novel is incredible and is something I believe needs to be a part of her cannon, but to do so against her will while she was bed ridden in a hospital is almost disgusting to me. And now, this is coming to light about the play? Come on people. The wishes of the dead must be followed. Especially when it comes to art. To take someone else's work after they die and change it into something completely different is just wrong. She deserves to have her work portrayed as she would have wanted it and nothing else.
I’m surprised that a Broadway production is having this problem. I would have thought that the people producing this play would have anticipated the problem and been able to deal with it out of court. Nevertheless, I understand why Lee’s estate does not want the show to change this critical aspect of the book. To Kill a Mockingbird is a classic and though some may argue that changing Atticus’ plot line is better for today’s world, Lee’s estate would disagree. It is interesting that this change lines up with Lee’s published manuscript Go Set a Watchman. In Go Set A Watchman, Atticus’ does not have the same views as in the final version of To Kill A Mockingbird. Since I do not know how the producers have changed To Kill A Mockingbird, I can not say if Atticus acts more like he does in Watchman, but I thought it was interesting to note that this interpretation may not have gone against Lee’s wishes.
I can understand why this lawsuit is being filed. Atticus Finch is supposed to be a character who has a moral compass as strong as steel, and as unwavering as a mountain. In this new Broadway adaptation, he is not that character. In the lawsuit it is stated that Atticus is based on Ms. Lee’s father which makes this change more of a personal affront. In addition, it seems that Mr. Rudinplay deliberately tried to get the estate of Harper Lee to let him dramatize the book by changing characters, including Atticus Finch, even though the estate was against this choice. I believe that this suit is fully warranted, and the estate has said they will drop the suit if Mr. Rudinplay continues with the terms originally set forth, and represent the characters the same way they were in the books. I hope that Atticus’s honor is restored to this play and that he remains the hero he always has been.
I actually disagree with many of the commentators on this article. I feel that, though we must honor the source material, there should not be a limit on creative license. This play is not the book. It is a completely different medium created by a completely different team. Things change all of the time when they are constantly adapted so I do not understand why this is any different. The creative team is trying to retell the story we all know and love in a nuanced way and, if they believe that changing Atticus' character is the best way to do so then they should do it. The book will not disappear if this play is produced. It is a completely separate piece of work. Though I can see why people are defensive since Atticus is such an iconic and strong character but it seems almost as if the public is taking ownership of something that is not theirs to do. Just because it may "ruin our childhood" does not mean that it shouldn't exist. As for the agreement between the Estate and the Producers, I cannot speak about since I do not know what was agreed upon. I do think that the producers should stick to their word if they explicitly agreed to stay completely faithful to the book.
Harper Lee’s work is something that has inspired and influenced the minds of thousands of school age children for decades. Part of the reason her work was so impactful was because it handled material that was considered sensitive and difficult, and because of that, we owe it to her to preserve the integrity of her work and her message, to ensure that her voice remains a powerful voice of good in our society. I understand the desire to reinterpret and reconceive the classics in the name of art. Part of what we are taught to do is to look at something that already exists and transform it into something completely new and transformative. That all being said, there are some ways that you do not alter a piece. It is alright to change things, as long as the core message, the author’s intentions, are left pure and clear.
I honestly do not understand how the production team working on this show could make this decision in the first place. Atticus’ clear view of society and race is obviously one of the major components in this book that drives everything that happens in the story. There are so many movies, plays, musicals, books, etc. that have a character that is racist then realizes the error of their ways, or goes through an experience that shifts their perspective. Part of why “To Kill a Mockingbird” is such a classic and is so revolutionary was because Atticus was so not prejudice from beginning to end. He had his own set of values. There is close to nothing to be added to the world through a character who has a change of heart. It is a total clique. I really hope this issue can be worked out without legal action because this would be an amazing show, but I am glad that the Harper Lee Estate took action against this issue.
This is a very interesting article. Im not too sure how to feel about this until I either read the script or see the play. I think they are trying to change things as the cast adults in the roles meant for children. I remember reading that this will be a flashback type of story. if so maybe we see a different said of Atticus. I feel weird making assumptions about what is happening until I get more information about what is going on. The was a really great book and I hope they do justice to the source material. Having followed Scott Rudins career for some time now I don’t think he would purposely do this to the estate. However, I do not know all the facts so I will be following this closly as the lawsuit continues. I hope they are able to perform this on broadway this fall.
Post a Comment