I guess it's fair to say that Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird is one of my favorite books. I've read (and LOVED) so many great classics, but this book still makes me pause to think when the characters and/or plot crosses my mind. And, I often think about that famous image--of crawling into another person's skin and walking and walking around. For me, it's the eye altering. That change of perspective is what we all desperately need some days!

I want to see. I want to understand--not only myself, but others as well. And, literature helps me to do that. I'm immersed in the plots and stories of other people, places and experiences--all drawn from that enduring universality we all want to understand. Literature (books, poems, stories & all) gives me voices--they call, laugh, cry & scream out at me in words. And, some books stay with us beyond the first or second reading; they stay with us, and make us rethink our own actions/reactions. How well do we ever really try to understand? How does literature help you to see (or learn or feel or open your mind and heart)?

Harper Lee writes: "I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand. It's when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do." Experience the quotes, from To Kill a Mockingbird. Also, take a look at questions, a review, and related books.

What do you think about the novel? When you first read it, what struck you about the book? Has it stayed with you? Have you read it more than once?

Cover Art © HarperCollins.

A Swedish author--who claims that The Catcher in the Rye is "just a book"--is now being dragged into court for creating what J.D. Salinger claims is an unauthorized sequel. According to Publishers Weekly, the court case may force the famous author to take the stand. But, even if Salinger does manage to remain in the shadows (represented as he is by lawyers, agents, etc), this case offers us an intriguing twist in the controversial history of The Catcher in the Rye.

The man who has created all the ruckus is Fredrik Colting (using the pseudonym John David California), and he's quoted in the PW article: “I wanted to explore what happens to characters. When a book is finished, do the characters cease to exist, or do they live on somehow?”

That's what a lot of us like to imagine. We like to think about what might have been--if J.D. Salinger had written a sequel, if the book hadn't ended as it did. But, for some of those questions, we can leave it to our own imagination (or wait until some far-future day when the "lost" works of J.D. Salinger will surface). I haven't read Colting's work, but I can't imagine it will compare very favorably with The Catcher in the Rye. But, there's the thing--we can't really speak to the quality of the book, nor make comparisons. We just don't know, and we may not know for a long, long time.

So, what do you think? Should the Swedish author be allowed to publish the book? Is the claim of "parody" an acceptable defense? Does it detract from the original? Would a story of this sort help you to imagine the main characters in a different/better light (or is it detestable)?

Erich Maria Remarque was born on June 22, 1898. He would later be in the unique position to write his famous war novel, All Quiet on the Western Front, after his experience at 18 years of age, as a soldier on the front lines in World War I. With terse prose, he writes about the horrors of war, centering around Paul Bäumer, a young soldier.

In this anti-war novel, Remarque writes: "To me the front is a mysterious whirlpool. Though I am in still water far away from its centre, I feel the whirl of the vortex sucking me slowly, irresistibly, inescapably into itself." Read more quotes from Erich Maria Remarque, and All Quiet on the Western Front.

I remember the days when my mom would make me get out my "nice" stationary (covered with flower, cats, or some iteration on a cutsie theme) and write my cryptic thank-you notes to aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents and the like. Now, how often do I write a letter? I honestly can't think of the last time. Do you recall?

Perhaps I should be sending you all nice, hand-written letters. We could scribble on about our shared love of literature, tell all about the last books we'd read (or tried to read), and explore all the particular loves (and hates) in the world of books. Hum, would you reply if I sent you one? Would it seem strange to receive an actual letter in your mailbox, or would you be looking for it via email?

So, why am I talking on about letters--literary notes in particular? I just received a note from The New Yorker--all about the newly discovered "lost letters" by Edith Wharton. It's always curious to me when people call them "lost," because they've just been locked away in storage somewhere. Wharton asked that the letters be destroyed upon her death, and as often appears to be the case, her wishes were ignored (the family of her governess apparently kept them in storage).

With the letters on display--soon to be auctioned off--I look forward to the future books that will be written on the topic of Edith Wharton and her relationship with her governess.