Corky is confused by America's reaction to "To Kill a Mockingbird", and thinks, "Stories weren't supposed to make readers mad. Were they?" What's your opinion on this?

Corky is confused by America's reaction to "To Kill a Mockingbird", and thinks, "Stories weren't supposed to make readers mad. Were they?" What's your opinion on this? Are there books that have made you angry?

So I have to disagree with Corky on this one - stories are meant to evoke emotions and reactions. They have to connect with us on some level otherwise what is the point? My reaction to a story may be entirely different from someone else's just based on who we are and our personal experiences.

Corky is so young and I can see where she may think this at her age and growing up in a small town. I do disagree with the statement because each person reads a book differently. I have read many books that have made me upset, angry or dismayed, and someone else may read the same book and interpret it differently and not feel the same way I do.

I agree completely with the prior comments. For example, my book group's next book is Fever in the Heartland by Timothy Egan. Egan is a wonderful writer and I started the book, but found it so upsetting (gruesome violence by the KKK against black people), that I quit reading it. I let the group know that I wouldn't read it and I wouldn't come to the next meeting. I didn't want even a discussion of that violence to permeate my psyche. The rest of the group said they would forge ahead and read it. So clearly a book can make someone mad, (or go mad!),or not even affect them at all.

I disagree with Corky’s thinking on this. Books bring out all sorts of emotions and can be very different from reader to reader. Just listening to some book club discussions make this very evident.

America knew the reality of lynchings for the black population. The subject matter initially made her stop reading the book. Corky didn't have a racial connection to the subject matter of lynchings so initially couldn't understand America's reaction. Books evoke feelings based on one's personal experiences.

I disagree with Corky's opinion; however, she is too young to realize the depth of "To Kill a Mockingbird," whereas America understands it completely. Corky didn't know what "rape" meant and she was searching for answers. In 2023 a 13 year old probably knows its meaning, but it's believable that in 1964 she wouldn't.

Some books can really make you angry, and I think that' s a good thing. How else would we know about events outside of our purview? For example, "Nightcrawling" by Leila Motley which deals with power and corruption of the Oakland police department, based on a true crime in 2015. There is no way I would be able to understand what it's like growing up in the streets of Oakland, California.

It seems perfectly plausible that Corky would not be sophisticated enough to know that books can make us mad. She was such a young girl for her age, growing up in a small town where she had little chance to know that their racist attitudes were wrong because she heard few other opinions. I grew up in a rural farming area of a very "white" state and was at least as ignorant about rape and lynching, etc as Corky -- but I was 13 in 1955. My daughter at 13 in 1986 had far more knowledge about life than I did. Today's 13 year old teen reader would have no trouble thinking books can make you mad. Different times...........how they have changed.

I disagree with the thought process of Corky on this one. Perhaps, it because she too young and unaware of what "rape: mean thus that she felt she was supporting America's acceptance by loaning her a book to read . thus causing a rift between them Plus she was ignorant aspects of society such as lynching. But this was the 1960's and teens often were often more ignorant of many topics.

Life experiences affect us. Reading makes us aware that there are many stories, and hopefully we are enlightened from them. We can't know what we don't know but books inform us of different lifestyles and experiences. I was touched that Corky was SO sensitive to America's reaction to the book. I was impressed with Linda Rutledge's including in her book that America could not go to Corky's library. I agree with Carriem that in the 60's we were naive or protected from difficult topics. I remember how married couples on TV slept in twin beds.😂

I disagree with Corky on this one. I do understand why she thought this based on the time period. Books are supposed to be a source of information and thought provoking. Books should drive discussion, whether you agree or not. Active discussion about a book's topic csn open new worlds for the reader.

Corley is definitely wrong on this one. Isn’t that what reading is about..evoking emotions. Whether you agree with the storyline or not, some form of emotions will always be involved.

I think Corky up to this point had not read a book that challenged her thoughts or ideals of what is right or wrong in the actual world. She most likely was use to happy endings or fantastical stories. I think the point is when it was all said and done that it challenged her to at least start to question what she saw in life. There are books that make us feel good and books that make us uncomfortably and books that should challenge us and evoke emotion and thought.

Corky reads from her own narrow life perspective and neglected to realize that others would read the same story with alternate points of view. Certainly understandable at her age within the context of her upbringing-- and what an amazing lesson to realize that a single book can ignite an emotional response from hundreds of different readers!

Corky doesn't understand why America "got mad" thinking she was given a book about a lynching. She tells America she should read to the end because there wasn't a lynching.

But in essence, there was. Tom is first unjustly convicted of a crime he didn't commit and then he is shot 17 times while "trying to escape."

I was Corky's age when I read To Kill a Mockingbird, and it definitely made me mad - so I'm not really sure where the author is coming from with this comment.

I agree with those who have replied that Corky was of a young age that she probably wouldn’t have read thought provoking books beyond the realm of her existence.

I read because it sends me into worlds that I may never know exists: both good or bad, happy or sad, ordinary or extraordinary, obtainable or way out of my reach. The books that I remember for years and years have not been the happy ones, but ones that that were very sad and emotional. They showed me how at least those characters in the book handled the events and taught me many life lessons. I am sure that as Croky got older and saw the world her mind would have changed.

Not only did America come from a different background than Corky and was much more familiar with the effects of racism on the Black community, but she was several years older, too. She consequently had a much better understanding of the book's subtext than Corky did.

I don't think that books are necessarily supposed to "make us mad". However, many excellent books will elicit thoughtful emotions from the reader. The most interesting books I have read usually introduce provocative themes or ideas that produce emotions such as anger, elation, or soul-searching. Certainly, "To Kill a Mockingbird" produced such emotions for many readers, including America.

Books invoke many emotions in the reader. It promotes thinking and discussion.

I agree with most of what is said above. Age and life experience will both definitely change our outlooks on books. At 13, Corky was quite naive. I was 7 then, and I feel like her outlook was closer to my 7-year-old point of view. I was 11 when Kent State happened and lived in a college town with a lot of unrest due to the Vietnam War, so I feel like by the time I was 13, I definitely had a handle on the idea that some things we read would be deeply disturbing.

Books evoked all kinds of emotions for a reader. The emotions you feel when reading a book can be very personal. Corky lived a sheltered life at 13. Although she projected her angry emotions to America, the book meant something different for America. Corky was inquisitive and always pushing questions to the fore front. My 13 year old self in the 60’s was really nothing like Corky’s. Time, place and circumstances can dictate many things.

I have to agree with what so many have already stated, books bring out every form of emotion imaginable. It is going to be based on the individual reader and the experiences that person has had. Corky’s life is just beginning to change - her father allowing her to work at the store, America’s arrival. In many ways she is still very young and is on the verge of learning so very much. Corky has had a very sheltered life up until now.

I my opinion, books are supposed to carry you away to all different worlds, thoughts, happy or sad. They bring out your emotions on something whether it makes you mad, makes you laugh, makes you cry, makes you happy.

It's obvious why America was upset about "To Kill A Mockingbird." She is a person of color, and that book shows the prejudice against a Black man. Corky is very naive about what it is like to be a person of color and to live in the
wrong side of the tracks.
I am the discussion leader for a book club. I am always interested in how each person reads the same book and has a different perspective. It's what makes for a great discussion.

Corky is young and perhaps the books she has read did not make her mad. America however is reading the book from her perspective and because of the hatred of people of color, she become mad.

The beauty of books is that they open your mind to new ideas, other people's way of thinking and situations you may not be aware of if you didn't read it. I know that many books my book club has recently discussed brought to light cultural differences and history the history books didn't teach us. Although some topics make a reader uncomfortable and yes even angry, the book leaves you better informed.

I agree with laurag and many others. One sure way to know you are really "getting into a book" is to have a reaction: good or bad, happy, sad or mad! The only time I have read a book that made me mad is when I finished it, I wished I hadn't spent time reading it. The book either didn't live up to my expectations or I just didn't get it. However, I'm more mad at myself because I could have easily stopped reading it, but I don't like not completing something I started.

I worked as a children’s librarian for a long time, and it wasn’t unusual to hear reactions to books that told me that the reader didn’t have the background knowledge to be ready for the book. Most notably, Blume’s Are You There God… was not about a period being the end of a sentence, and so the reader didn’t know why it was a big deal. Sometimes asking at home doesn’t explain it enough, and that is what Corky experienced.

I loved this part of the book. It’s like a lightbulb went off for Corky and she realized how much more the contents of a book could affect people and in different ways.

I’m sure Corky hadn’t read a lot of books in her young life that elicited strong emotions. As everyone has said, what you get out of a book coincides with the emotions and experiences you bring to it.