Readers React: Sorry about the name, Atticus

To the editor: I can understand some parents of decades past now having second thoughts about naming their sons “Atticus” after revelations regarding the character in Harper Lee’s “new” novel, “Go Set a Watchman.” Atticus is not the patron saint of gentlemanly fatherhood that so many of us built him up to be — he is human, a mere mortal after all. (“Give ‘Atticus’ parents a break,” op-ed, July 23)

But even though Atticus’ daughter becomes disillusioned with her father, and even confrontational, there is rational conversation and dare I say some reconciliation, ultimately, between the two.

Perhaps it is high time that parents strongly consider the name “Scout” for their sons and “Jean Louise” (a.k.a. Scout) for their daughters.

Stan Seidel, Rancho Palos Verdes



To the editor: In “Go Set a Watchman,” Atticus is shown as a segregationist but not a member of the Ku Klux Klan. The book is not really a sequel to “To Kill a Mockingbird” because new characters are introduced — Henry “Hank” Clinton being one of the most important ones. Arthur “Boo” Radley is not even mentioned.

Harper Lee’s writing improved 100% when she wrote “To Kill a Mockingbird,” but reading the other book, it’s hard to believe it’s the same author. Scout swears at her 72-year-old father and threatens him because he is not in favor of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People.

The book had a couple of amusing parts, but it was a disappointment because it could not compare to the literary brilliance of “To Kill a Mockingbird.” Was it published simply for monetary reasons?


Katherine Tripodes, San Marino

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook