I first heard of Harper Lee passing away on February 19 on Facebook, then it was all over Twitter, and when I Googled the details a few minutes later, it seemed like every single news outlet had an article on her death. It isn’t surprising in the least to have news of a well-known writer’s death picked up like wildfire, but the irony in this case is that despite having written one of the most famous and influential books of the twentieth century, Lee was notoriously reclusive. And she’s probably the last of her kind.
To Kill a Mockingbird was an immediate success after its publication in 1960; Lee won the Pulitzer Prize and then enjoyed even more fame after the release of the To Kill A Mockingbird movie starring Gregory Peck and Robert Duvall. Yet Lee mostly lived a private life like few other writers have, save J.D. Salinger and Eudora Welty (Thomas Pynchon is known for being private as well, but he isn’t at the level of reclusiveness as these authors; he even appeared in The Simpsons). Lee kept out of the public eye so much that TIME magazine named her one of the Top 10 Most Reclusive Celebrities.
Of course, back when Salinger and Welty and Lee were coming of age as writers, it was easier to lead a private life; this was well before social media and the persistent online paparazzi. But unlike Welty (who died in 2001) and Salinger (who died in 2010), Lee published a second book—Go Set a Watchman—only last year. The news of Go Set a Watchman took the media by storm; the majority of the public had completely forgotten about Lee since she hadn’t published anything in the 55 years since Mockingbird, and many people actually thought she had died long ago. But Lee still largely avoided the public eye, despite article after article comparing her two novels and the famous debate over whether or not Lee was manipulated into publishing her second book.
Today it’s nearly impossible for a writer to live the private life Lee and Salinger were able to cultivate. Writers are expected to market their books on every social media outlet and go to interview after interview to gain readers, which may actually be counterproductive to the writer’s need for time away from distractions to focus on their work.
After Lee’s death, author John Green tweeted, “So many obits today describing Harper Lee as reclusive. But a private life is not reclusion. Authors don’t owe readers or press their lives.”
So many obits today describing Harper Lee as reclusive. But a private life is not reclusion. Authors don’t owe readers or press their lives.
— John Green (@johngreen) February 19, 2016
While this may be true (although ironic for Green to say given how incredibly active he is on Twitter and YouTube), living a life of complete reclusion for a writer today could damage their ability to gain readers. It is all the more impressive that Lee was able to manage to live a private life and still have the media market Go Set a Watchman for her, especially given how influential To Kill a Mockingbird was and still is.
There is nothing wrong with a writer being in the public eye (it’s actually nice to have some intellectual celebrities out there so Twitter isn’t solely consumed by celebrities like the Kardashians). Because the news and social media are now at everyone’s fingertips, readers often want to see into their favorite author’s life to feel more of a connection with their books. But there is a price to pay for that as well, not least the assumption that readers are entitled to pass judgment on a writer’s life (and motives and tastes and preferences in spouses or living arrangements, for example). The danger is that the writer’s life begins to overtake the writer’s work, the literary version of a celebrity chef who is on TV but never really cooks. Lee, may she rest in peace, may have taken the concept of being a writer-recluse with her to the grave. But it’s one we could do with reviving in our social media-saturated age.
Pingback: Exploring the Schuylkill River Trail Part 2 - Philly with a Fjallraven()