Podcast Summary: The New Yorker Radio Hour

Episode Title: Aaron Sorkin Rewrites “To Kill a Mockingbird”
Date: December 14, 2018
Host: David Remnick
Guest: Aaron Sorkin (playwright, screenwriter)
Producer: WNYC Studios and The New Yorker

Main Theme

This episode focuses on Aaron Sorkin’s bold adaptation of Harper Lee’s classic novel, “To Kill a Mockingbird,” for the Broadway stage. Host David Remnick interviews Sorkin about the challenges, controversies, and insights involved in revamping a beloved American story—particularly tackling issues of race, character agency, authorship, and cultural relevance in 2018.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Challenges of Adapting a Classic

• Sorkin began the adaptation intending to “add stage directions” and remain faithful, but realized that produced something lifeless—“a trip to a museum, not a thrilling night in the theater.” (01:47–02:13)
• Producer Scott Rudin’s critical note: "Atticus can't be Atticus from the beginning to the end of the play—he has to become Atticus." This forced Sorkin to make Atticus the protagonist with a real character journey, rather than immutable moral perfection. (02:34–03:25)

Sorkin: "A protagonist has to have a flaw...In the novel, Atticus is Atticus...he doesn’t change. The answer is, Atticus isn’t the protagonist in the novel. Scout is." (03:10–03:24)

2. Giving Voice to Marginalized Characters

• Sorkin was troubled by the marginalization of black characters in the original:

Sorkin: "In a story about racial tension and injustice...neither of the African American characters have anything to say on the matter." (05:32–06:06)

• In the adaptation, Calpurnia and Tom Robinson are given more agency and voice, reflecting contemporary awareness and correcting missed opportunities from the original. (05:32–06:27)

3. Confronting Racial Anxiety and Modernization

• The play addresses the overt racism of characters like Bob Ewell, explicitly depicting him as a Klansman to draw clearer historical connections. (04:37–05:10)
• Remnick observes that black characters’ lack of voice “doesn’t go unnoticed” today, and Sorkin concurs that this silence is “wrong” and “a wasted opportunity.” (05:19–06:27)
• Sorkin acknowledges present-day audience expectations, noting the importance of making the story relevant without being heavy-handed or “on the nose.” (13:34–14:49)

4. Sorkin’s Writing Style vs. Harper Lee’s Voice

• Remnick playfully asks how “Sorkinian” the adaptation is. Sorkin tried to stay true to the novel’s tone, blending his own style subtly into Lee’s narrative rhythm:

Sorkin: "I’m not trying to write Sorkinian...There were similarities between the way I write and the way Harper Lee does." (07:12–07:21)

5. Legal Disputes with the Harper Lee Estate

• The estate, represented by executor Tonja Carter, objected to changes in the script—especially changes seen as altering Atticus Finch’s character and expanding Calpurnia’s role. (08:07–11:07)
• Key sticking points: Atticus using profanity, drinking alcohol, having a rifle—all eventually resolved to reach compromise and keep the production moving. (10:05–10:24)
• On racial grounds, the estate found the new Calpurnia “too civil rightsy”; Sorkin refused to back down:

Sorkin: "There was not a chance in hell that I was going to aid and abet what I felt was racism on the part of the person in charge of the legacy of To Kill a Mockingbird." (11:07–12:08)

• The dispute almost led to a trial, with a proposal to present the play in a courtroom—"the only play ever to close on opening night in the Southern District." (12:24–12:50)

6. Resonance in the ‘Trumpian’ Era

• Remnick points out the political context—the rise of Trump, national division, and questioning of legal and moral standards. (12:50–13:39)
• Sorkin updated some lines to avoid overt political messaging while still letting the play’s themes echo current anxieties:

Sorkin: "There was a line…which felt a little bit like the production was kind of unzipping itself and...making the play relevant. And the play is just doing a good enough job of that on its own." (14:06–15:13)

7. Examining the ‘White Savior’ Narrative

• Sorkin reflects on the classic “stand up for your father” courtroom scene—once his favorite—now recognizing its limitation:

Sorkin: "In reality, those people in the balcony should be outside on the streets, rioting...But instead, they’re standing, docile, in gratitude to the white liberal man. It’s a white savior moment." (17:10–18:50)

• He sees Atticus’s journey—as discovering the limits of his own understanding—as a reflection for many Americans who thought they knew their own country.

8. The Work of Adaptation

• Sorkin had to stop “swaddling the book in bubble wrap” and take creative risks, knowing some would say, “You ruined my childhood.” The play remains set in 1934 but thematically updated for today. (15:19–17:03)
• The process of adaptation is both homage and critique—a way of looking at a classic art work with new eyes. (19:13–19:55)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On changing Atticus Finch:
  “Atticus can’t be Atticus from the beginning to the end of the play. He has to become Atticus.” (Scott Rudin, via Sorkin, 02:34–02:52)

• On character flaws:
  “A protagonist has to have a flaw. So I thought, well, how did Harper Lee get away with it?” (03:10–03:19)

• On Calpurnia:
  “There's no such thing as a typical black maid. And plays aren't written about typical people doing typical things.” (11:07–11:22)

• On the ‘white savior’ moment:
  “It’s sentimental white liberalism. It’s a white savior moment in the thing. And I was in touch with the fact that that’s what I want... to be recognized as one of the good ones.” (18:47–19:13)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Opening context & Remnick intro: 00:10–01:47
• Sorkin’s first draft and Scott Rudin’s note: 01:47–03:24
• Discussion of Atticus’s character arc: 03:24–04:42
• Race, marginalization, Calpurnia & Tom Robinson: 05:19–06:27
• Sorkin’s writing voice & adaptation method: 06:27–08:07
• Legal battles with Harper Lee estate: 08:07–12:08
• ‘Trumpian’ echoes & relevance: 12:50–15:13
• The ‘white savior’ scene and Sorkin’s reflection: 17:03–18:50
• Adaptation as both homage and critique: 19:13–19:55

Language & Tone

The tone is thoughtful, candid, and self-reflective. Sorkin is open about his learning curve and the pitfalls of adapting “sacred” material, while Remnick’s questions are probing yet respectful, helping the listener see both the reverence for and the need to modernize a classic.

Summary for New Listeners

If you haven’t listened, this episode offers an engaging behind-the-scenes look at the making of a Broadway blockbuster and the artistic courage it takes to take on—and challenge—a canonized work. It explores how art, race, authorship, and the American conscience collide in both the original “To Kill a Mockingbird” and Sorkin’s 2018 adaptation.

(Note: The following segment in the podcast transitions into a separate interview with Senator Amy Klobuchar and is not part of the Sorkin-focused discussion.)