Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AnAmericanMother
I disagree -- "classics" are called "classics" because there is a core body of literature that every educated person MUST know. Shakespeare is woven into the fabric of the English language, the best playwright of the age that wrote the most beautiful English ever produced (they also brought you the King James Bible.) Dickens and Hardy each illuminate a time and a place in English history. Like it or not, that is important.

Having read a classic once doesn't make one educated. A book you didn't want to read leaves your head the day the assignment is done and you will never consider it again - or consider reading it again either.

Teenagers may not be good judges of merit, but they are great judges of what they don't like. Forcing meritorious art that they hate "for their own good" today at the expense of turning them off literature forever afterwards is not a win for education.

180 posted on 08/04/2006 9:24:07 AM PDT by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]


To: CGTRWK; AnAmericanMother
Forcing meritorious art that they hate "for their own good" today at the expense of turning them off literature forever afterwards is not a win for education.

I agree. As I said in an earlier post, Shakepeare's intended audience was not incarcerated teenagers. People paid to see Shakespeare's plays, and those of other popular playwrights of his day, because they enjoyed them. The Elizabethan theater scene was "American Idol" meets "Survivor" crossed with "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." As it were.

The great novels of the past, of various eras and nations, were popular, read voluntarily by the general public. They were not forced on prisoners of the state.

In my opinion, if literature is worthy of being described as "classic," it will attract uncoerced readers in every generation.

183 posted on 08/04/2006 9:42:13 AM PDT by Tax-chick (I've always wanted to be 40 ... and it's as good as I anticipated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

To: CGTRWK

"A book you didn't want to read leaves your head the day the assignment is done and you will never consider it again - or consider reading it again either."

Wow, is that ever wrong. I can't count the number of people I've talked to - friends, family, coworkers - who talk about books they hated in school, only to rediscover them years later and finally "get it". A great example is "Moby Dick". Teenagers should never read that book; it goes right over their heads. It's not a book about whales; it's a book about what obsession can do to you.

There isn't a sixteen-year-old alive who understands that; there isn't a forty-six year old who doesn't.

Some people never DO consider reading those books again. They tend to be non-readers in any case, which includes far too much of our adult population.


186 posted on 08/04/2006 9:47:27 AM PDT by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

To: CGTRWK

Sometimes you don't know what you like. I think it is important to teach the classics.

My 7th grader son is not liking the books he has to read in school. I've been trying to get him to read some classics on his own. He finally read Tom Sawyer, and loved it. Now, he has Huckleberry Finn. I've bought a few other classics for him to read: Treasure Island, Robinson Crusoe, and some others. He hasn't started those yet because he is re-reading Harry Potter.

I wish that there were more literature choice at his school: a sci-fi/fantasy class, a classic novel, or a romantic novel class. My daughters would love a sci-fi/fantasy class as much as my son.


188 posted on 08/04/2006 9:49:56 AM PDT by luckystarmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson