Why the "classics" don't suck

[Lace Neil Singer]

My class got to read and act out the books that we did. We could choose a part, so that the people who loved to read out loud could read the most. Anyone left over took turns reading the narration, or stage directions. In third year, we did Julius Caeser, and I got to read Brutus. Good times. XD

[AdminAssistant]

Yeah, sorry, I didn't get from anywhere that we were discussing elementary school/Jr. High. In elementary school, we did get to choose what we read (if I remember correctly). And thank God we did, since I was reading two levels above my peers. I hadn't read many 'classics' then, because my parents didn't have a strong education in them. But, I'd found things on my own to be interested in.

Jr. High was when we started 'classics'. My 8th and 9th grade English teacher was awesome. We read The Odyssey and Romeo and Juliet, along with a ton of Greek mythology and a lot of different short stories. Well, that's what I can remember anyway. She also let us watch film versions of the stuff we read, although she would fast forward through naughty bits.

Reading plays aloud in class....well, it's not perfect, but it's a step above reading it by yourself at home. Now, if teachers would challenge students with a little Titus Adronicus....or go the non-Shakespearean, Jacobean route with some Duchess of Malfi

[protege]

Honestly, I've never understood how people can talk of Beowulf, the Iliad or other works and call them boring. They're about gods and battles and demons/creatures...the stuff modern fantasy bases itself on.

I read those...and several other 'classics.' Some of them literally bored me to tears. Not so much the story itself...but because certain teachers spent so much time on them. I don't know about you, but several days of hour-long Beowulf lectures got to be a bit much. Same with Romeo & Juliet or MacBeth. Seriously, was it really necessary to have to read those every freaking year? As such, I can't stand Shakespeare!

But, I will admit--the mythology stuff was pretty cool.

[ExRetailDrone]

Reading plays aloud in class....well, it's not perfect, but it's a step above reading it by yourself at home.

In high school when we were reading Shakespeare, I would have much rather been reading it by myself at home. I think that I would have enjoyed it more. Instead, we split up the parts and had people read aloud in class. A lot of my classmates could not read well from a modern standpoint, so suffering through them mangling the words of Shakespeare... By my junior and senior years, I just took a nap during our readings because I just couldn't handle it anymore. Which was unfortunate, I think that I would have really enjoyed Hamlet or Macbeth, but at this point I still don't want to go back and read them, a decade later.

[Rageaholic]

What he said, pretty much.

Also, I don't know where people are getting the idea that school is meant to be fun. You go there to LEARN. If it bothers you so much, feel free to drop out and do what you like then.

I don't know about "fun" but they should at least keep students interested and show how the material is relevent. I know that if something is boring, I will not get anything out of it other than finding ways to get it done faster.

[Hyena Dandy]

Reading plays aloud in class....well, it's not perfect, but it's a step above reading it by yourself at home. Now, if teachers would challenge students with a little Titus Adronicus....or go the non-Shakespearean, Jacobean route with some Duchess of Malfi

I dunno how CHALLENGING Titus is, but its fun as hell.

[Exaspera]

I think part of the problem about reading the classics is the wordiness reflecting the writing styles of the times. The aforementioned books are termed "Classics" because they set a precedent at the time that served to provide a background for the writings that followed. They also reflect, for the most part, the social mores of the time and enable the modern reader some insight into what was going on.

It's the same with art. Many people don't get that why some art, especially contemporary art, is so special. It is mainly because the creator broke the existing rules at the time the art was made. Most of the art that is regarded as priceless classics today were treated with much anger and derision when they were first shown. I can only assume the same occurred with books.

One problem I had with reading classics is that a lot of them described the entire world for the first 2 or 3 chapters before they got to the meat of the story.

[jackfaire]

Considering you've been talking specifically about instances in high school and not mentioning elementary school, how are we to deduce which level of education you're talking about.

Let me quote myself here

I am not talking about college courses hell I am not even necessarily talking about High School courses. I am talking about when we are teaching kids to read and teaching them literature at the beginning.

The point is not to make every Junior High and Elementary school student into a collegiate scholar but rather to get them interested in reading in the first place so that their love of reading like mine advances their vocabulary improves their spelling and helps teach them about the world around them.

Both references pointing out that High School and College are not what I was talking about those are from my first post on this thread.

Where have you been that you were taught classics in elementary school? Unless you're thinking of Fun with Dick and Jane as classics.

The last time I read books in that style was the first half of the 2nd grade. 3rd grade was entirely books with excerpts from short stories and actual novels as most of my teachers allowed us to choose what we wanted most people in my class developed a love of reading.

Kids in the other class were forced to read Austen, Twain, etc and the ones that liked those authors liked reading but the ones that were scratching their heads wondering what the author's were talking about developed an aversion to reading.

[Hobbs]

I thought you were being facetious/sensationalist with the "making elementary kids...collegiate scholars" bit because such thinking is so not what educators are trying to do at that time. As for Austen and Twain; those books are fairly easy to read. Although, Louisa May Alcott may be easier, especially her earlier books. You also point out that it's your own teacher who allowed you to read what you want. So how were you "forced" to read classics?

[Amanita]

ExRetailDrone, I can completely relate about the crappy reading skills of some of my fellow students. I remember us doing "Pygmalion" aka "My Fair Lady" in class, and the teacher asked one girl to read the description of a scene taking place in a character's study. This girl was apparently very smart, a real teacher's pet. Listening to her mangle that passage reading it out loud was painful. Any word more than two syllables in length was a fight, with her stumbling over almost every one, and mispronouncing many of them. Even "Supply" got mangled into something like "soo-plee".
Gods, it was painful to listen to.

[jackfaire]

I thought you were being facetious/sensationalist with the "making elementary kids...collegiate scholars" bit because such thinking is so not what educators are trying to do at that time.

I am not saying that I was I am saying that other students at my school were, also other schools have a policy of the teacher assigning one book for everyone to read and everyone has to read the exact same book.

Putting aside the moniker of classics for the moment. I did have one teacher that made everyone in class read Maniac Magee. Not everyone liked that book.

When I encounter teachers that refuse to let their students read anything that they consider to be crap then yes I consider that expecting them to be scholars. There are plenty of teachers out there who feel that rather than their students reading books they enjoy they should read books the teacher enjoys.

[Hobbs]

If I'm educating students, I certainly don't want them reading "crap" because they'll never learn from it. Look at Twilight and other such books. Even though they may be popular, they don't get kids interested in reading; only interested in the certain story. The books aren't even appropriate for children.

I knew people that grumbled at Raold[sic] Dahl books...if we keep placating to children to only read what they want, pretty soon they won't be reading anything. I'm sorry the words are hard for you to understand, but sometimes you need to read books that challenge your vocabulary.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

There's more to it than challenging vocabulary and there's a whole big area between the classics and Twilight. The point is not to placate to their basest wants and let them read comic books and riff-raff, but at the very least flex a little from the equally distasteful 'classics'. They may have been important, and riff raff may be fun, but what's best for everyone is to read something interesting This may be a classic, it may be junk, or anything in between. Anyway if it interests and provokes thought from the reader, I call that mission accomplished at least in a general sense.

I agree that the classics need to be taught for historical perspective. But historical value is not the be all end all of the benefits of reading a book, to say nothing of what constitutes a good book.

[muses_nightmare]

comic books and riff-raff

Hey, have you read a comic book as of late? A lot of them have excellent storylines and great writing. Hell, they made Sense and Sensibility into a graphic novel, same with the Wizard of Oz, and probably a few more that I'm forgetting about.

Just saying.

[Hobbs]

Hey, have you read a comic book as of late? A lot of them have excellent storylines and great writing. Hell, they made Sense and Sensibility into a graphic novel, same with the Wizard of Oz, and probably a few more that I'm forgetting about.

Just saying.

I still don't see someone getting the same scope of the graphic novel as compared to the original novel. Next you'll be saying that we should skip written abbreviations of a work altogether and wait for the movie

Sorry, but I would expect students to be able to pay attention to a book without pictures. *Are people's attention spans really that bad?

*Don't be snarky w/ ADD comments. You can take meds for that.