Why the "classics" don't suck

[Dreamstalker]

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.

Yup. For a lot of kids (I was that way, and got labeled with every disorder under the sun) they won't learn anything unless they're given some reason to be interested. Especially if they get the impression that the teacher is trying to cram it down their throat (my HS American Lit teacher didn't believe I had a learning disability and just thought being unreasonably hard on me would work).

All my grade school English teachers had bookcases in the classroom full of random books. If we didn't like what was in the library for the non-assigned reading, she let us pick from her shelves. The only thing that mattered was if we would be able to write a report. The shelves were donated books, so there was all manner of subjects and reading level--we could read a book that was a few grades above (that was my introduction to Lovecraft in fourth grade, Mrs. Moran was all too happy to meet with me outside of class when I got confused), but also had to choose one we could do a report on.

[infinitemonkies]

I think that if the goal is literacy, choose a book the students will enjoy, and leave the 'classic' literature to an elective class that those who are already literate can choose to study.

Now, you're never going to find a single book that will be interesting and enjoyable to the whole class. But if you've got a book that 90+ percent of students despise, maybe you should try a different book instead of teaching just that one book for the next 80 years.

I think a lot of books are hugely overemphasized for no reason other than being old. For example, when I was in 10th grade, we had to read 'A gun for sale' by Canadian author Graham Greene. God I hated that book. The teacher started us off by saying "this is without a doubt the worst book he ever wrote, but it's also the first book he ever wrote, so the board of education says we're required to read it."

[HYHYBT]

Each of these books is selected because it shows an evolution in literary prose.

It wasn't Ulysses... but anyway, if that's why it was included then, surely, those new-at-the-time details ought at least to have been mentioned. Same for Moby Dick; we didn't do Catcher in the Rye.

[Hobbs]

It wasn't Ulysses... but anyway, if that's why it was included then, surely, those new-at-the-time details ought at least to have been mentioned. Same for Moby Dick; we didn't do Catcher in the Rye.

Usually they are, or it's implied considering what lessons/discussions you had on the books. I can't offer anything more than that since I don't know the curriculum your teacher used. Possibly it was Dubliners?

[Rageaholic]

No, it's really more of a "we can't allow kids to pick books because there has to be some uniformity to what they're learning" as has been said already. You can't have a whole classroom of kids constantly reading different books. It's okay once in a while, for things like book reports, but to teach literary tools and subjects, there has to be something cohesive in the classroom. The easiest, most effective way to do that is to make them all read the same book. That book is generally a classic because they have well-known examples of the things kids need to be taught, plus there's a whole support network of teacher literature and materials to make accessing the knowledge in these books easier. It doesn't really matter too much if the kids like the book, as long as they're learning the same thing.

You see, that makes sense. If they are going to do class discussions, it would make sense for everyone to literally be on the same page. The reasoning I don't like and heard from many teachers and college professers is "We can't always read stuff that's interesting to us". That's what turns students off learning, it's this "it can't always be interesting" excuse when teachers assign boring, mindnumbing assignments. I think for the most part, it should be interesting or at the very least relate to the students in some way. Sure, there's no one size fits all solution to learning, but if students can be given some choice (like with book reports), that may solve the problem.

[HYHYBT]

Usually they are, or it's implied considering what lessons/discussions you had on the books. I can't offer anything more than that since I don't know the curriculum your teacher used. Possibly it was Dubliners?

That's it! Sorry I don't remember more (like for instance, what the book was even about): it was 1992 and I barely got a C. Actually, what I remember was mostly that almost everything in that class was depressing; we also read a then-brand-new book The Secret History which, besides being dreary, was completely bizarre.

Sometimes I'm not sure I didn't just imagine that whole quarter... but then, I still have a couple of books from it (not from that class), and others exist which I'd otherwise never have known about. And would probably be better for not knowing.

And my apologies to anyone who likes either Dubliners or Secret History; I mean no insult.

[AdminAssistant]

A teacher should never say, "I'm sorry you have to read this book that really sucks." You should always try to find something, anything in it that's interesting.

[Ladeeda]

I loved reading all through elementary and junior high. High School didn't kill if for me, but I did learn that a lot of the so called classics are not to my taste.

I couldn't even get halfway through Tale of Two Cities. It was so boring. Lots of symbolism and junk that just filled up space.

Cause that's what Dickens did. Paid by the word.

I think the problem is that most books taught in school are depressing or tragic. Huckleberry Finn is the only one offhand I can think of that had any real elements of fun in them.

There are loads of good, OLD books that are more fun to read than flipping Scarlett Letter. Get some Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the classrooms. Or Wodehouse! Good God, what that man can do for language. And they are always sunny and fun. And more Mark Twain.

I did find what kind of writing I like to read. More straight-forward, like Grapes of Wrath, not all that flowery crap that never seems to go anywhere.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I did Animal Farm for GCSE. Thing is, by the time we did the book in class, I'd already read it a thousand times and knew it by heart. XD It was one of the books that my parents encouraged me to read, along with 1984 and Brave New World. In the end, it's really parental encouragement that's the most important thing.

[muses_nightmare]

I loved Brave New World, we read it in my grade 10 English class. Along with a book called the Chrysalids. When it came to reading the second book the class had a choice between that or another book, which I can't remember because I didn't choose to read it, all I remember was the other book was a bit easier to read for people who were struggling in the class.

I've skimmed through Animal Farm, I would actually like to sit down and read it. I had to read some of it very quickly when I was tutoring to help a student answer questions on it.

Grade 11 I remember reading Shoeless Joe, seriously, worst book ever. Maybe that's my opinion, but I dislike sports, and it's a book about a baseball player (well it's the basis for the Field of Dreams movie, which I also hated). That is something I don't consider a classic. Oddly enough I don't remember what I read in Grade 12 English, I do remember what I read in literature for the most part, especially since our last assignment was a term paper on a book of our choosing. I read The Mists of Avalon.

I think what I did in grade 12 could help students learn to love reading, to have to study a book in depth to pull out points for a thesis and everything like that, but then again I'm strange and I like writing long papers.

[ExRetailDrone]

I did Animal Farm for GCSE. Thing is, by the time we did the book in class, I'd already read it a thousand times and knew it by heart. XD It was one of the books that my parents encouraged me to read, along with 1984 and Brave New World. In the end, it's really parental encouragement that's the most important thing.

I would agree with you that parents need to encourage their kids to read and try to instill a love of reading in them. That is not the job of teachers. I loved reading before I started school because of my mom. We would sit down together and she would read books to me, using her finger to show where she was reading so that I could follow along and begin to learn how the words looked. She told me stories of taking me to her aerobics classes when I was about 4 and getting comments from the other women in the class on how well-behaved I was because I would just sit quietly on the bleachers reading my books. Some of my favorite times when I was a kiddo were when my mom and I would go to the library together and I would spend hours looking at books and picking out which ones I wanted to bring home.

I ended up reading all kinds of different types of books. I have to admit that I'm guilty of having loved the Sweet Valley series, but I would also read other random young adult books. I think I read Rebecca when I was in middle school and just fell in love with it. I tried Gone with the Wind but just couldn't get into it.

I never had a problem reading whatever was required for classes throughout the years, but there are some books that I just loathed. I found Great Expectations to be an utter piece of crap, and Heart of Darkness can go to hell. I loved when we read Poe, and I was a huge fan of The Scarlet Letter, The Stranger, Johnny Got His Gun, The Great Gatsby, and Lord of the Flies.

You can't make everyone like everything, classics as well as contemporary work. Teachers are there to teach lessons found in the writings, not to teach the love of reading. There's no one-size-fits-all book, as is evident by all the comments on this post alone; teachers need to do the best they can to make books as interesting as they can for their students. The rest is up to the students and, in part, the parents.

[Ladeeda]

You can't make everyone like everything, classics as well as contemporary work. Teachers are there to teach lessons found in the writings, not to teach the love of reading. There's no one-size-fits-all book, as is evident by all the comments on this post alone; teachers need to do the best they can to make books as interesting as they can for their students. The rest is up to the students and, in part, the parents.

I'm sorry, but what "lessons"? I just got force-fed symbolism and nonsense and lost points whenever I didn't agree with what the teacher thought, even after stating my reasons for seeing it a different way. That's really all I remember from the books upon books I had to read in school. Mile long lists of symbolism and hidden meanings that half the time probably didn't mean jack except what they were.

A series of cigars that were often cigars, if you will.

[Kaylyn]

I found Great Expectations to be an utter piece of crap, and Heart of Darkness can go to hell.

*shudder* Heart of Darkness. Why, oh why, was it required for me to read, not once, but TWICE? I hated hated HATED that book. I would get nauseous at the mere thought of having to pick it up and suffer through another few pages every night.

[McDreidel09]

I'm sorry, but what "lessons"? I just got force-fed symbolism and nonsense and lost points whenever I didn't agree with what the teacher thought, even after stating my reasons for seeing it a different way. That's really all I remember from the books upon books I had to read in school. Mile long lists of symbolism and hidden meanings that half the time probably didn't mean jack except what they were.

A series of cigars that were often cigars, if you will.

Obviously, you had some craptastic teachers. My high school teachers were really amazing and open to new point of views.

For instance, we were reading Julius Caesar, while listening to it on audio cd because my teacher wanted us to hear what they were saying instead of stumbling with the words, but we had to read while they spoke. We got to the part where the murders talked about how they wondered how many times this scene would be shown.

When asked about what this meant, I said that it was Shakespeare putting in a joke about how many times his play would be shown. My teacher was pretty impressed, even though he expected someone to answer with "They were wondering how many people would rise against dictators". However, I got points for the creativity and spotting something that wasn't so obvious.

That is what a good teacher does.

[joe hx]

A series of cigars that were often cigars, if you will.

God Yes. Jane Eyre, tenth grade. Why is the fireplace red? Because fireplaces are made out of bricks, and bricks are red!! There's no symbolism there! (To me anyway )