-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
What book should be REQUIRED reading for everyone?
- Thread starter shari
- Start date
chillinrod said:
Horribly written, banal storied, pseudo-history mixed with vacant biography on quasi-fictional (at best) characters and past geniuses?
Hmmm, should this be encouraged?
_Catcher in the Rye_, which hasn’t held any significance (if it ever did) for decades, can be nixed and, if need be, replaced with a more contemporary whiny teenage [beeeeeeep] book: _Life is Elsewhere_ by Milan Kundera, _Moon Palace_ by Paul Auster …or _Superfudge_ by Judy Blume.
Shakespeare, while vital, was written to be heard. In class, read it out loud.
I just finished a recent book called _We Need to Talk About Kevin_ (2003) by Lionel Shriver. I need to make some notes to throw up in ‘just finished reading’ so that the 1, 3 or 5 people not reading crap like S. King and Harry Wanker may actually look into it…
Anyway, I think this could prove to be a very interesting read, maybe even an important read.
j
Chixulub
New Member
The list tends to be long, but one that I think gets neglected is 'The Magic Christian' by Terry Southern. There's a couple of his I haven't gotten to, but he's always good in my experience and in the case of 'Magic Christian' both excellent and groundbreaking.
The movie adaptation, FYI, sucks, despite having Peter Sellers and several of the future Monty Python outfit involved. I suspect that abortion of a flick resulted from Sellers & Southern associating on 'Dr. Strangelove,' which Southern co-wrote the screenplay for. The book isn't even set in Britain, and doesn't have a son to Grand Guy Grand for Ringo Starr to play...
The movie adaptation, FYI, sucks, despite having Peter Sellers and several of the future Monty Python outfit involved. I suspect that abortion of a flick resulted from Sellers & Southern associating on 'Dr. Strangelove,' which Southern co-wrote the screenplay for. The book isn't even set in Britain, and doesn't have a son to Grand Guy Grand for Ringo Starr to play...
Robert said:
Well, just because most students have blind ignorance that if something is forced upon one, then it’s **bad**.
Generally one _might_ ponder that many of these books have had some longevity for a reason.
While an across the board scholastic open-syllabus is an interesting idea I think that teachers would not want to deal with this. And how do they rotate their plan? Spring semester means more Joseph Conrad? A higher ratio of brunettes to blondes means _The Bell Jar_ should be used?
It just wouldn’t work.
And no matter what, *any* book used is going to get the idiot crowd bitching, since it’s an assignment. And little Jimmy will bitch because “last semester you taught _The Great Gatsby_ why do *we* have to read Dickens, it’s 15 times thicker!!”
Vintage doesn’t have a contract with schools that Faulkner *has* to be taught. As I stated, more than likely these books have stayed on through the years for a fairly good reason. Even if it is crap like _Catcher in the Rye_; controversy, although absurdly outlived for that title, is a good thing.
Although, more often that not, it’s also out of laziness. A teacher that has been using _Of Mice and Men_ for x amount of years has probably seen, heard and read just about every conceivable aspect of the book. Be it through past students or the many volumes of “literary criticism” easily available. For teachers to use more contemporary things, those resources are not available, and I’m sure no person in a position of authority wants to be stumped with a plot twist or have to admit, “You know, I never thought about that!”
Sadly, you youngsters will also see that in your University years it’s much the same system. I can’t tell you how many English classes I’ve bounced to and from that AGAIN were using Cheever’s “The Swimmer” or O’Conner’s “A Good Man is Hard To Find”. Don’t get me wrong, these are 2 of the finer short stories ever written, but…that’s just way the pages flip in academia.
Now eat your spinach,
j
Robert
Active Member
jay said:
Struck a nerve I see. I didn't say it meant that a book was bad. I also don't buy your assertion that it means "most students have blind ignorance." Only the arrogance of the academic community would assume that a student that doesn't like the literature that they push must be suffering from "blind ignorance." Whatever happened to marching to the beat of a different drummer?
While it is acceptable to judge an author or specific works, I would suggest you refrain from insulting people just because their taste in literature is different from your own.
Robert said:
Not at all. I have very little hope for literacy, education or people in general, so I’m not going to let my nervous system get frazzled by it.
I’ll stand by it all the more after reading your post.
Who ever said you have to “like” anything in class? Criticism can be both “good” and “bad”. Hate _Wuthering Heights_? Write a kick ass paper on the inanity of Heathcliff. _The Scarlet Letter_ piss you off? Do a dissertation on Hatred for Hester.
More often than not though people can’t actually puts words together. “I dunno, I just like/hate it”.
That’s doesn’t wash so well.
I don’t see you offering up any suggestion in anything but 4/4. If that.
I would guess the advent of the drum machine wiped that out.
But all in all, yes, if students, even if hating the overall’ness of a certain book, can’t pinpoint areas of Grandness within the stuff “pushed” at them, like say, Ellison’s _Invisible Man_ it’s past the point of “ignorance” and no seeing-eye (or -mind) doggie will rescue that.
The flip side to ‘higher education’ is that you may find a few courses that _do_ bring some ‘odd time signatures’ (if you will) to the classroom. I’m hardly one to say what is “hip” or the redundant term “alternative” these days, but undoubtedly some teachers are trying new things out in class. As I mentioned before (probably another thread though), shortly after _Fight Club_ came out a (now retired) professor I knew used it in his class.
j
I’m not sure what, if anything you edited out, but I see you added this:
Seems more like the twitching nerve is on the other end, eh?
I don’t mean to be insulting at all. This is called “conversation”.
It’s odd (and ever so ironic) that in the day and age of CONTAST CONTACT (thank you Nokia, et al, and pathetic people) this is a dying hobby.
“Give it only in sound bite form, please, and pardon me if I can’t defend my own thoughts.” Seems to be the new mantra.
And as I (maybe) made more clear with my last post. Not *once* did I say these books are supposed to be liked. _Catcher in the Rye_, if one actually READS (albeit, different than “comprehends”) my post, is clearly something I am _not_ a fan of, but I _can_ see the reasoning for using it.
See, deductive thinking. Really, tis not so difficult.
And can be done to *any* *beat*.
j
Robert said:
Seems more like the twitching nerve is on the other end, eh?
I don’t mean to be insulting at all. This is called “conversation”.
It’s odd (and ever so ironic) that in the day and age of CONTAST CONTACT (thank you Nokia, et al, and pathetic people) this is a dying hobby.
“Give it only in sound bite form, please, and pardon me if I can’t defend my own thoughts.” Seems to be the new mantra.
And as I (maybe) made more clear with my last post. Not *once* did I say these books are supposed to be liked. _Catcher in the Rye_, if one actually READS (albeit, different than “comprehends”) my post, is clearly something I am _not_ a fan of, but I _can_ see the reasoning for using it.
See, deductive thinking. Really, tis not so difficult.
And can be done to *any* *beat*.
j
Robert said:
My apologies.
I amend:
Most PEOPLE have blind (or at least some serious cataract-like obstruction) ignorance.
And most PEOPLE find this comfortable (i.e. the beloved “ignorance is bliss” saying)
Frankly, it’s nice to see you are not.
Most by no definition means “all”.
All I did was try to offer you my thoughts behind *why* such a program of fixed-learning is in place. I’m always open for change –as are probably many teachers that are sick to death of Lenny and his floppy rabbits- but change has to be founded on solid ideas, not just change for change’s sake or the desire for a new DJ.
j
cajunmama
Active Member
I'm afraid I must disagree with you statement
Deciding the school curriculum is not for the feint of heart, my friend. And most teachers I know (and I know a few) bring more homework home than their students do. Most of the time, it is a matter of pleasing most of the people most of the time and duck and cover should you royally piss off a parent who knows people. A teacher who assigns a book to read that has some objectionable material risks their job. And most of the teachers I know are seriously dedicated to their careers. Its not laziness. It is sometimes wiser to choose your battles and not heap more work on top of the ton-and-a-half you already have.
Yet agree with
Deciding the school curriculum is not for the feint of heart, my friend. And most teachers I know (and I know a few) bring more homework home than their students do. Most of the time, it is a matter of pleasing most of the people most of the time and duck and cover should you royally piss off a parent who knows people. A teacher who assigns a book to read that has some objectionable material risks their job. And most of the teachers I know are seriously dedicated to their careers. Its not laziness. It is sometimes wiser to choose your battles and not heap more work on top of the ton-and-a-half you already have.
I read as much or more than anyone I know (except people in these forums), but I somehow managed to get through high school without reading a lot of the standards. So I was an adult (in my 30s) when I finally read The Catcher in the Rye. I wish I had read it as a young adult. It may have given me a broader perspective at a time I could have used it. Ditto The Sun Also Rises & All the Kings Men
dolphinfire30
New Member
English was probably my favorite class. I loved reading shakespear and all the poems thrown at us. Some of the books we read were, A Tale of Two Cities, The Catcher in the Rye, Of Mice and Men, The Color Purple, thats a few but I loved them. There are plenty of other books that I wish they would of had us read, that I have never read, The great gatsby, lord of the flies, etc. I do agree that students should be aloud to have choices in their reading, but I think that required reading at least introduces them to some of the best books. We had 2 required reading books a year(not including shakespear) and the rest of the year we got to pick what we wanted to read from a list.(majority votes won). I think that worked great.
Robert said:
Robert, you didn't strike a nerve, Jay just always has that stick of hard, dried diarreah up his ass. Jay, seriously now, how many failed books did you really write?
As for required reading, I think required reading should be taken into CONSIDERATION once a person is about 30 years old. Most American teenagers are too busy obeying they boiling, oozey, pustulous hormones to pay attention to English class and books. Really, can you imagine an ADD teenager who is too worried about getting laid and parties and illegal substances, actually sit down and read? Not only that, most people under the age of 20 greatly lack emotional maturity, and so cannot, more often that not, understand characters in books written by 70 year olds. Then they start making fun of the characters [he's such a fag, etc], and, unable to connect with the character, just stop reading. Usually they need more experience of the world to gain a deeper understanding.
Also...come on, let's just say it. Most people are dullards. They don't care about books, or poetry or whatever. It's survival that matters, really. I'm fine with that. They're missing out, but they have a right to live their life in a minimalistic fashion, and we are nobodies to stop them. If you are really stupid, and you've never read a book in your life, you are still going to die the same death as a tea-party literati, and when you are dead, everything in your brain is gone, all that remains are the by-products from your sex life. So no, I don't think there should be a required reading, not only will it make no difference in the reading habit of a person, but with the help of normal psychology and the reactance theory, they will develop a dislike of books, which is what none of us want. Some people just won't read. I've given up.
sirmyk
New Member
Through elementary and high school I hated "required reading". But when senior year of h.s. came around I took an english class called Contemporary Lit (by choice, instead of Advanced English classes the years before), where I had the option of choosing from a wide selection of books from a "suggested reading" list. This was much more fun, and was the subtle push that got me to enjoy reading for pleasuring, instead of (what I thought at the time) was punishment. I even went back years later to to read some of those "required reading" books again, and enjoyed them much more than when I was forced to read them. But, I must say, I did enjoy a few books that were "required reading" when I was required to read them, such as Lord of the Flies, and The Scarlet Letter. We disected those books, which was overbearing at times, but also fun. So, this leads me to believe that if we continue to use "required reading" lists in school, that these books need to be something worth disecting, with much sybolism, hidden morals, lessons on life, or whatever you'd like to call them. I would nominate The Life of Pi, Lost Boy Lost Girl, The Shining, Mutant Message From Down Under, The Power of One, and a bunch of others I won't list here.
ions
New Member
I think at the high school level that there are a few must reads but more importantly books at that level must have certain attributes that are often missing.
Keep the novels chosen shorter. Kids that don't like the book are more likely to finish the book and it won't make them feel like reading is some plodding excercise. Give them something from their region but don't beat them over the head with it. I remember we read a lot of Canadian authors for which I am grateful for but we were beat over the head with it a few times. Give them a list of 5 or 6 and let them choose from. They'll be less resentful if they got to choose from a small selection. The group activities around that idea practically write themselves. Give em something from a popular modern writer once in a while. It'll make them feel more like the reading community if they can walk into a bookstore and see a display of the author's books that they read in school. Life of Pi is a good example, you can't walk into a big bookstore without seeing that thing on display and it's not crap. Try not to include books that are a history lesson at the same time. They have a History class for that. There have to be better ways to teach context.
The big issue for me is that I don't think the majority of kids walk away from the books that they do read in school any better than they were before they read them. I don't think they have the capacity for Literature at that point. Some may but they are exceptions. Just look at the amount of reading enthusiasts High Schools create...yeah. Teach them that reading is fun, later at University or on their own they'll appreciate it at deeper levels when they're ready. Provided they haven't been persuaded that reading is boring by a poor experience at school.
Keep the novels chosen shorter. Kids that don't like the book are more likely to finish the book and it won't make them feel like reading is some plodding excercise. Give them something from their region but don't beat them over the head with it. I remember we read a lot of Canadian authors for which I am grateful for but we were beat over the head with it a few times. Give them a list of 5 or 6 and let them choose from. They'll be less resentful if they got to choose from a small selection. The group activities around that idea practically write themselves. Give em something from a popular modern writer once in a while. It'll make them feel more like the reading community if they can walk into a bookstore and see a display of the author's books that they read in school. Life of Pi is a good example, you can't walk into a big bookstore without seeing that thing on display and it's not crap. Try not to include books that are a history lesson at the same time. They have a History class for that. There have to be better ways to teach context.
The big issue for me is that I don't think the majority of kids walk away from the books that they do read in school any better than they were before they read them. I don't think they have the capacity for Literature at that point. Some may but they are exceptions. Just look at the amount of reading enthusiasts High Schools create...yeah. Teach them that reading is fun, later at University or on their own they'll appreciate it at deeper levels when they're ready. Provided they haven't been persuaded that reading is boring by a poor experience at school.
What I recall from school and my failure to read assigned material (although I read a ton of unnassigned material) was that more than the books, I hated the monotony of the lessons and the stupidity of the testing.
It's not the books, it's the teacher. Do a good job teaching and it doesn't matter what your subject is. (And I know it's often not the teacher's fault, the system forces them to work in such and such a way etc etc...)
You can have the best reading list in the world, with books individually chosen for each student, but if the students thinks your class is dull, it won't matter what books you chose.
It's not the books, it's the teacher. Do a good job teaching and it doesn't matter what your subject is. (And I know it's often not the teacher's fault, the system forces them to work in such and such a way etc etc...)
You can have the best reading list in the world, with books individually chosen for each student, but if the students thinks your class is dull, it won't matter what books you chose.
cajunmama said:
And here I was thinking I was defending the teachers. To a certain point…
I would never be the one to say teachers don’t work hard, or don’t bring work home. And while my comments _are_ based on a generalization, I think it holds pretty firm. The abundance of True and False questions and the dreaded Multiple Choice questions on exams are *not* designed to whittle down the student’s base of knowledge but simply a framework that is easy to correct (not that I blame teachers from wanting to correct piles and piles of “essays”, hell reading some of these posts is difficult enough…)
And I’m quite aware of the trials and tribulations of deciding a syllabus (at least at the Uni level), but since that wasn’t the theme I didn’t get too into it.
Indeed. I was going to riff on the whole ‘beat of a different drummer’ thing –but clearly most of what I write is a waste of time as it is- in that a drummer (teacher) not only has to supply the basic-beat, but they also have a conductor (principal, school board, etc) to answer to, and, of course, and audience (students and students’ parents).
And frankly, if I were conducting or an audience member and I heard that, say, Stephen King was being used in anything other than a Fundamentally Bad Writing and Piss Poor Storytelling (and what better way to get “turned off” to reading??) course, well, I’d be asking for more than a metaphorical refund to that particular symphony.
I don’t doubt it. I never meant to sound as otherwise. My implied laziness (in this case) is moreso at the combined academic thinking, as it would take a lot more than just a handful of teachers slowly leaking new books into the curriculum.
But again, it’s not something that I think needs much changing. If any, really.
Undoubtedly. It’s not in a dire situation, so it’s pretty much fine.
Hell, some of the best fiction is taught in the “History” class anyway.
I just oh-so totally don’t buy the “I know a low of people that were turned off to reading” *because* of required reading. This holds as much merit as one not listening to music because of the sonic scars one has due to repeated “Mary Had a Little Lamb” renditions during kindergarten or forced Beethoven on the piano at age 10.
Or “I refuse to balance my cheque book because I hated algebra in school”.
Typical *Excuse* instead of a *Reason*.
Bakku said:
While I appreciate your question (none, thank you. I guess it’s easier to say “jay hates bad writing, vapid storytelling and sheep-like buying behaviour because of some kind of professional jealousy”, but you’re wrong and could use a bit more expansion of your deductiveness.) (and I assure you, life is a bit more complex than a Stephen King plot)), and even furthermore your clinical prognosis.
But next time, instead of ‘talking shit’, why don’t you simply address the points you disagree with. Consider it my verbal colonic.
And lemme guess, you really got miffed you skinned your knees on some of my Harry Potter ramblings…
As for the rest of your post, well, it’s outright absurd. Required reading at “about 30 years old”? And this would be what, “Dick and Jane”?
According to your warped thesis, which is just more excuses, not only required reading should be negated but pretty much all of school (as “history”, “maths”, “art”, “science” and all other subjects can easily be substituted in your dangerous and frankly fucking scary little theory”.)
Planet Bakku. Interesting. Good luck. Stock lots of Pepto-bismol.
j