Is it really all that beneficial to put so much emphasis on the classics? I like them, I’ve learned from them, but I’ve learned more from reading The Giver than I did from Crime and Punishment. I learned a great deal more from Ender’s Game than I did from fighting through Great Expectations. From these two examples it seems to me that more can be learned from YA lit than from the classics. Is this the case? I don’t really know for sure. I’ve read The Scarlet Letter twice now. All of the symbolism and everything we were taught in class about the book did nothing to help me. I’d go as far as to say that it hindered my reading process. It wasn’t until I had finished it the first time that I realized I had enjoyed it. The second time I was able to see what I enjoyed and learn from the book itself.
Perhaps teaching the classics is not what we really need. I enjoy discussing books that I read for fun and I even learn from it. Perhaps what we need for the classics is a guided discussion. Not the usual teacher led discussion about characters and symbolism and all that stuff that’s so specific that the focus is taken off of the story and is put on the minutia. These discussions need to be about the story itself. Just like a discussion between friends about a favorite book, only there is a teacher to help out with the more difficult portions of the classics. This makes reading more about the reader’s imagination than about the reader’s analysis. I believe that it is better to experience a book than to study it.
I couldn’t agree more. I think that one of the reasons I am guilty of rarely reading for pleasure these days is because when I do read (for classes), I am bored or feel disconnected from majority of the pieces. Like you said, it’s not to say that classics don’t have their place, but I agree–reading “The Giver” was a very rewarding experience for me this semester.
I think so many English teachers today think that students will “struggle through” the classics if you assign them, and eventually they will understand them. I argue that this is not the case. Students who consistently feel disconnected from the classics they’re being assigned will NOT read them. They will come to class, barely participate, faking discussions and writing prompts. I’m sure we’ve all missed a reading assignment and been guilty of this before. But students will consistently do this if the classics are over their head, and if they do reject literature in this way, we’re doing the exact opposite of our job as English teachers.
So yes, like you said, I think guided discussion is absolutely necessary for classics. I also think that students should have the opportunity to use other forms of media for assistance–videos, books on tape. Even if they want to read sparknotes or online blogs before reading the piece to get a sense of the author or the characters, that should be encouraged! I know when I was in high school, watching the movie “Romeo and Juliet” BEFORE reading the play, or looking up sparknotes (even when it was because I didn’t understand a piece that was confusing) were deemed as “cheating.” Seems pretty ridiculous to me. As teachers, we’re teaching students to use resources, past experiences, discussions to help them build knowledge about the test, but we’re expecting them to dive into classics, love them, and understand them, all on their own?