The Classics Suck! (or how I learned to stop worrying about what people read and roll with it)

[lady_fellshot]

I hate Jane Austen.

Not personally, but I utterly loathe her writing far more than anyone ever should. I find the characters as dim as a box of rocks, the pacing of the prose drags as if it were hauling a dead donkey on its back and the story duller than C-SPAN discussing economics. This hardly the sort of book I would inflict upon the

Comments

[lady_fellshot]

We need more teachers willing to make the effort to make their courses interesting in general (history springs immediately to mind). :D Skip the standardized test and organize a period dance instead, using Jane Austen as an inspiration maybe?

[suitetwentytwo]

Period dance yes. I'm not in school anymore, but i would go back for that. And I could wear my reinactment dress!

[nightshade_7976]

I don't know...I was reading the classics and loving most of them by the 4th and 5th grade. While, I agree, Jane Austin's writing leaves something to be desired, I've always loved her stories. I read Lord of the Flies in Jr. High and again in high school and loved it. I adored Jane Eyre and Ethan Frome. Loved Shakespeare, and so on. It's actually most of the contemporary stuff out today that makes me want to stop reading...There are quite a few "authors" that make me wonder how bad off the publisher had to be to even stoop so low as to publish the work sent to them. Don't get me wrong, there are some contemporary novels out there that I think are amazing, but anymore, they're few and far between. Quite a bit of the time, though, I think society is going downhill when the books that are popular become a phenomenon, and the books that deserve to be, aren't. I guess that's what opinions are for, though. :)

[silverflight8]

Let's face it, the average reader does not get inspired by things that are boring or dull or so dense that they can't understand it.
-Hi. Thank you for speaking for everyone on the planet.

Give me swords, magic, spaceships and strange happenings!-Then don't go and read these kinds of fiction. It's not like what you want are difficult to find: often they are clearly labelled, have their own section (fantasy, sci-fi), and frequently have covers that are easily recognizable

[silverflight8]

Oops, that should say "authorial intent are pretty much unknowable to the reader".

[lady_fellshot]

And so I did speak for myself. Austen was a primary example not the blanket, but then I try not to pretend I'm an impartial writer under any circumstances. I'm sure there was a classic you hated too. :)

As for finding fantasy, I've found Jules Verne and Edgar Allen Poe in four different sections before depending on what store I've stepped into at the moment, because the classification systems for the more fantasic and sepeculative fiction can jump all over the place.

Besides one has to point out that "authorial intent" should be be pretty much irrelevant in anything except historical context. Especially if the author in question has been dead for a while. But that's just my opinion again.

[silverflight8]

...not gonna touch the first few sentences, but yes, there are classics I dislike also. (For instance, I cannot stand Jules Verne.)

It's always possible to guess at authorial intent (and I think oftentimes it's easy to do so) but you never know. Especially, yes, when you can't ask them anymore. ;)

[tatjna]

I dislike her descriptive prose, but I enjoy her dialogue. YMMV.

[silverflight8]

YMMV
This.

[kondo85]

This. I love reading her, but she's even better as a book on tape. :)

[niteflite]

That's how most women experienced books in those days anyways. One person would read aloud for a group while they all did piecework.

[obsessivelyfate]

This does make me wonder about what you think that the purpose of an English Class is?

As an English Teacher in training, a lot depends, but I don't think I'd have much time to do books to try to get kids interested in the classics. Reading writing from the 1800's and struggling with it, while no fun (The Scarlet Letter for me) helps get them ready for college. Also, my junior year was about the American History of Literature, and we read authors that were milestones.

Not that I would teach Austen. I wouldn't. But there's more to picking a book to read in class then "Let's get kids interested in reading." More, they're going to read if they want to do well in the class.

[lady_fellshot]

This does make me wonder about what you think that the purpose of an English Class is?

My immediate answer to this is to get a high score on an arbitrary standardized test so that the district gets more money, but I've a feeling I'm getting carried away by cynicism. What do you think HS English is supposed to do?

Reading writing from the 1800's and struggling with it, while no fun (The Scarlet Letter for me) helps get them ready for college.The problem I have with that is more based off of personal experience, but I can't say that high school English helped me get through college. All I pulled from high school was how to write an essay. I also did better in classes with material that I liked overall than classes with reading lists I found dull, even if the theory being presented was applicable to both

[obsessivelyfate]

Teach how to use proper grammar and spelling, write a paper, and comprehend reading, I think are the main things.

To be blunt, English is going to be more useful for some then other, as some people will read and write more in college then others. I would say it's important just for reading textbooks, which can be difficult texts, and my main concern would be making sure they're prepared for those. Although, one would hope it'd be a priority in the sense that they don't want to flunk and hurt their gpa. ^_^; Still, some kids aren't going to care, and may not be able to be made to care.

If it helps, my high school had a prep for college curriculum, which forms some of my views.