What books were you made to read at school?

[psikeyhackr]

@biodroid : I wouldn’t inflict King Lear on anyone that didn’t have the option to give it up if they wanted to…

Maybe King Lear can repel aliens.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I've never understood the persistence with education boards having Shakespeare for study in secondary schools. Perhaps it's in part because they feel they have to , or the possible fallout of them removing him from the curriculum.

Shakespeare is like the Bible - I am not religious and think it's the most appalling book but understanding so much of modern literature is based in both that it's a hole in our education if we haven't read or studied the Bible and Shakespeare. Shakespeare is really good at building characters and settings, and it is written in modern/Tudor English. Yes it can be a bit difficult to grasp but it's not impossible.

My history lecturers back in the 90s would say that so much time was taken up early on in the degree teaching the Bible and other classical texts which in previous generations would have been common knowledge. Not having a basic knowledge can even hamper subjects like medicine.

I do think that Robert Burns is better at still being relevant to everyday life in 2022 but he didn't have to worry about having his head chopped off for writing his poetry.

 

[hitmouse]

I recently went through The Merchant of Venice with my 15 year old, who is studying it for his GCSE English. I had forgotten just how clever and rewarding it is, having read it myself at a similar age in the early 80s. It is a brilliant example of depths revealing themselves through careful reading and discussion, understanding characterisation, human foible and moral dilemma. He was initially doubtful, but really buzzing by the end.
Shakespeare is the dog's bollocks.
The idea that "old stuff" like Shakespeare, Austen, Elliott, Dickens, Burns, or some of the more allusive poets should be avoided, because they are a bit challenging, or possibly irrelevant (good lit is rarely irrelevant), underestimates the intelligence of our children.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Shakespeare is the dog's bollocks.

'Tis not so deep as a well nor so wide as a church door but 'tis enough.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

But education and breadth is always something that you can best acquire on your own.

Right! So this is the whole point, isn't it? The aim of education should be to provide the basics of literacy and numeracy while inspiring the student to be inquisitive, to love learning and to seek knowledge.

For example, with tens of thousands of great books out there waiting to be read, how many can we realistically study in school? A dozen or so? The aim should be to develop a love of reading and an appreciation for literature. It is exactly the same with, say, the study of history. You can't cover it all at school - there's just too much of it! In my case, we studied the French Revolution. As well as learning the facts and timelines, we looked at the techniques of historical research. My point being; the specific time period and location is less important than fostering an interest in history and an understanding of the methodology behind its study. If the education system is successful, we will go on to take an interest in the world around us (science, literature, history, art) and become well-rounded, intelligent and engaged individuals.

When I think of everything I now know about the world, I estimate that perhaps 3% of that knowledge and understanding was directly acquired at school. The rest came elsewhere as a result of my curiosity. That's not to say formal education isn't important; it's vital! But the most valuable thing it teaches is to be curious and seek knowledge independently.

I don't think parents who are constantly complaining about teachers and the curriculum quite understand this.

 

[williamjm]

I am realising I got to read some really great books as well. I've just had to reread Sunset Song (for Scots it's like doing Shakespeare or Burns) for university and it was so much better. I enjoyed it as a teenager but this time round the humour really jibed which made it a lot miserable.

I missed this thread before. I also went to school in Scotland and Sunset Song is one of the main novels we studied. I remember we watched the TV adaptation as well which I suspect might have been an attempt to help out those who didn't like reading that much.

Other books I remember doing in class:
The Hobbit
The Guardians by John Christopher (I saw another post on dystopias being popular in school reading and this is another one)
Children of the Dust by Louise Lawrence (the early chapters about a nuclear war were particularly memorable)
Romeo and Juliet
Bold Girls (a play set during the troubles in Northern Ireland)
The Burston School Strike (a play)
Consider the Lilies by Iain Crichton Smith

There were also some SF short stories including Harrison Bergeron and A Sound of Thunder.

Poets included:
Robert Burns (compulsory in Scotland)
The 'world's worst poet', William McGonnagal's inimitable The Tay Bridge Disaster. The Tay Bridge Disaster by William McGonagall - Scottish Poetry Library
Philip Larkin
Rupert Brooke
Wilfred Owen

 

[PadreTX]

Of Mice and Men
Grapes of Wrath
East of Eden-by this point in my junior year of high school, I hated John Steinbeck
Call of the Wild
Shane*
Alive
Brothers Karamazov-pain
Hamlet*
Catcher in the Rye
Guns of Navarone*
Others I forgot-that was in another millennium

College
Iliad*-I picked Ancient Greek Literature

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Of Mice and Men
Grapes of Wrath
East of Eden-by this point in my junior year of high school, I hated John Steinbeck
Call of the Wild
Shane*
Alive
Brothers Karamazov-pain
Hamlet*
Catcher in the Rye
Guns of Navarone*
Others I forgot-that was in another millennium

College
Iliad*-I picked Ancient Greek Literature

Shane is a great novel.

 

[KGeo777]

I read Of Mice and Men too.
I forgot about that one.

If you speak English you should have a little Shakespeare knowledge.
To be or not to be.


In college before dropping out I took a course on the Bible (so boring) and Epic Poetry and Classical Literature of the Greeks and Romans--those courses were great.
We read the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Aeneid, the Golden Ass, the Satyricon, Works and Days, and I think a couple of plays.

 

[LostCosmonaut]

Right! So this is the whole point, isn't it? The aim of education should be to provide the basics of literacy and numeracy while inspiring the student to be inquisitive, to love learning and to seek knowledge.

For example, with tens of thousands of great books out there waiting to be read, how many can we realistically study in school? A dozen or so? The aim should be to develop a love of reading and an appreciation for literature. It is exactly the same with, say, the study of history. You can't cover it all at school - there's just too much of it! In my case, we studied the French Revolution. As well as learning the facts and timelines, we looked at the techniques of historical research. My point being; the specific time period and location is less important than fostering an interest in history and an understanding of the methodology behind its study. If the education system is successful, we will go on to take an interest in the world around us (science, literature, history, art) and become well-rounded, intelligent and engaged individuals.

When I think of everything I now know about the world, I estimate that perhaps 3% of that knowledge and understanding was directly acquired at school. The rest came elsewhere as a result of my curiosity. That's not to say formal education isn't important; it's vital! But the most valuable thing it teaches is to be curious and seek knowledge independently.

I don't think parents who are constantly complaining about teachers and the curriculum quite understand this.

Really like your point here! Granted, inspiring lifelong learners is easier said than done---some kids are going to go off to the real world and never pick up a book again, no matter what you do---but it's independent curiosity that does most of the legwork, not curricula.

When I was in fourth grade, I went to a really tiny private school where the history teacher was empowered to do pretty much whatever he wanted. So, at an age when my peers in the public school system were suffering through the widely hated Oregon Trail unit, my teacher was zipping around through some of history's wackiest characters, from William the Conqueror to Vlad the Impaler to Lawrence of Arabia. There was no rhyme or reason to it, as far as I can remember. At the end of that year, I had nothing resembling a comprehensive understanding of any of those events, but who cared? It was fourth grade. The most important thing was that I was absolutely jazzed up about history, and I spent fifth and sixth grade doing a lot of reading.

As for my English classes, I do feel that the content mattered relatively more. Ever since I learned to read, I was consistently reading outside of school, but my middle- and high-school curriculum did a great job of exposing me to things I never would have touched in a million years. Shakespeare, for instance. Or One Hundred Years of Solitude, which has perhaps my favorite opening line of all time. Even some books I disliked---looking at you, Catcher in the Rye---still expanded my horizons.

 

[Orcadian]

Shane is a great novel.

And my father's favourite Western. I never could understand why, as the film seems very simplistic. But if the book is deeper, that might explain it.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

And my father's favourite Western. I never could understand why, as the film seems very simplistic. But if the book is deeper, that might explain it.

I think the movie does a pretty good job. And the book is a literary classic. The other day we were discussing show-don't-tell and I didn't think of Shane at that point but it is a fantastic example. The sexual tension between the gunfighter and the farmer's wife is a key theme of the book, but nowhere is it explicitly described. It just somehow oozes out of the pages. Shane was really the book that launched a thousand great westerns. It created the meme of the gunfighter who tries to hang up his guns but gets forced, by events outside his control, to take them up again. Pale Rider, for example, was a direct copy.

 

[Orcadian]

Interesting, Christine Wheelwright. Westerns are like science fiction (and several other genres) in the sense that the best examples contain some fabulous writing but are almost totally dismissed by those that like to define 'literature'. I want to start a Topic about this - but have to check that it hasn't already been discussed.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Interesting, Christine Wheelwright. Westerns are like science fiction (and several other genres) in the sense that the best examples contain some fabulous writing but are almost totally dismissed by those that like to define 'literature'. I want to start a Topic about this - but have to check that it hasn't already been discussed.

It could be an interesting topic. Most genres have their masterpieces floating in a sea of pulp. Jack Schaefer's westerns. Raymond Chandler's crime novels. Tolkien's fantasy? Could be quite a debate.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I recently went through The Merchant of Venice with my 15 year old, who is studying it for his GCSE English. I had forgotten just how clever and rewarding it is, having read it myself at a similar age in the early 80s. It is a brilliant example of depths revealing themselves through careful reading and discussion, understanding characterisation, human foible and moral dilemma. He was initially doubtful, but really buzzing by the end.
Shakespeare is the dog's bollocks.
The idea that "old stuff" like Shakespeare, Austen, Elliott, Dickens, Burns, or some of the more allusive poets should be avoided, because they are a bit challenging, or possibly irrelevant (good lit is rarely irrelevant), underestimates the intelligence of our children.

I definitely don't think they should be avoided, but they need to be taught in the right way.

The problem is that in secondary education (or certainly was in my day) that it's difficult to devote any meaningful amount of time to one topic in any subject. In English, it's obviously important that children can leave school with the ability to read and write to a certain degree; if they can gain interest in classical literature or poetry, to the extent that they go on to further study it at college or university, or simply find joy in reading or going to the theatre, then that is a bonus.

I'm not sure that secondary education has the ability to devote the time needed to come to appreciate and enjoy classical literature such as Dickens or Shakespeare. The danger with a cursory knowledge is that the student won't ever want to go near it again after leaving school, and this does often seem to be the case.

With a knowledge of the time in which it was written, of the meaning of the words spoken and an understanding of the poetical rhythm of the writing, there is a beauty to Shakespeare that is unequalled in literature (in my opinion). With little or no background knowledge, many parts of the plays are incomprehensible when read like a book.

 

[Elentarri]

In primary school we read The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton (the class hated the ending), Animal Farm by George Orwell (I don't like talking animals and I hadn't discovered telepathic white spirit horses yet) and Across the Barricades by Joan Lingard. I remember Across the Barricades because I thought the all out war between Catholic and Protestant was ridiculous. After all, my dad is Catholic and my mom Protestant/Lutheran and they manage to get on just fine with each other and each other's in-laws without killing each other. I can't remember anything else we read in primary school.

In high school, we had to dissect the following (that I remember):
Mcbeth - Shakespeare (not too bad, short and easy to write about)
Romeo & Juliet - Shakespeare (I loathe romances!)
Much Ado About Nothing - Shakespeare (I like this one)
A Tale of Two Cities - Charles Dickens (another romance - bleh!)
Kringe in 's Bos - Dalene Matthee (aka Circles in a Forest; read for Afrikaans language classes - pretty good book, it had an elephant as a semi-main character)
Of Mice and Men - John Steinbeck
The Crucible - Arthur Miller (a play)
Lord of the Flies - William Golding (was disappointed that Beelzebub did not make a personal demonic appearance with the traditional goats horns and hooves!)
I'm missing a few. There were also some short stories and poetry anthologies and that sort of thing. Spectacularly unmemorable.

I know my much younger foster brother did Good Night Mr Tom by Michelle Magorian. He asked for help with homework based on the book so I read it. There was also a lot of bitching about Othello, so I got him some random DVD version of Othello from the library. Then there was bitching because the movie was different from the book, so I suppose he managed to absorb some of it via text.

 

[chongjasmine]

Macbeth
Crucible
Charlie at the chocolate factory

Most of my classmates hate literature lessons, but I simply adore them. Anything to read that is fiction is a worthwhile experience for me rather than reading boring textbooks.
I love literature, and that instills in me a love for reading over playing games and watching tv series, which is still here, to this day.

 

[Bramandin]

I can't remember the one, it was about two boys wandering around during the Great Depression.

I took study hall in the classroom where they were doing Lord of the Flies.

I think To Kill a Mockingbird might have been one.

Even the books where you go on the computer and get points were not to my tastes.

 

[Le Panda du Mal]

Context can make a huge difference. I've revisited a lot of books I hated in high school and found out I love them. For example, Heart of Darkness and Paradise Lost. There are other books that everyone moaned about but which I loved from the beginning. For instance, I don't trust anyone who doesn't find Moby Dick an absolute delight.

 

[Astro Pen]

Context can make a huge difference. I've revisited a lot of books I hated in high school and found out I love them. For example, Heart of Darkness and Paradise Lost. There are other books that everyone moaned about but which I loved from the beginning. For instance, I don't trust anyone who doesn't find Moby Dick an absolute delight.

In 1968 the BBC did a broadcast of Leviathan 99 Bradbury's rewrite of Moby Dick in space
It's here if you have a spare hour and like 60's BBC sound effects (and received pronunciation)