Summer Reading - Ruining My Education.

[Terry576]

I like reading. A lot. It's one of my favorite activities actually, and I think summer reading is a great way to introduce books to kids.

However this?

This is not cool.


http://i.imgur.com/sxbEA.jpg


Note the grade. Note it immediately, because this is my summer reading book. This is what I am going to be reading over the summer, and discussing in class next year.

I am not insulting the book - no, far from it, I think it's rather good, with decent plot and characterization. However, it is not a book for twelfth grade students; the book is designed for middle-schoolers, specifically seventh graders.

I am not very amused by this, as you might be able to tell.

[CoffeeIncluded]

Jeez, where do you go to school?

[Terry576]

California. That place with the terrible school system and all.

Still doesn't justify this though.

[Mauve Shirt]

Lol, having enjoyed the movie but never read the book, and being 23, I'd still read it. For school though? It's not challenging enough.

[fergo]

From what I've seen, most people your age (eh, most people my age, only a couple of years older) just don't read. Full stop.

So, yeah. If they want to get students interested in reading, it needs to be something really easy.

It always depressed me how often in English class someone would say something along the lines of, 'Oh, I only read magazines'. Which means the last time they read for fun was probably, I don't know, primary school or something :smallyuk:.

[LaZodiac]

Because clearly we should be reading Gravity's Rainbow in grade 12/absolutely no sarcasm and is serious

[arguskos]

...man, I read Anna Karenina in a week earlier this semester. God damn I love college. I mean, I despise Russian literature (mostly Tolstoy and Dostoevsky), but seriously, that they want us to read real books makes me happy inside. Sir, I feel your suffering. As a professional reader (English major, seriously, it's all we do other than write papers), I stand with you in your plight).

[Rallicus]

So, yeah. If they want to get students interested in reading, it needs to be something really easy.

Maybe children, but definitely not seniors in high school.

The most important factor to keep students interested in reading is... well,having a good story. Of course they have to be able to comprehend it, but at that age having something that is "really easy" to read is almost an insult to their intelligence.

[AsteriskAmp]

Because clearly we should be reading Gravity's Rainbow in grade 12/absolutely no sarcasm and is serious
For personal reasons yes, forcing students to do so, I digress. The reason one approaches a book is crucial in relation to both how one will read it or enjoy it. Course literature is read with a different purpose and mentality than what one wilfully reads, and the kinds of enjoyment are also different.

Maybe children, but definitely not seniors in high school.

The most important factor to keep students interested in reading is... well,having a good story. Of course they have to be able to comprehend it, but at that age having something that is "really easy" to read is almost an insult to their intelligence.
Or perhaps what they are looking for is for the story to be easy so as to intend devote themselves to the development of themes and draw relations in regards to them. It's better to start simple, you can't start analysing themes, allegory, parallelisms, inspirations unless the plot is clear in the head of the students, a simple book allows that.


From what I've seen, most people your age (eh, most people my age, only a couple of years older) just don't read. Full stop.

So, yeah. If they want to get students interested in reading, it needs to be something really easy.

It always depressed me how often in English class someone would say something along the lines of, 'Oh, I only read magazines'. Which means the last time they read for fun was probably, I don't know, primary school or something :smallyuk:.
Having done tutoring to people on my own grade all through high school on literature gave me a different perspective than merely of an student. The first one is that people don't want to read if there are other options, plainly as that. Most would love certain books, but will never approach them because they have enough literary load with what school gives.

The second part is that there is a need for a hook, for my year it was Chanson du Roland (it also helped that I refused to help anyone with that one). The book simply pinged right and people actually got excited about it and during the reading, commenting on determined events and heck, some researching the historical situation with the most solid opposer of literature classes actually getting into the context and spending a whole class debating with the teacher about the implications of a chapter. Sometimes the hook has to be a plot simple book so that the focus can go elsewhere.

[AtlanteanTroll]

I'll gladly trade. I'm reading A Confederacy of Dunces, American Tabloid, and some other third book for AP English and Literature. And probably The Yiddish Policemen's Union. I also have to watch L.A. Confidential. Also whatever else I have to do for AP European History and Macroeconomics.

[Drolyt]

I like reading. A lot. It's one of my favorite activities actually, and I think summer reading is a great way to introduce books to kids.

However this?

This is not cool.


http://i.imgur.com/sxbEA.jpg


Note the grade. Note it immediately, because this is my summer reading book. This is what I am going to be reading over the summer, and discussing in class next year.

I am not insulting the book - no, far from it, I think it's rather good, with decent plot and characterization. However, it is not a book for twelfth grade students; the book is designed for middle-schoolers, specifically seventh graders.

I am not very amused by this, as you might be able to tell.
I don't blame you, that is definitely not 12th grade material at all. Not that the book is bad (although the movie is far better), but come on. I can't remember what I had to read for 12th grade, which was AP Literature for me, except I think one of them was the Great Gatsby (loved that book). I know we studied Paradise Lost too, but that wasn't summer reading. What else do you have to read?

[AtlanteanTroll]

I don't blame you, that is definitely not 12th grade material at all. Not that the book is bad (although the movie is far better), but come on. I can't remember what I had to read for 12th grade, which was AP Literature for me, except I think one of them was the Great Gatsby (loved that book). I know we studied Paradise Lost too, but that wasn't summer reading. What else do you have to read?

I'd just like to drop in here and say that I read The Great Gatsby for AP Language and that if the OP is reading The Hunger Games he probably isn't taking an AP class (I hope so, anyway. System fail if so.) and wouldn't have a reason to have any other summer course work.

[Righteous Doggy]

Its better than some of the thigns I was told about summer reading. I had one class give me a list of things not to read becuase we might read it next year and that would ruin it... I already read many of the books on the list too.

I rather disliked that series myself. I always wished they'd give you a few choices about what to read in class or over the summer at least to give some variety. Maybe give people a chance to read what they want rather than something they might not like, pushing them away from reading or succeeding in the class...

[Katana_Geldar]

I've also heard of Twilight being a set text in US schools, but I think this was in Georgia.

[Drolyt]

I'd just like to drop in here and say that I read The Great Gatsby for AP Language and that if the OP is reading The Hunger Games he probably isn't taking an AP class (I hope so, anyway. System fail if so.) and wouldn't have a reason to have any other summer course work.
Hmm, you think it is just the one book? I had to do five. I think one of them might have been My Antonia, but that might have been a different year. But even if this is just an ordinary class, no honors or AP, I don't see any excuse for reading the Hunger Games. If the student body at that school is such that a book like The Great Gatsby would be too advanced there are other options. There is such a thing as a good, easy to read popular novel that is also respected, maybe Dune or Ender's Game?

[Qaera]

Ender's Game was the novel for a dual enroll class. The professor got fired for being incompetent. Meanwhile, my AP class was reading Anna Karenina, Heart of Darkness, Silas Marner, Jane Eyre, Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, Joyce, O'Connor, Dunne, etc. The other AP class had a teacher that never graded any papers (completion grades basically). You could tell which students had which teachers at the AP test (my class was calm mostly, and dressed up for a Quidditch match, other class was sweating bullets).
If you're taking an English class that sets you up with The Hunger Games and not deeper literature, take it upon yourself to be well-read. It's not hard, it's enjoyable, it makes you smarter. A teacher could pull a lesson out of Battle Royale, I mean Hunger Games. It will be very straightforward: government, nature, freedom fighting, betrayal, illusion vs reality.

Impress your teacher; read 1984 alongside HG. You'll notice similarities and be more challenged, if you like that sort of thing.

~ ♅

[AtlanteanTroll]

Hmm, you think it is just the one book? I had to do five. I think one of them might have been My Antonia, but that might have been a different year. But even if this is just an ordinary class, no honors or AP, I don't see any excuse for reading the Hunger Games. If the student body at that school is such that a book like The Great Gatsby would be too advanced there are other options. There is such a thing as a good, easy to read popular novel that is also respected, maybe Dune or Ender's Game?

I was just saying for a regular class (not AP or honors) summer work is sort of out of the norm. Or it has been in my experience. Not that I am the be all end all by any means.

I'm in the AP track (I'd probably made that clear by now), but I know that the regular English 12 at my school reads both Frankenstein and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in class. I envy them. I read both of those for fun the summer between my sophomore and junior year. Both are fun reads and are ... I don't know ... Actual literary works? Well, HG2 may not be, but it's still a good book.

(Not sure what my point was with that last bit.)

[Grue Bait]

...This is flat-out ridiculous. What kind of school assigns pre-teen brain candy for summer reading? In my school, I get actual literature to read. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the books, but not for these purposes. I've had to read Animal Farm, Romeo and Juliet, Frankenstein, Slaughterhouse-5, Heart of Darkness, The Chosen, Julius Caesar, and a couple others for English class. I'm very sorry for you.

On the plus side, this isn't all you can read. Read some other books along with this one. Draw parallels. Impress your teacher. Don't let the education system screw you over because that'd be a waste of your intellect. Maybe you'll even get lucky and get to discuss this with people like you, or at the very least, make them think about the book in a different light.

[Terry576]

Thanks to my friend's mother being a writer, we're debating organizing a protest about it, because it's really just unacceptable levels of incompetence. I am planning on reading 1984, as well as Battle Royale, as those are books I'll actually enjoy and are appropriate reading material.

I don't care if you weren't like half the people I know and read Dune by the time you turned twelve - you should not read Hunger Games in a twelfth grade English course.

[Elemental]

I was lucky. They usually gave us a choice of books when I was in school.
Though, the play we had to study in grad eleven was pretty boring. Very outdated. None of the themes applied to modern Australia at all!
But then, I was in OP English in grades eleven and twelve, so we got all the good stuff.

[Drolyt]

I've also heard of Twilight being a set text in US schools, but I think this was in Georgia.
I... what? Surely you mistyped? Why would anyone think this was a good idea?

Ender's Game was the novel for a dual enroll class. The professor got fired for being incompetent.
Are those two related? I don't see how they could be, Ender's Game is pretty common in college courses, see this (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/literature/21l-002-foundations-of-western-culture-ii-fall-2002/readings/) course at MIT.

Heart of Darkness
Hey, I'm pretty sure that was one of the ones I had to read.

I was just saying for a regular class (not AP or honors) summer work is sort of out of the norm. Or it has been in my experience. Not that I am the be all end all by any means.
Oh. Maybe. I always got summer work, but I was in a college prep (I guess that's what you'd call it) program.

I'm in the AP track (I'd probably made that clear by now), but I know that the regular English 12 at my school reads both Frankenstein and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in class. I envy them. I read both of those for fun the summer between my sophomore and junior year. Both are fun reads and are ... I don't know ... Actual literary works? Well, HG2 may not be, but it's still a good book.

(Not sure what my point was with that last bit.)
Frankenstein is another good one, pretty easy to read, often taught in college. Not sure about Hitchhiker's, it is a great series, certainly, but I'm not sure what kind of mileage you could get out of it in discussion.

To the OP: If you want to read some real literature over the summer I can offer some suggestions. Frankenstein is really good, completely different from modern adaptations. Feminist critics like it for some reason, although I've always felt they were reaching. Regardless it is the type of book that can really get you thinking while still being quite enjoyable. A lot of literary types recommend getting the 1st edition, but it probably doesn't matter as much. 1984 is really good for the same reason, you won't be bored reading it and it gives you a lot to think about. Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead are good examples of relatively popular genre novels that are nonetheless well respected by academics. Oh, did I mention I loved the Great Gatsby, I would definitely recommend that one. Finally, watch a play by Shakespeare. Notice I didn't say read, go to a production or get a video copy of an actual play. Let's see, here's (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/episodes/hamlet/watch-the-film/980/) a production of Hamlet with the Tenth Doctor as Hamlet and Captain Picard as the Ghost. You might also want to check out The Reduced Shakespeare Company.
Edit: I also found King Lear (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/episodes/king-lear/watch-the-play/487/) with Gandalf/Magneto and Macbeth (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/episodes/macbeth/watch-the-full-program/1030/) with Captain Picard. Now I have to watch all of those.

[Ceric]

I laughed when I saw the title, but I think there's a good chance the class won't be as bad as this seems. It's probably light summer reading so the students who don't like reading start off with something easy to analyze, before you get to more famous literature.

[Drolyt]

I laughed when I saw the title, but I think there's a good chance the class won't be as bad as this seems. It's probably light summer reading so the students who don't like reading start off with something easy to analyze, before you get to more famous literature.
I think you are being overly optimistic. I mean, I can see how that would work, Hunger Games is a pretty easy read and could lead to some nice discussion, but at least when I was in high school the point of summer reading was to get the reading done before class because the pace of your average high school reader is far too sluggish to get anything done otherwise. If the expectations are such that it should take a whole summer to read a young adult novel there is no way in hell that class is doing anything remotely difficult like Paradise Lost or A Tale of Two Cities.

[ChaosLord29]

Lol, having enjoyed the movie but never read the book, and being 23, I'd still read it. For school though? It's not challenging enough.

Agreed, this is something you could knock out in a week at the most. The plot and characters of the book are elegantly simple, everything they need to be but nothing one would expect of advanced literature.

It'd be a great book for freshman, especially as a replacement for Lord of the Flies, considering the excellent use of thematic imagery and symbolism (fire, mockingjays, flight, etc.)

[Ceric]

They also have the entire summer to think of 10 controversial and unique questions. But I'll defer to the rest of your post.

[Qaera]

Are those two related? I don't see how they could be, Ender's Game is pretty common in college courses, see this (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/literature/21l-002-foundations-of-western-culture-ii-fall-2002/readings/) course at MIT.


Well, just from reading that URL I can tell they went more in-depth than the dual enroll professor. He taught it (to seniors in high school) as a story, and not looking into the characters, symbols, etc. On the AP test, it always says "avoid mere plot summary" which is basically all he taught. I was speaking from the point of view of someone who read it in middle school for enjoyment, which was how the professor taught it. More a rant on the professor than the book.

~ ♅

[Knaight]

I think you are being overly optimistic. I mean, I can see how that would work, Hunger Games is a pretty easy read and could lead to some nice discussion, but at least when I was in high school the point of summer reading was to get the reading done before class because the pace of your average high school reader is far too sluggish to get anything done otherwise. If the expectations are such that it should take a whole summer to read a young adult novel there is no way in hell that class is doing anything remotely difficult like Paradise Lost or A Tale of Two Cities.

It being assigned over the summer doesn't mean it is supposed to take the whole summer. It's understood that it doesn't take the whole summer for what you've pegged as "remotely difficult". I'd agree that Hunger Games is likely an unreasonable assignment - particularly as there are better ways to break with the classics, starting with numerous recent authors who aren't canonized due to geography more than anything else (e.g. Chinua Achebe, Gabriel Garcia Marquez) - but it probably isn't supposed to take the whole summer.

[Drolyt]

It being assigned over the summer doesn't mean it is supposed to take the whole summer. It's understood that it doesn't take the whole summer for what you've pegged as "remotely difficult". I'd agree that Hunger Games is likely an unreasonable assignment - particularly as there are better ways to break with the classics, starting with numerous recent authors who aren't canonized due to geography more than anything else (e.g. Chinua Achebe, Gabriel Garcia Marquez) - but it probably isn't supposed to take the whole summer.
Of course assigned reading shouldn't take the whole summer, but my point is that the most difficult reading is usually assigned for summer precisely because you have way more time than you need. Think reading Paradise Lost during the course vs over the summer. There just isn't much time to cover a lot of novel-length works during the school year. Assigning something super easy like Hunger Games defeats the purpose.

[Katana_Geldar]

I... what? Surely you mistyped? Why would anyone think this was a good idea?


I wish I did. Apparently the teacher was a Twihard. The book has no literary value whatsoever.

And BTW, the idea of summer school or doing work for school over the summer sounds completely alien to me.

[Knaight]

Of course assigned reading shouldn't take the whole summer, but my point is that the most difficult reading is usually assigned for summer precisely because you have way more time than you need. Think reading Paradise Lost during the course vs over the summer. There just isn't much time to cover a lot of novel-length works during the school year. Assigning something super easy like Hunger Games defeats the purpose.

The summer is used for bulk as much as difficulty. It's a good way to get a bunch of books out of the way, while leaving the more complex literature for later in the year following the development of skills in class. However, if bulk isn't needed, then assigning something like the Hunger Games so as to transition gradually into more difficult works makes sense.

The problem being, that with the Hunger Games it makes sense in 7th grade or so.

[Drolyt]

The summer is used for bulk as much as difficulty. It's a good way to get a bunch of books out of the way, while leaving the more complex literature for later in the year following the development of skills in class. However, if bulk isn't needed, then assigning something like the Hunger Games so as to transition gradually into more difficult works makes sense.

The problem being, that with the Hunger Games it makes sense in 7th grade or so.
I don't think we really disagree about anything here.


I wish I did. Apparently the teacher was a Twihard. The book has no literary value whatsoever.

And BTW, the idea of summer school or doing work for school over the summer sounds completely alien to me.
At least at my school it was only in the honors classes that you did that. Also, for the most part I didn't like it, the only class I really see the point is English, I think it makes sense there. Maybe mathematics too, given those studies about much people forget over the summer.

[Whiffet]

Is this just for a specific class, or for everyone going into 12th grade? Just knowing "12th grade" isn't much, unless they're putting the students who have repeatedly proven themselves skilled at analysis in the same classes as the students who barely know how to read at all.

If that's just for a higher-level class, it's ridiculous. But if it's something everyone has to do, I can understand why they would pick it. Heck, I'd be pessimistic and wonder how many people will still fail to complete the assignment.

[Drolyt]

Heck, I'd be pessimistic and wonder how many people will still fail to complete the assignment.
Laziness is probably sufficient explanation. That and/or the strange cultural phenomenon whereby actually doing school work is considered "uncool". I highly doubt any student without an actual disability has ever failed such an assignment due to lack of ability.

[The Succubus]

English-set books have always been something of a bugbear of mine.

The books I had to read for my English GCSE were Pride and Prejudice, Romeo & Juliet, Twelvth Night & Pygmalion. Why in the name of Satan would anyone think a 14 year old boy would find those books even remotely engaging? What really grinds my gears is that exam boards wonder why girls do better than boys in English before setting Wuthering Heights as next year's course book. :smallsigh:

We could have done Animal Farm, 1984, The Crucible - a dozen books that would have been more interesting than the trash I had to read and people still think Pride & Prejudice is the very pinnicle of English literature, rather than the glorified Mills & Boon novel it actually is. :smallfurious:

It probably says nothing good about me that I would have Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas as my English coursebook. <3

[Elemental]

English-set books have always been something of a bugbear of mine.

The books I had to read for my English GCSE were Pride and Prejudice, Romeo & Juliet, Twelvth Night & Pygmalion. Why in the name of Satan would anyone think a 14 year old boy would find those books even remotely engaging? What really grinds my gears is that exam boards wonder why girls do better than boys in English before setting Wuthering Heights as next year's course book. :smallsigh:

We could have done Animal Farm, 1984, The Crucible - a dozen books that would have been more interesting than the trash I had to read and people still think Pride & Prejudice is the very pinnicle of English literature, rather than the glorified Mills & Boon novel it actually is. :smallfurious:

It probably says nothing good about me that I would have Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas as my English coursebook. <3

I didn't have to read anything like that until at least grade ten. The teachers at my school had some intelligence when setting the curriculum.
Though, I did enjoy Pride and Prejudice when I read it. But everyone told me to steer clear of Wuthering Heights.
Actually... I need to finish reading Pride and Prejudice... I never actually did.

[Blisstake]

Huh... I didn't even have to read any books in 11th or 12th grade. Those years were just essays non-stop. Really helped prepare for college, though.

[Lea Plath]

Well, it could be a lot worse. Hunger Games is a decent enough book, lots of symbolism, but you could be doing so much better.

A personally detest reading any Shakespear. Not because I dislike Shakespear, because I love it, but because just reading it, it falls flat. Good Shakespear needs actors to really understand it. Inflection, how you say something, etc can drastically change the meaning of something. For example, look at Romeo + Juliet the movie, then compare it to how they might do it in a play. Even if they modernised it, the inflections and how they say things will change the play drastically.

Lets see...over my time in school I've had to read Lord of the Flies (I had read it before, disliked it then and disliked it now), McBeth (see above), Romeo and Juliet (see above, however I did like looking in close detail at some of the language, especially when people misquote it), Great Gatsby (amazing, love it to pieces), Great Expectations (loved it) and One Flew Over the Cuckoos nest (loved that too).

[Drolyt]

English-set books have always been something of a bugbear of mine.

The books I had to read for my English GCSE were Pride and Prejudice, Romeo & Juliet, Twelvth Night & Pygmalion. Why in the name of Satan would anyone think a 14 year old boy would find those books even remotely engaging? What really grinds my gears is that exam boards wonder why girls do better than boys in English before setting Wuthering Heights as next year's course book. :smallsigh:

We could have done Animal Farm, 1984, The Crucible - a dozen books that would have been more interesting than the trash I had to read and people still think Pride & Prejudice is the very pinnicle of English literature, rather than the glorified Mills & Boon novel it actually is. :smallfurious:

It probably says nothing good about me that I would have Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas as my English coursebook. <3
I have to agree here, especially about Romeo and Juliet, I never understood why that was such a popular choice. I think a good introduction to Shakespeare would probably be A Midsummer Night's Dream, which is not only one of his greatest plays but as a comedy is very accessible. Other good ones for high school are probably Othello and The Merchant of Venice because of their applicability to modern social issues and The Tempest because it is awesome.

I didn't have to read anything like that until at least grade ten. The teachers at my school had some intelligence when setting the curriculum.
Though, I did enjoy Pride and Prejudice when I read it. But everyone told me to steer clear of Wuthering Heights.
Actually... I need to finish reading Pride and Prejudice... I never actually did.
I've never touched Pride and Prejudice. I suppose I plan to someday, but it isn't that high on my "must read" list. Though since I haven't read it yet, for all I know it is the greatest book ever.

Huh... I didn't even have to read any books in 11th or 12th grade. Those years were just essays non-stop. Really helped prepare for college, though.
This isn't terribly surprising, the English (or equivalent outside of the anglosphere) curriculum varies immensely, and at least in the United States isn't standardized. Some states have standards, but these usually only apply to public schools (I think in Britain these are called government schools?). If I might ask, where and when did you go to school, and what kind of school was it?

A personally detest reading any Shakespear. Not because I dislike Shakespear, because I love it, but because just reading it, it falls flat. Good Shakespear needs actors to really understand it. Inflection, how you say something, etc can drastically change the meaning of something. For example, look at Romeo + Juliet the movie, then compare it to how they might do it in a play. Even if they modernised it, the inflections and how they say things will change the play drastically.
Why do you spell Shakespeare without the e? I've never seen that before. Anyways, this is only true to an extent. My personal feeling is that when studying Shakespeare students should see the play, preferably live but recorded is fine, and/or a movie adaptation, in addition to reading the text. The reading part is necessary to actually analyze it in any detail. Also, some plays are hurt more than others by not seeing a performance. For example, A Comedy of Errors is absolutely hilarious live, but to read it is like reading the script of an episode of Seinfeld. It just doesn't work. By comparison Hamlet isn't so bad read.

[Lea Plath]

The shakespear thing was me derping >.<

[Knaight]

The books I had to read for my English GCSE were Pride and Prejudice, Romeo & Juliet, Twelvth Night & Pygmalion. Why in the name of Satan would anyone think a 14 year old boy would find those books even remotely engaging? What really grinds my gears is that exam boards wonder why girls do better than boys in English before setting Wuthering Heights as next year's course book. :smallsigh:

Two of these are Shakespeare, Twelfth Night is completely hilarious, and Pygmalion is quality. I'm more surprised that somebody wouldn't find them interesting - which doesn't matter much anyways, as they all are well suited to analysis and that takes priority over fun.

[Whiffet]

Ah, Romeo and Juliet. Why must it be taught everywhere?

We read it the very first year of high school. On the plus side, that meant they expected a bit less out of us than they did a few years later. We got to take our time. Our teacher let us read it out loud in class and do our own little mini-performance. It was kinda fun when a few of the boys were pretending to sword fight. Then the guy reading Mercutio's lines insisted on just lying down on the floor for the rest of the class period. :smallbiggrin:

Still the worst Shakespeare play we went over in those four years, though.

[Telonius]

I don't think that being assigned a book "below reading level" is necessarily a horrible thing. Assigning 12th-graders something like "The Little Prince" could work, for instance. A well-written children's book is a gold mine for theme analysis. Being assigned a badly-written book, regardless of reading level, is the bigger crime. (I haven't read The Hunger Games, so I can't speak to its quality).


The books I had to read for my English GCSE were Pride and Prejudice, Romeo & Juliet, Twelvth Night & Pygmalion. Why in the name of Satan would anyone think a 14 year old boy would find those books even remotely engaging?

I actually enjoyed Pygmalion. Agreed on the others.

[Ceric]

My cousin's fiancee is a high school literature teacher and he doesn't like Romeo and Juliet either, although I can't remember which Shakespeare he teaches instead.

[Katana_Geldar]

We did R & J and Macbeth in high school, I wish we'd done Hamlet as I think that's more accessible. In year 12 I studied Julius Caesar and we studied King Lear as a class.

And if you say Pride and Prejudice is a sappy romance you have missed the entire point of the novel, and maybe even of Jane Austen. Her novels are satires of romances and there's a lot of humour, particularly between Mr and Mrs Bennett and Mr Collins and Lady Catherine de Bough,

[Knaight]

And if you say Pride and Prejudice is a sappy romance you have missed the entire point of the novel, and maybe even of Jane Austen. Her novels are satires of romances and there's a lot of humour, particularly between Mr and Mrs Bennett and Mr Collins and Lady Catherine de Bough,
My longer post got eaten by the forum, so:
1) I agree regarding the point of Austen.
2) I'd also note that Austen is usually viewed as boring due to highschools favoring a New Criticism based analytical system, which Austen isn't particularly well suited to. If New Historicism is used instead, it gets far more interesting (the same applies to the more politicized systems, but I prefer to stay away from them on the forum).

[Drolyt]

We did R & J and Macbeth in high school, I wish we'd done Hamlet as I think that's more accessible. In year 12 I studied Julius Caesar and we studied King Lear as a class.

And if you say Pride and Prejudice is a sappy romance you have missed the entire point of the novel, and maybe even of Jane Austen. Her novels are satires of romances and there's a lot of humour, particularly between Mr and Mrs Bennett and Mr Collins and Lady Catherine de Bough,
I'm confused, when you say "you" studied Julius Caesar, is that separate from school, or were you given some form of choice on what works to read? Regardless I think the histories are overall a poor choice for required reading, I love them, but my experience is that most people find them boring compared to other options.

My longer post got eaten by the forum, so:
1) I agree regarding the point of Austen.
2) I'd also note that Austen is usually viewed as boring due to highschools favoring a New Criticism based analytical system, which Austen isn't particularly well suited to. If New Historicism is used instead, it gets far more interesting (the same applies to the more politicized systems, but I prefer to stay away from them on the forum).
You know, I've never really considered this before but I think you are right, high schools do favor an approach similar to New Criticism. Sometimes historical context is provided, but I don't recall ever having deep discussions about how circumstances influenced a work and how knowing those circumstances affects our understanding of the work, or really any sort of reader-response criticism either. Which is sad, because I think that is the most boring way to analyze a text.

[Blisstake]

This isn't terribly surprising, the English (or equivalent outside of the anglosphere) curriculum varies immensely, and at least in the United States isn't standardized. Some states have standards, but these usually only apply to public schools (I think in Britain these are called government schools?). If I might ask, where and when did you go to school, and what kind of school was it?

Michigan suburbs (30 minutes outside of Detroit) in a public school.

[Drolyt]

Michigan suburbs (30 minutes outside of Detroit) in a public school.
Odd, I went to school in Grand Rapids and my classes were heavily literature focused.

[Blisstake]

In 11th and 12th grade we had the choice between essay-focused classes, and literature-focused classes.

[Drolyt]

In 11th and 12th grade we had the choice between essay-focused classes, and literature-focused classes.
Oh. That makes sense then. Essay classes are probably good college prep, but I can't imagine ever choosing them myself.

[Katana_Geldar]

I'm confused, when you say "you" studied Julius Caesar, is that separate from school, or were you given some form of choice on what works to read? Regardless I think the histories are overall a poor choice for required reading, I love them, but my experience is that most people find them boring compared to other options.


One of my subjects in year 12 was English literature, I went to a school where we could choose all our own subjects. So I had that, CADD and Computer Science among other things in year 12.

My class studied King Lear as one of our chosen texts (we also had Dead White Males by Louis Nowra, Tess of the D'Urbervilles, the poems of Margaret Scott and Snow Falling on Cedars). And as a major piece of assessment we chose a text and wrote an essay on it negotiated with the teacher.

And FTR, neither Julius Caesar or King Lear are histories, they're tragedies. Julius Caesar is not very historical, and the play is really about Brutus, and King Lear is about a legendary British King that lived before King Arthur. The history plays are about the numbered English kings. And yes, you have a point about the histories, the tragedies and comedies have more substance to them.

The only Shakespeare I studied at university with Richard III, I don't mind it but I wanted more. All I got really other than English novels were modern authors and the like of Barthe, Foucault and Derrida :smallyuk:.

[Drolyt]

And FTR, neither Julius Caesar or King Lear are histories, they're tragedies. Julius Caesar is not very historical, and the play is really about Brutus, and King Lear is about a legendary British King that lived before King Arthur. The history plays are about the numbered English kings. And yes, you have a point about the histories, the tragedies and comedies have more substance to them.
Sorry, you are correct. To be clear I wasn't suggesting King Lear was a history, only Julius Caesar, and I wasn't really thinking in terms of the technical difference between history and tragedy so much as the historical context lost on modern readers. Most students, at least from what I've seen first hand and heard from other accounts, do not like Julius Caesar. As for the play being about Brutus, that is one interpretation. I prefer to think that there is no protagonist in the traditional sense. Certainly even if much of the play focuses on Brutus' inner struggle it is Caesar who drives the events, and we can't forget Mark Antony and Octavian, especially since we can consider Julius Caesar a sort of prequel to Antony and Cleopatra (or else we could say Antony and Cleopatra the sequel). Also I disagree that it isn't very historical, it takes several liberties yes but it follows Plutarch fairly closely.

[Katana_Geldar]

Brutus is the play's tragic hero, even if it is Caesar and later Antony and Octavian, that drive events. And his tragic flaw? His honour and naivete, particularly when the world is rapidly changing around him.

[Drolyt]

Brutus is the play's tragic hero, even if it is Caesar and later Antony and Octavian, that drive events. And his tragic flaw? His honour and naivete, particularly when the world is rapidly changing around him.
I agree, I'm just not sure we can say he is the protagonist/main character, which I maintain is a separate consideration from his status as a tragic hero. I would argue moreover that the play is focused just as much on matters of political philosophy and great events as on individual characters. In a sense all of the characters, even Caesar, are swept up in events that none of them fully control or even fully comprehend. This is related to the theory that the play reflects concerns at the time of its writing over the succession of the English crown. I think it may be fair to say that Brutus is the Focal Character, that is the character that receives the most attention, while Caesar is the Protagonist, the character around whom all events turn.

[Katana_Geldar]

And that even happens after Caesar dies.

[Raistlin1040]

Lots of snobbiness in this thread, wow. I don't even like the Hunger Games, but come on. Saying it's not suited to 12th graders is insulting to basically everyone who likes it. While I think there are better books out there, it's good for a summer reading. It's not hard to understand, but you still have to compose a few decent ideas and the discussion should be good because most people won't be confused.

In my 11th grade Honors English class, we read a lot of classic stuff (Gatsby, Scarlet Letter) as well as some pretty heavy stuff (Toni Morrison's Beloved, my reading group read Generation X). We even got into literary criticism by reading some D.H. Lawrence. However we didn't get Studies in Classic American Literature assigned for summer reading. Our summer reading book was Sherman Alexie's Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian, which I read when I was 13, and could have (had it existed) when I was 11. Obviously not an "Honors English" level book, but it was a good read, thematically appropriate to our early classes, and let everyone in the class get involved in our first class discussion without feeling like they didn't understand the material.

Would you rather read someone like Faulkner or Leslie Marmon Silko over the summer? If so, then read them too, but don't act like you are being deprived of some great educational opportunities because your teacher wants you and your classmates to read something fun that s/he thinks you'll like.

[Goosefeather]

The only Shakespeare I studied at university with Richard III, I don't mind it but I wanted more. All I got really other than English novels were modern authors and the like of Barthe, Foucault and Derrida :smallyuk:.

Oh god. Oh god, oh god, oh god. The first two I could just about bear most of the time, but Derrida makes me want to claw my own eyes out. :smalleek:

Shakespearewise, we did Midsummer Night's Dream around year 9, and Merchant of Venice at GCSE. I personally enjoyed both, though I can't say the same for much of my class (I still can't understand my school's persistent refusal to set English classes by ability, instead shoving a bunch of the weakest students, usually chavs with no desire to learn, into each and every class, where they then enormously slow things down for EVERYONE else).

[Drolyt]

Lots of snobbiness in this thread, wow. I don't even like the Hunger Games, but come on. Saying it's not suited to 12th graders is insulting to basically everyone who likes it.
And calling people snobs isn't insulting? Mind you, I do like the Hunger Games, although I prefer the movie, but I still don't see how it is good summer reading. Maybe if it was just one of several works it would be okay, but the fact is it isn't deep or difficult enough for a high school senior. That isn't saying the book is bad, I wouldn't think the Discworld or Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series appropriate for a high school senior either and those are some of my favorite books. Even besides that one of the goals of a literature program is to expose students to those works that helped to define our culture, giving the student a greater insight into the world we live in. Hunger Games completely fails in that regard.

[Knaight]

You know, I've never really considered this before but I think you are right, high schools do favor an approach similar to New Criticism. Sometimes historical context is provided, but I don't recall ever having deep discussions about how circumstances influenced a work and how knowing those circumstances affects our understanding of the work, or really any sort of reader-response criticism either. Which is sad, because I think that is the most boring way to analyze a text.

I'd agree with you regarding New Criticism being basically terrible. I'm pretty sure I've put up more than one several thousand word screed on it before when it has come up in the forums, so I'm not going to go further than that here, except to say this: Die New Criticism, Die!


Lots of snobbiness in this thread, wow. I don't even like the Hunger Games, but come on. Saying it's not suited to 12th graders is insulting to basically everyone who likes it. While I think there are better books out there, it's good for a summer reading. It's not hard to understand, but you still have to compose a few decent ideas and the discussion should be good because most people won't be confused.

Nobody said it wasn't suited to 12th graders. People said it wasn't suited to assigned reading for a 12th grade class. These are drastically different statements. The first is snobbery - sadly it's common snobbery, given the recent national publication that came down to "I read adult fiction, why don't you" replete with comments like "I'd rather be caught in public reading pornography than YA", and the reaction to it. The second is refraining from undermining education.

[Terry576]

[QUOTE=Raistlin1040;13242245]In my 11th grade Honors English class, we read a lot of classic stuff (Gatsby, Scarlet Letter) as well as some pretty heavy stuff (Toni Morrison's Beloved, my reading group read Generation X). We even got into literary criticism by reading some D.H. Lawrence. However we didn't get Studies in Classic American Literature assigned for summer reading. Our summer reading book was Sherman Alexie's Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian, which I read when I was 13, and could have (had it existed) when I was 11. Obviously not an "Honors English" level book, but it was a good read, thematically appropriate to our early classes, and let everyone in the class get involved in our first class discussion without feeling like they didn't understand the material./QUOTE]

I moved from AP to regular, because next year I have one of those "Oh, you have an A for the entire year of English? Too bad, here's an 8-Month Project, which, if you fail it, you fail your Senior Year!"

We read:


Jane Eyre
The Wide Sargasso Sea
Great Gatsby
Namesake
Sula
Pygmalion
Various Short Stories
Shakespearean Poems
Ect.


Normal English read:


The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian
Crucible
To Kill A Mockingbird
The Things They Carried


Bolded text indicates Required Summer Reading.

Yes, people had to read much less in regular English. However, that book is a High-School level novel. It was designed to be read and analyzed by High School students.

Hunger Games is like Harry Potter 1-3, in a way. While they are all great books, enjoyed by many people, they are designed for people between the ages of ten and thirteen. That is who is supposed to analyze them - not seventeen year olds.

My desperate attempts to avoid reading it because I did not want to is completely unrelated to this topic.

[Raistlin1040]

Re: Absolutely True Diary

"Reading level: Ages 12 and up"-Amazon
"Level: Middle School [Ages 12-14]"-k12reader.com
"Parents Seek To Have 'The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian' Banned From 9th Grade Reading List"-Chicago Tribune
"Reading Level Grade 3.4"-Bookwizard.scholastic.com

It should be noted that in addition to reading it for 11th grade Honors English, I also read it for 8th grade Social Studies.

One could make the argument that it's "unsuited" for young teenagers because it has a lot of swearing and is a little sexually explicit, but one could make the same argument with The Hunger Games, replacing "a little sexually explicit" with "graphic, underage violence".

[Terry576]

The novel is supposed to introduce us to government.

We could have read 1984, Brave New World, 1Q84, or Battle Royale. All of which are twelfth grade level.

[Raistlin1040]

1Q84 is over 1000 pages and is one of Murakami's weaker books in my opinion. Not good summer reading. Battle Royale is an excellent novel, but the actual "government" elements are vague and undefined. 1984 and Brave New World would have been better choices, I agree, but I think you're getting too hung up on the actual *book* and not the ideas behind it.

One class could read Hunger Games, one could read 1984, one could read Brave New World, and one could read A Clockwork Orange, and you could put all four classes together and have a strong, coherant discussion. If the purpose is to get you to think critically about the role of government and how it can become too powerful and turn tyrannical, all of those books will give you the same basic themes. You could have a good discussion about the ideas without delving too much into the plot. "Is the Capital justified?" is a stupid question with an obvious answer. No, they aren't. "What stops people from standing up to the Capital?" however, is a good question and starts a good discussion. "What stops people from standing up to Big Brother" is also a good question and would yield a similar discussion.

If you wanted to read things like Brave New World, I think you should go to your school and request to transfer into AP English (or whatever equivalent class) you have, if you're really that concerned about the content. My school also has an 8-month long "pass it or don't graduate" project and I'm taking a College English class. Regular English is reading things like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead and Hamlet. We are reading authors like Faulkner and Silko. Such is life.

If you are ACTUALLY concerned that you are going to miss out on an educational opportunity, then take AP and work harder to make sure you stay on top of your project and your classwork, but if you just want to complain about having a teacher who wants to connect with your class by reading something fun over the summer, then pat yourself on the back for being so advanced and knowing better than your teacher.

[Moff Chumley]

Let's put things in perspective: Hunger Games shouldn't take you more than two sittings to read. Your english class is gonna waste a LOT of your time this year, another wasted eight hours is not, relatively speaking, very much.
Or you could not read it and BS your way through your senior year, which is working perfectly for me.

[nooblade]

Does anyone still read the C.S. Lewis stuff that I grew up with not long ago and still love? Out of curiosity. I think That Hideous Strength is my favorite, although it looks like only his serious books about theology have aged well.

As for the actual topic: this semester I had a general ed. class about film actually, but it showed that I can get surprised by the stuff I had thought was very much beneath me. But I have no plans to read or watch Hunger Games so take it with a grain of salt.

Also, a tangent: when I read 1984 less than a year ago, I cried like a baby. Felt like various institutions (social, educational, employers, even friends) were out to get me. FYI. I might be saying that personal experience changes the utility (or something less practical?) of the book, if I'm not just expressing myself.

[Drolyt]

The novel is supposed to introduce us to government.

We could have read 1984, Brave New World, 1Q84, or Battle Royale. All of which are twelfth grade level.
1Q84 and Battle Royale aren't English, which makes them difficult to analyze in an English class. Not impossible, but to be honest I would want the teacher at least to speak Japanese and have a copy of the original so he/she could point things out. 1984 and Brave New are better choices, especially if the stated function of the course is to learn about government. That said, if you have the option of AP, do it. No can be responsible for your own education but you. Yes a single project on which your grade hinges is bull****, but sometimes you have to make hard choices. If you would rather be lazy and don't want to read Hunger Games, go all the way and just watch the movie. To be honest I don't think you'll miss much and the movie is actually really good, whereas the book is just okay. If you want something in the middle then read on your own, you yourself have listed some excellent choices as have the rest of us. If you want some structured learning you could check out some of the Open Yale Literature Courses (http://oyc.yale.edu/) like Hemmingway, Fitzgerald, Falkner (http://oyc.yale.edu/american-studies/amst-246), Milton (http://oyc.yale.edu/english/engl-220), or Introduction to Literary Theory (http://oyc.yale.edu/english/engl-300), or check out Saylor.org English Literature (http://www.saylor.org/majors/english/). Do two or more of those classes on your own and you are probably ready to take the AP English Literature Exam even if you don't take the AP class.

Battle Royale is an excellent novel, but the actual "government" elements are vague and undefined.
Compare this to

One class could read Hunger Games, one could read 1984, one could read Brave New World, and one could read A Clockwork Orange, and you could put all four classes together and have a strong, coherant discussion. If the purpose is to get you to think critically about the role of government and how it can become too powerful and turn tyrannical, all of those books will give you the same basic themes. You could have a good discussion about the ideas without delving too much into the plot. "Is the Capital justified?" is a stupid question with an obvious answer. No, they aren't. "What stops people from standing up to the Capital?" however, is a good question and starts a good discussion. "What stops people from standing up to Big Brother" is also a good question and would yield a similar discussion.
You really think the government elements in Hunger Games are less vague than those in Battle Royale? Really? If Hunger Games is worth analyzing at all, it is for Katniss' psychology and internal struggle. The government is just a sort of catalyst for that.

[AtlanteanTroll]

Eh what? Brave New World as a Senior? I read Brave New World right along with Animal Farm and Fahrenheit 451 back in middle school. Then again, I never actually got around to reading Lord of the Flies until 9th grade. Yay non nationally standardized education.

[Maxios]

...that's idiotic. The Hunger Games is a book middle-schoolers and sixth-graders should be reading.

[Drolyt]

Eh what? Brave New World as a Senior? I read Brave New World right along with Animal Farm and Fahrenheit 451 back in middle school. Then again, I never actually got around to reading Lord of the Flies until 9th grade. Yay non nationally standardized education.
This was for school? I mean, I guess there's nothing wrong with reading those books in middle school, if the class was generally advanced in reading, but I don't think that is the norm, although I could be wrong about that.

[Xondoure]

I read The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay for summer reading last year. Good book...

[THAC0]

Some of y'all seem to have way different summer reading programs than I did. Ours, we were supposed to read the required books and then would write essays about them for the first week before jumping into the curriculum.

Also, books used in English class need not be selected entirely based on difficulty level. There are many standards to be addressed in classes, many of which work better with easier books.

...And some places I wouldn't expect most 12th graders to be reading on a middle school level anyway, which is sad but true. Then again, I currently teach in a state that has a 50% graduation rate. :smallfrown:

[SDF]

I read Ender's Game before 10th grade for summer reading out of a pretty large list. We had a group discussion about it instead of a paper. For my 12th grade senior thesis I had to do a 15 page report on Ireland and a 15 page report on A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Everyone chose a country and got assigned either a book or poetry from it. I am of the opinion that assigning James Joyce to anyone in high school is pretty sadistic, but I got a lot out of it.

[CurlyKitGirl]

I read Ender's Game before 10th grade for summer reading out of a pretty large list. We had a group discussion about it instead of a paper. For my 12th grade senior thesis I had to do a 15 page report on Ireland and a 15 page report on A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Everyone chose a country and got assigned either a book or poetry from it. I am of the opinion that assigning James Joyce to anyone in high school is pretty sadistic, but I got a lot out of it.

James Joyce?
Good God.
He's one of the main reasons I ran screaming from the Modern Literature option paper in first year of Oxcamfordbridge.
Still went to some lectures on him for various reasons (at least two of which being for dares or bored out of my skull) and I still don't understand him. At all. Or like him. At all.

I suppose twelfth grade is roughly equivalent to the last year of (UK) college yes?
Um. When I did English Literature that year I did -
ah.
Um.
I can't actually -

Ah. The Duchess of Malfi an early C17th satire on Senecan tragedy and tragedy in general; coursework on Cold Comfort Farm (a novel satirising Georgian, late Victorian and early Edwardian novels and authors like D. H. Lawrence, Thomas Hardy Jane Austen), Sons and Lovers and anything else we could find to link the two; and the work of John Keats in particular, and the Romantics in general.
Year before that it was Carol Ann DUFFY's poetry, The Picture of Dorian Gray, King Lear and smatterings of other Shakespeare and the poetry of T. S. Eliot, focusing on that poem about Alfred Prufrock and The Wasteland and you could analyse whatever you wanted as long as you cleared it with the tutor.

So yeah. Bit harder than The Hunger Games. Didn't think that was actually 'literary' material that was complex enough for students over sixteen.
And while I fully acknowledge that most things can be classed as 'literature' and thus worthy of study, there comes a point when you're stretching yourself explaining or discussing material.

Unless you're using it as a launch pad into more 'adult' material or example about the continuing prevalence of dystopian literature and its pervasiveness even in young adult literature, you'll probably run out of things to talk about pretty quickly unless you start, I don't know, obsessing about the symbology of the mockingjay in the book.

[Sunken Valley]

Eh, I got to mention it in my Advanced Higher Disertation (although arguably not as the main focus, that was 1984, Brave New World and Farenheit 451). This was before it was cool, mind you.

[AtlanteanTroll]

This was for school? I mean, I guess there's nothing wrong with reading those books in middle school, if the class was generally advanced in reading, but I don't think that is the norm, although I could be wrong about that.

Well, my middle school sort of cherry picked all the pre-honors kids from the district's elementary schools and put them all together, but still ... I don't think Animal Farm is that out of place. The others might be though, I guess.

[lerg2]

The Hunger Games.....
Assigned for summer reading.....
Senior year.
Not to brag, but I finished it in 3 and a half hours.
I finished The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King at age 7. I read (NOT claiming to have understood or remember) The Three Musketeers using a French-English dictionary at age 8.
Anyway, these are some really good suggestions. Never having stepped inside a public school, I have no idea of the expectations or desired work level for Publicly Educated Seniors, but this sounds good. I should probably be doing this.....
(Sorry if I sound snobbish, egotistical, etc. I don't mean to sound that way.)

[Drolyt]

The Hunger Games.....
Assigned for summer reading.....
Senior year.
Not to brag, but I finished it in 3 and a half hours.
I finished The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King at age 7. I read (NOT claiming to have understood or remember) The Three Musketeers using a French-English dictionary at age 8.
Anyway, these are some really good suggestions. Never having stepped inside a public school, I have no idea of the expectations or desired work level for Publicly Educated Seniors, but this sounds good. I should probably be doing this.....
(Sorry if I sound snobbish, egotistical, etc. I don't mean to sound that way.)
I'm not sure about snobbish or egotistical, because I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say.