Highschool required reading: Is there a theme here?

[Kane]

For my first year of Highschool, I had to read Ender's Game. Good book, but I'd read it back in sixth grade.... But still good. A bit depressing, especially some of the sequels, but, eh. Romeo and Juliet later. Rather depressing.

Second year, it was first Animal Farm, really depressing, and then Lord of the Flies, if possible, even more depressing. I mean seriously.

And now I have to read "The Things they Carried", Tim O'Brien. Vietnam war.

I really feel like I'm sensing a patter here; they choose books based on how dark and horrible they are. Does this happen to anyone else?

[The Evil Thing]

Sucks to be you: the only required reading we had for GCSE if memory serves was MacBeth. And we read that in class. :smalltongue:

While MacBeth certainly is pretty dark, listening to classmates recite it in monotone really kills any drama.

[RabbitHoleLost]

Before my senior year, I had to read Catch 22...which is kinda depressing, but, overall, more funny than anything else.
Hmm...junior year was Balsac and the Little Chinese Seamstress and Bless Me Ultima, both pretty dark.
Sophmore year was Ray Bradbury's Dandelion Wine, which was so mediocre, I can't recall if it was melancholic or not...

However, that's just the required reading before the school year started. During the school year, it seemed to me like everything we read was dark and miserable and unhappy and genuinely made me see the world as a doomed place. Grendel, Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are Dead, The Awakening, Hamlet, Catcher in the Rye, The Great Gatsby, 1984, Fahrenheit 451...
Hell, the only kind-of happy thing I can remember reading in high school was Pride and Prejudice...

[Kane]

Oh, right. I forgot to add To kill a mocking bird and Farenhiet 451. Both not particularly uplifting.

I'm damn near certain that they think an upbeat book cannot be worth reading.

[TigerHunter]

High School English teachers like "Darker and Edgier" books, apparently.

Let's see... uplifting books I've read since Freshman year... um... Huckleberry Finn. And I was in England during that unit, so I actually didn't read it.

Siddhartha might have qualified if it hadn't been so bad that the English language lacks the words necessary to describe just how bad it was. Any inherent happiness I might have felt at any events was ruthlessly squashed by my constant desire to cry at the fact that I had to read this worthless piece of garbage. (You may have noticed that I really, really hated that book.)

Oh, Much Ado About Nothing. Which was pretty fun.

That's really it.

[Rockphed]

I never found Ender's Game that depressing, but I must be crazy. As for the rest of it, there is a reason High School students are often caricatured as being emo.:smallwink:

[RabbitHoleLost]

I never found Ender's Game that depressing, but I must be crazy. As for the rest of it, there is a reason High School students are often caricatured as being emo.:smallwink:

...That makes so much sense, its not even funny.
FINALLY we know who to BLAME for that!

[Hairb]

It could be worse. Some High School down south had 33 Snowfish on its required reading list, a book so vile and grim I couldn't get through 30 pages of it.

[Kojiro Kakita]

We had to read Heart of Darkness, which is a pretty depressing and dark book.

[Swordguy]

They're trying to get you ready for "real life", which IS dark and depressing...well...depressingly often.

Get used to it.

[averagejoe]

That... is actually very true upon recollection, though I'd disagree that To Kill a Mockingbird was depressing. We had A Tale of Two Cities, which was pretty depressing. Besides Mockingbird the only non-depressing, non-badly-written book I can recall reading was The Hobbit, but that was in middle school, not high school.

The Things They Carried was an amazing book, though. Just thought I'd get that out there.

Edit: @Swordguy, if anything, life has got less depressing into adulthood, if for no other reason than because as I grow older I learn more and more that life is what you make of it.

[Tengu_temp]

Real life is around 40% idealistic, 60% cynical on average (can go more into one of the directions depending on your status and where do you live), on a scale where Sailor Moon is 100% idealistic and Narutaru 100% cynical.

[freerangetroll]

Humans like stories with some deep meaning. Whether the meaning is worth it, or even in the book is immaterial. Usually people attribute stuff to books that the author probably never even thought of. I mean does anyone really think that the turtle crossing the road in the Grapes of Wrath was supposed to be mans eternal struggle to move ever onward? Darker books tend to have these deep meaningful lessons that drive scholarly types wild. Believe me it doesn't get any better in college if you are a english major. :|

[Revlid]

I think someone said once that a symptom of an 'art' book (i.e. one that will win an award) is a dead dog. Because if you see an award sticker on a book with a picture of a dog on the cover - that dog will have bought it by the end of the book. True Art is Angsty. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty)

A sentiment I loathe, but it seems to be the established order.

[Emperor Ing]

Dark, depressing books? Hmm, not the pattern I sensed.

I sensed books with REALISTIC TEENAGE characters in REALISTIC settings, with REALISTIC problems that students can CONNECT to very well.

I would read books as an escape from reality, not to read about someone else's mundane struggles in life. :smallyuk:

[Eldan]

We read Clockwork Orange in english. And some other books I don't remember. Most people complained that "it isn't even english".

[Nevrmore]

We read Clockwork Orange in english. And some other books I don't remember. Most people complained that "it isn't even english".
You have the coolest English teacher imaginable.

[Drascin]

I think someone said once that a symptom of an 'art' book (i.e. one that will win an award) is a dead dog. Because if you see an award sticker on a book with a picture of a dog on the cover - that dog will have bought it by the end of the book. True Art is Angsty. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty)

A sentiment I loathe, but it seems to be the established order.

Indeed. I share you contempt for that sentiment as well, but that's how things seem to be. A book with a happy ending cannot be a true award winner, ever. And sadly, most teachers eat up this philosophy hook, line and sinker.

Even the only comical book I had to read for highschool, myself, ended with the protagonist sick in bed and dying, and renouncing to all his ideals while his friends cried around him, fer cryin' out loud! And that not mentioning the mindscrewy book that would have made Hideo Kojima proud, the other one where all the (teenager) protagonists were horrible amoral bastards and all end up dead (real subtle there, guys), and the one dealing with a girl suffering depression. Yay highschool reading. And then they wonder why people come out of high school hating books.

[Emperor Ing]

You know what they need to bring back? In Elementary schools, teachers had students do a book report based on a book they chose based on a genre(?) the teachers usually chose.

Now, when they DO do book reports, its of a specific book the teachers chose.

I think what they do now actually greatly discourages kids from reading books. If they're used to having a (crappy) book handed to them to read, they won't choose books that look good.

[Philistine]

Dark, depressing books? Hmm, not the pattern I sensed.

I sensed books with REALISTIC TEENAGE characters in REALISTIC settings, with REALISTIC problems that students can CONNECT to very well.

I would read books as an escape from reality, not to read about someone else's mundane struggles in life. :smallyuk:

What part of Lord of the Flies do you expect teenagers to realistically connect to? What about Heart of Darkness? The Scarlet Letter? Moby ****? The Grapes of Wrath? For Whom the Bell Tolls?

The pattern I sense is that English teachers are just going down a predefined list of (apparently) arbitrarily-chosen "great literature," and picking selections from the list like a menu. Some of the books on The Approved List are in fact quite good (Twain); others, not so much (Bronte). But they're all on The List, and can only be removed with extreme difficulty.

[Eldan]

Oh, highschool. Right. Our school system is pretty different, but from what I remember the books we read in years 7-10 were utter crap. All about youths from families with divorces first being tempted to take drugs and shoplift out of peer pressure but then saying no and finding who they are and falling in love with the perfect girl. :smallannoyed: Boring.

[Gaelbert]

My summer reading in high school has been Kindred, a book about a modern day African American lady who magically gets transported back to the 1830s every so often, Gwendolyn Brooks, an African American anarchist poet if I remember correctly, and The Autobiography of Malcolm X. The first two were iffy, but I enjoyed the Autobiography towards the end. But I see a definite theme for all of them.

[doliest]

Well, to work with the depressing theme, we had to read pigman, a book about two kids who meet a friendless oldman and end up accidently killing him...then we get a book I'd only call depressing in that it is SO...FREAKING...BORING...I mean even the english teacher agrees that it's boring, and it's called "A seperate peace"

[The Duskblade]

What really drove me crazy was the teachers need to make us read it aloud one by one. Turning a bearable book (But not deserving of the proudly placed award sticker) into an exersise of bordem were all drama and interest was killed off by mispronunciations of seemingly simple words. That when haltingly forced out by my class mates, felt not unlike experimental brain surgery preformed with a pickaxe.

My usual stratergy was to try to shut out the sound of outloud reading and read ahead. Resulting in less bordem and severe annoyance when I had to flip back several chapters to read aloud at teachers say so.

No I'm not bitter... Why do you ask? :smallsmile:

So this is slightly more ontopic (Rather then just my crazed ranting.) I don't tend to find many stories depressing. Possibly because when I see a character die/go crazy/whatever. Then there is a definate possibility that will actually boost my interest. Because I actualy kind of like that stuff done correctly. Past that it all comes done to how much I like the character and whether or not it fits the story. (The standard reading materials at schools having a habit of killing one of the only character you actually like. Which done wrong often feels like a forced attmpt to ring out alittle simpathy.)

In my oppinion. A well done attempt at a depressing scene Aka: Freind of a certain Assasin dies of causes that by this point make it somewhat suprising he manged to last as long as he did. (Either you'll get who I'm talking about or you probally havnt read it yet.) This can hit you really bloody hard. (As long as it is well written. Which it was.) Billy "Likeable" slaming into the side of a bus two pages from the end when the plot is all but wrapped up. That is Depresing...ly bad.

In retrospect its alittle weird that my examples of depresion feature death. Ahwell. Thanks for reading through if you read it through. If not. Ahwell.

[Eldan]

Wanna hear something worse?
Take "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day" by Shakespeare. First, translate it into "modern" english, then let a class barely able to understand simple english sentences and let them read it line by line. After every line, discuss what he meant to say.

[Turcano]

Well, at least you don't have to read anything by Nathaniel Hawthorne. That stuff will put you out cold.

[Joran]

Other depressing books to add to the list:

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe

[Anteros]

It's not just high school. I remember, in the 2 college English courses I took we had these very large books which were compilations of short stories. Probably about 60-100 stories in all. In every single one, someone dies.

We had to write a short fiction story in the class that semester, so I wrote about killing myself. The teacher gave me my only A of the semester.

[Various]

Depressing, yeah, but a lot of good books here. I don't remember much about what we read, Scarlett Letter and some book about a kid who pushed his friend off a tree and then the kid died later and it was really boring. I remember in 8th grade I wrote a book report on a Conan book because I hated my teacher and wanted to make her suffer.

[Kuma Da]

"I think what they do now actually greatly discourages kids from reading books. If they're used to having a (crappy) book handed to them to read, they won't choose books that look good."

I agree so totally and completely, Randomizer. As for the reason why things are the way they are, I'd have blame academia. My reasoning is thus:

1) Once a book becomes a classic, it can't un-become a classic.

2) Classics are the books that all the scholars have ooh'd and aah'd over and written papers about.

3) Professors pass on their views to students, some of which in time become professors.

therefore, 4) Some professor gets it into his head that Nathanial Hawthorne is just dandy. He writes some essays about it. His students think "well, I thought Mr. Hawthorne was a longwinded blowhard, but he's gonna grade me way harder if I write a paper about that," so they write about how he's actually a visionary artist instead. If this happens on a grand enough scale, then Nathaniel Hawthorne becomes a classic. And then he's stuck that way, haunting all future generations of readers.

As for the school department that assigns these classics as required reading, I think their heart's mostly in the wrong place. Teaching the kids about Dickens will help them pass their tests, but it won't get them genuinely interested in reading. Which is what should matter, really. Standardized testing is supposed to be a measure of how interested in and committed they are to learning, not of how much they've studied test-taking techniques.

What I would really like to see would be one month per school per year (just one) in which the students read a book of their own choice and then present what they learned from it to the class. Not in a this-is-the-plot book-report-y way, but in a these-are-the-words-I-had-to-look-up and this-is-the-philosophy-this-book-made-me-think-about kind of way.

Anyone else have a suggestion for how to improve high school standardized reading?

[snoopy13a]

To Kill a Mockingbird is depressing if you consider that an innocent man is killed over something that he didn't do. Most high school required reading has an underlying message that speaks to the human condition.

The Lord of the Flies speaks to the inherit evilness that is present in humans. The Great Gatsby speaks to not aspiring for the wrong goals. To Kill a Mockingbird states that injustice can sometimes prevail but that we shouldn't ever stop striving for justice. Macbeth teaches that power corrupts.

I think the only required reading I read that had a happy ending was A Midsummer Night's Dream. Obviously, that's a comedy so it is supposed to have a happy ending. Traditionally, tragedies end with the main character's death or in the case of some ancient Greek tragedies a sort of living death (see Oedipus in Oedipus Rex or Creon in Antigone). Comedies traditionally end with a marriage. So unless you read Jane Austin novels or Shakespeare comedies in class, you're not going to have too many happy endings.

[D_Lord]

Its sounds like you need to read some lighter books from the school library. For a enjoyable life you need both, lighter things to read and watch and heavier things too. A sort of mix of Light and Darkness, order and Chaos.

[Telonius]

Another depressing one that was on the optional list: Lord of the Rings. The main character fails at the end, the elves leave, magic fades, the Shire is all devastated, the main character never fully recovers from his wounds, and the Fellowship scatters to the winds or dies. Honestly, what a downer![/snark]

Most really good works of literature are, to a certain extent, depressing. That's because without conflict and danger of real loss, there isn't a story. Depressing stuff happens. People suffer injustice, loss of life, loss of loved ones, sometimes even death. The uplifting books and works try to transcend that - like Lord of the Rings, or The Little Prince, or even Fahrenheit 451. (Yes, there is still some hope at the end of that one). The depressing books take the conflict and give up into despair - like Lord of the Flies. Some are more ambiguous, like Heart of Darkness; or focus only on a particular political issue and not humanity in general. But each one has a legitimate response to the conflict.

[Tirian]

I can name a few extra books that I was made to read in HS that weren't total downers: Robinson Crusoe, The Pickwick Papers, and As You Like It. And that's just in English class; in French we studied several works by Moliere, who is freaking hilarious even after the translation and 350 years.

[Were-Sandwich]

Lets see. In Year 7 we had to read Skellig, which is possibly one of the most boring, worst written books ever. It made no sense, offered no explanations for anything and was just...crap. It was also so easy-going, I finished it in one lesson. It took the rest of my class three months.

In year 9 we read MacBeth, which I probably would have enjoyed if it weren't for the way it was handled by the teacher. Because it *might* come up on the SATs paper, we spent two and a half terms doing nothing but listening to her talk at length about stage directions and emotions and blah blah blah whilst she told us to write it all down and memorise it. She killed the play for me. And after all that, we only had one short question about it on the paper, and only my inherent awesome carried me through the rest of the test.

In year 10 we read Of Mice and Men, which I kinda liked, but it was VERY depressing, but I had a new English teacher, who was the Awesome, so it was fun to read. We also read some Elizabethan and Jacobean poetry about death, then had to write an essay about how "the poetry of the elizabethans and jacobeans shows that death and love and linked". Depressing, and in some places disturbing.

In Year 11 we read Romeo and Juliet, which was fun, upon which I wrote an amasing essay which got an A* and had the English staff in hysterics. We also read To Kill A Mockingbird, which, despite being Great Literature, I didn't like, mainly because I don't like Childhood Adventures, no matter how Dark and Edgy. We also read The Crucible, which was depressing, and A View From The Bridge, also depressing, but I liked both of them.

At my College open day, he English Literature teacher admitted the stuff we were studying was pretty depressing, and we talked about the depressingness of Literature for a while, can came to the conclusion that most Literature is about Love or Sex, which are the only certainties in life. We also have to read Rime of the Ancient Mariner, which should prove...interesting.

One thing I should hopefully be freed of when I start College is the irritating 'reading aloud' that high school teachers insist on doing. Why are half of these people in the top group, I ask myself, as they struggle to muddle their way through a simple sentence without asking what a paticular word is.

[warty goblin]

It's not just high school. I remember, in the 2 college English courses I took we had these very large books which were compilations of short stories. Probably about 60-100 stories in all. In every single one, someone dies.

We had to write a short fiction story in the class that semester, so I wrote about killing myself. The teacher gave me my only A of the semester.

Sounds about right. College classes seemed obsessed with misery, particularly history, which can gloss over a few hundred years when nothing to terrible happened, but hone in on a couple really wretched years like a large fly drawn to three day old roadkill. It's like it cannot be interesting unless some group of people were having horrible things done to them.

This is why I take Political Science, which actually looks at when things are going well, then asks "so what were they doing right?"

Although to be fair, my Shakespeare class was not nearly as gloomy. Sure we read Hamlet, but we also read a couple comedies and romances.

[LCR]

Don't you get to read Oscar Wilde over there? Most of his plays are witty and uplifting. Or G.B. Shaw, for that matter. Or P.G. Wodehouse.
And I don't think, "Mockingbird" is that depressing. I think it is actually very uplifting (although not upbeat) to read about a man with ideals like that.
Unfortunately, I also find it true, that great art derives mostly from suffering, which might account for a lot of books being perceived as depressing.

[snoopy13a]

I taught in high school for three years (not English). Anyway, you have to understand that the English teachers have to fill 40 minutes of class time. If they tell their students to read silently, the goof-offs and troublemakers are not going to read and instead are going to fool around causing a headache for everyone. Additionally, about half (or more) of the class isn't doing the nightly reading so at least this allows them to get something out of the book. Last of all, there is a movement in education for differentated learning. The philosophy is that some people are visual learners while others are more audio learners and some are more textual learners. Note that often, English teachers will show a film adaption of the literary piece. By reading out loud in class the teacher:

1) Kills time

2) Presents an opportunity to talk about important passages and themes

3) Better presents the material to audio learners

Now college professors or grad assistants usually go through material three or four times at fast and they meet three times a week instead of five. Thus, they have less time to work with and have to teach more efficiently. A high school teacher usually has to go slower because of not only a lesser average student but also due to more class time and less material.

[Griemont]

I have to read The Things They Carried (reading it right now, actually) for AP Language, and it's fantastic. Not gloomy at all, but maybe that's because I've interspersed my reading with playing Metal Gear Solid 4. In fact, this book is rather hilarious, and I love it. :smallbiggrin:

[DeathKnight]

In my experience HS reading is horrible. I find myself amazed day after day that HALF of the kids in my grade actually made it past pre-K have you ever seen a 16 year old mis-pronounce the word "inside" ? also considering that a good 15% of them stayed back at one point or another, and the worst part is they refuse help of anykind. At least when I get stuck on some word sent up from Heck I either straight out ask for help, or make a joke of it and say something along the lines of, "Mrs. ______ you lied, this isn't HS material." just for Sh*** and giggles.

and to continue on Anteros' point, It does seem that english teachers enjoy suicide stories, No wonder the sucide rate is increasing! Me and a friend of mine decided to write stories about suicide in our Essay writing class and we both got A+ marks... even though they were both poorly written. then a few dyas alter we watched the "Dead Poets Society" because since it wasn't and English class she couldn't assign us to read the book. and after that we had to write either a summary of the plot or Neil Perry's suicide letter. If it wasn't for that one paper I never would have passed that class.

[Telonius]

Don't you get to read Oscar Wilde over there? Most of his plays are witty and uplifting. Or G.B. Shaw, for that matter. Or P.G. Wodehouse.

In general: no. I read Pygmalion in the advanced classes senior year. But other than that, nothing from any of those authors.

[Kane]

Okay, I was probably a bit ambiguous. Many of the books are good books, but oh so often we really drag out the depressing part. (To Kill a Mocking Bird, ending).

Also, I agree, many of the books are wonderfully well written. I just can't read The Things they Carried without realizing what a dark and horrible place the Vietnam war was, not only from the book, but because it keeps reminding me of my 20th century world history class I took last year.

We also read "Of Mice and Men", but the most depressing part of it, the very end, was ruined, because the teacher decided we should do skits of sections of the book. Looking at some people pretending to be hallucinations (GIANT TALKING RABBIT!) and barely refraining from laughing themselves....

Anyway, I forgot who said it, but someone out there is lucky; I never really thought of LotR as depressing, (Though on contemplation, I can agree it should be. Just isn't to me.), but of course, it's not doom&gloom-y enough, so I don't get any credit for reading it.

I'd like to say very clearly I'm not complaining about how well written, or good, some books are, because in retrospect, most of them seem pretty good, or at least okay, I'm just kind of annoyed because to a title they are all overflowing with doom&gloom.

[Helanna]

Other depressing books to add to the list:

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe

I read the Great Gatsby on my own time, and found it distinctly unsatisfying. It didn't seem like there was any point at all. I'm too used to fantasy, where the entire world is usually impacted by the end.

Things Fall Apart - had to read that last year in school. It was very depressing. Because it was a GOD AWFUL book. It was poorly written, disjointed, half the chapters didn't have anything to do with the rest of the book, and the plot didn't develop until two thirds of the way through. Yeah, I'm REAL glad we had to waste our time on that.

I don't really mind the books being depressing though. I've never even noticed. I'm a very depressed person to begin with, and most of what I read is at least a little depressing. So it's nothing out of the ordinary for me.

[WalkingTarget]

I read the Great Gatsby on my own time, and found it distinctly unsatisfying. It didn't seem like there was any point at all.

I did this as well and tend to agree (other than the point seemed to be the fun of just watching this train wreck waiting to happen through the whole thing). I keep thinking of trying it again now that I've got some more years behind me. I think I may have been trying too hard to pick out "why this is a classic" at the time to actually get it for itself (I only read Catcher in the Rye about a year ago and I think I managed to not do that this time, so I might have a shot now with Gatsby). I do remember thinking that I wasn't particularly impressed with Fitzgerald's writing in and of itself.

[TigerHunter]

I actually liked Things Fall Apart. Well, relative to most of the other books I've read for English. It sucked in comparison to anything I've read on my own time.

[Rockphed]

I did this as well and tend to agree (other than the point seemed to be the fun of just watching this train wreck waiting to happen through the whole thing). I keep thinking of trying it again now that I've got some more years behind me. I think I may have been trying too hard to pick out "why this is a classic" at the time to actually get it for itself (I only read Catcher in the Rye about a year ago and I think I managed to not do that this time, so I might have a shot now with Gatsby). I do remember thinking that I wasn't particularly impressed with Fitzgerald's writing in and of itself.

I read about half of Catcher in the Rye, and all of The Great Gatsby, and I don't think either of them was very good. Catcher seemed to consist of the main character being stupid and complaining that being stupid didn't net him the world. Gatsby on the other hand had a frivolous narrator.

On the other hand, I read Free Speach for Me, But Not for Thee by Nat Hentoff, and most of Thor Heyerdahl's Books on my own time, and I thought they were great. They completely changed my view on Nonfiction books, which until that point had been biographies and badly written textbooks.

[Jorkens]

I read about half of Catcher in the Rye, and all of The Great Gatsby, and I don't think either of them was very good. Catcher seemed to consist of the main character being stupid and complaining that being stupid didn't net him the world.
Key point about Catcher in the Rye: you've got the point of it nailed there. It's not about how unfair it is that being stupid won't net Holden the world, it's essentially about how lethargic and ineffectual Holden is and why... if you try to read it as "look at this really great guy, see how cutting and incisive his personal philosophy is" then you're not going to get far.

I've always thought it'd be a good idea for literature syllabuses to introduce people to the idea of subversive / radical / undeground literature at an earlier age, actually. I've known people who hadn't read a book of fiction from age 16 to about 21 until they discovered that there was stuff like JG Ballard and William Burroughs as well as the more 'worthy' stuff they'd read at school. Unfortunately I can't think of an example of something like that that you could actually give to a class of 16 year olds without the parents being up in arms, seeing as a lot of underground type writers have a tendancy to be unsqueamish about weird sex...

[Gaelbert]

We have 15 minutes to read every day right before 3rd period. I tried reading the Scarlet Letter because our teacher assigned it. I fell asleep by page 3. And I mean, straight up asleep, not just dozing. The only other time I've fallen asleep in school was in conflict management where they let us have cushy couches and sit and do nothing every day.

[Weezer]

probably the most depressing book I've ever read was for HS and was Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton. It was painful to read and honestly I wanted to kill my self after reading, although I dont know if the urge was from how boring the story was or how depressing it was.
Anyone else have to read this horrific book.

[CannibalHymn]

The college lit course I took while in High School's required reading included Equus, King Lear, and watching Dali's movie. You think "depressing" is a bad theme? Try a theoretically accidental focus on the destruction of eyeballs.

That said, every decent work of literature is either depressing or funny in a depressing way.

[tyckspoon]

I read the Great Gatsby on my own time, and found it distinctly unsatisfying. It didn't seem like there was any point at all. I'm too used to fantasy, where the entire world is usually impacted by the end.


The utter pointlessness of the thing was, to the best of my understanding, actually meant to be the point. Same thing goes for most of Hemingway. I despise them both. And considering the topic of the thread, it shouldn't be surprising that both Gatsby and several assorted bits of Hemingway wound up on my assigned reading.. oh, and No Exit for more wonderfully depressing stuff, although that was my choice.


Try a theoretically accidental focus on the destruction of eyeballs.

We did Oedipus Rex when doing the bit on Greek theatre history.

[Telonius]

We have 15 minutes to read every day right before 3rd period. I tried reading the Scarlet Letter because our teacher assigned it. I fell asleep by page 3. And I mean, straight up asleep, not just dozing. The only other time I've fallen asleep in school was in conflict management where they let us have cushy couches and sit and do nothing every day.

Ugh. You started off with that massive sixty-page introduction, didn't you? :smallfrown: It's a decent enough book if you understand what's going on (and skip past the Custom House stuff). Hawthorne's a great author, but Scarlet Letter is a really, really thick one to start off. I honestly can't figure out why they don't start off with some of his shorter works (The Minister's Black Veil, or even Rappaccini's Daughter) before getting into Scarlet Letter.

[Shades of Gray]

I think someone said once that a symptom of an 'art' book (i.e. one that will win an award) is a dead dog. Because if you see an award sticker on a book with a picture of a dog on the cover - that dog will have bought it by the end of the book. True Art is Angsty. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty)

A sentiment I loathe, but it seems to be the established order.

I believe that was Gordon Korman, in his book "No More Dead Dogs". He made a speech at my school last year.

[Ubiq]

I can't recall what all reading I had assigned during high school.

I do recall the following:
Jacob Have I Loved (9th)
Flowers for Algernon (12th)
Lord of the Flies (12th)

I didn't like any of them, which might have been why I recall them. To Kill A Mockingbird was in there somewhere no doubt, but I seem to recall reading that of my own free will earlier on.

[averagejoe]

What part of Lord of the Flies do you expect teenagers to realistically connect to?

You see no parallels with a book that looks at the sort of society an isolated group of children create for themselves, and takes the point of view that it is extraordinarily savage and violent, and the social structure present in most high schools, a hierarchy which most people would no doubt be better off forgoing, and yet the only thing keeping it in place is the willingness of high schoolers to participate in it?

[SAMAS]

I think someone said once that a symptom of an 'art' book (i.e. one that will win an award) is a dead dog. Because if you see an award sticker on a book with a picture of a dog on the cover - that dog will have bought it by the end of the book. True Art is Angsty. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty)

A sentiment I loathe, but it seems to be the established order. Well, if you wanna get more specific, the trope you're looking for is Death By Newberry Medal (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathByNewberyMedal). The quote is:

"The dog always dies. Go to the library and pick out a book with an award sticker and a dog on the cover. Trust me, that dog is going down."

[Paragon Badger]

We had to read Anthem in our sophemore year. :smallmad:

Am I the only one who felt that Ayn Rand was a total crackpot? For class credit, I had to write an essay to her organization about the book!!! :smallannoyed:

The Objectist Foundation still sends me newsletters and books through the mail, even though I totally trashed their philosophy in my essay.

I mean trashed, and I took a shot at the organization themselves- for sycophantically adhering to a philosophy that urges individualism.

Why do they keep sending me crap? :smallannoyed:

[LordOfXoriat]

-edit_deleted-

[averagejoe]

We had to read Anthem in our sophemore year. :smallmad:

Am I the only one who felt that Ayn Rand was a total crackpot? For class credit, I had to write an essay to her organization about the book!!! :smallannoyed:

The Objectist Foundation still sends me newsletters and books through the mail, even though I totally trashed their philosophy in my essay.

I mean trashed, and I took a shot at the organization themselves- for sycophantically adhering to a philosophy that urges individualism.

Why do they keep sending me crap? :smallannoyed:

That's what organizations do. They send people crap.

I never had to read Ayn Rand for school, but I do agree that she's a total crackpot. Admittedly, I've never been able to finish any of her books, or, really, get much farther than ten pages in. I think what really turned me off to her was when I tried to read Atlas Shrugged and her introduction was Ayn Rand responding to critics of the book's philosophies. It reminded me so much of a forum discussion taking place over a much longer period of time that I just had the urge to laugh and groan at the same time. Then I started reading the story and it was even worse.

[WalkingTarget]

Then again, I've known some people who read Atlas Shrugged without knowing about Objectivism or that Rand was espousing her personal philosophy and they liked it as just a book.

I can't comment, myself, as I haven't read any of it.

[Dallas-Dakota]

Reading Deirdre for my dutch class.(Have read the first part, starting second part now)

[Zarrexaij]

Some of you guys are wimps. :smalltongue:

Personally I hate it when books have arbitrary good endings. The fact a lot of classics have depressing or "negative" endings seems to be pretty coincidental. I seriously doubt high school English teachers have a board that decides they'll teach their students the most depressing books.

A lot of the novels I read my senior year were dark and/or depressing, but they all appeared frequently on the AP test.

[mangosta71]

Yeah, my high school lit was mostly pretty dark. As was a fair bit of my college lit. Really, only the Spanish lit courses I took in college offered any light-hearted reading. I had fun with my English lit course, though. For our final, we were all required to write a ~10 page story/play "inspired" by something we'd read during the semester, and after I read mine to the class I had the pleasure of looking around at all the ashen-faced, shaking peoples.

[Ethdred]

This is bringing back so many terrible memories. And some fun ones, but those were mostly not intended by the teachers!

I think it is really sad that English Lit lessons as school seem designed to put people off literature. I don't know how they do it, but even someone like me, who was brought up on books, really loved reading and was pretty intelligent, got almost nothing out of it. It was only when I got to university that I made a conscious effort to read some poetry and Shakespeare, and realised that it is actually worthwhile. Then I started finding good literature (someone mentioned why don't they teach kids subversive literature - the Beats would be good to start with. On the Road is fantastic, Allen Ginsberg maybe less so) outside that - I even started to appreciate stuff I'd not ghot at school. But that's all self-taught and picked up from other people. Unlike my music teachers, who gave all us unmusical types a real appreciation for good music. But I still can't deal with 19th century novelists.

So just suck up all the rubbish from school, and then go back to stuff once you've survived!

[Joran]

Let's see, AP English Literature class from about 8 years ago.

On the happy notes:
1) Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
2) Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan
3) Crime and Punishment... kind of. by Fyodor Dostoevsky

On the depressing side:
1) Hamlet by William Shakespeare
2) The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka
3) The Stranger by Albert Camus

So, I would say that it was pretty well balanced. I don't think any of the books we read was a waste of time and generally the class was well taught. I think a lot of it involves having a good teacher to guide you through the books, rather than getting it tossed at you.

I felt much better read after the class, but I prefer less deep books for my enjoyment.

[mangosta71]

I don't think any of the books we read was a waste of time

I can't help but notice that there's no Joseph Conrad on your list.

[DeathQuaker]

I've got my Master's in English Lit, and past high school you're still going to find profs obsessed with "only sad is good." One of the reasons I think I focused a lot on Renaissance lit, as there's a lot of fun drama and poetry from that time period.

But there's happy and sad throughout, all good, and I agree with the sentiment that high school teachers should not be presenting the English literary canon as a perpetual drag.

[chiasaur11]

Let's see, AP English Literature class from about 8 years ago.

On the happy notes:
1) Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
2) Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan
3) Crime and Punishment... kind of. by Fyodor Dostoevsky

On the depressing side:
1) Hamlet by William Shakespeare
2) The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka
3) The Stranger by Albert Camus

So, I would say that it was pretty well balanced. I don't think any of the books we read was a waste of time and generally the class was well taught. I think a lot of it involves having a good teacher to guide you through the books, rather than getting it tossed at you.

I felt much better read after the class, but I prefer less deep books for my enjoyment.

Hamlet ends sorta happy.
I mean, everyone but the sidekick is dead, but the next king (who will supposedly be a good one) is riding in, and the usurper is dead.

[mangosta71]

Hamlet ends sorta happy.
I mean, everyone but the sidekick is dead, but the next king (who will supposedly be a good one) is riding in, and the usurper is dead.

Yeah, it's not like Hamlet is intended to be a tragedy or anything.:smalltongue: By this logic, MacBeth also has a happy ending. And the Capulet and Montague families resolving their feud and living in peace and harmony means that Romeo and Juliet ends happily, too.

[Semidi]

In most Shakespearean Tragedies, everything doesn't completely suck at the end. It usually does have some kind of theme of renewal.

It's a glass half-empty/half-full sort of thing.

[chiasaur11]

Yeah, it's not like Hamlet is intended to be a tragedy or anything.:smalltongue: By this logic, MacBeth also has a happy ending. And the Capulet and Montague families resolving their feud and living in peace and harmony means that Romeo and Juliet ends happily, too.

Yeah. Bill did like to make the tragedies end on a "But everyone who DIDN'T die miserably is somewhat better off" note, didn't he?

[mangosta71]

Yeah. Bill did like to make the tragedies end on a "But everyone who DIDN'T die miserably is somewhat better off" note, didn't he?

Quite. Even though the ones that survived were often the minority of the cast. For some reason, I can't really remember the bright side of Othello...

[warty goblin]

Hamlet ends sorta happy.
I mean, everyone but the sidekick is dead, but the next king (who will supposedly be a good one) is riding in, and the usurper is dead.

Although it's worth noting that the sidekick is going to tell everybody what happened, then go kill himself.

[hamishspence]

Mine were A View from the Bridge (Arthur Miller) and Of Mice and Men (John Steinbeck) Trend seems to fit.

[Jorkens]

someone mentioned why don't they teach kids subversive literature - the Beats would be good to start with. On the Road is fantastic, Allen Ginsberg maybe less so
Yeah, I can imagine some Kerouac working quite well. I can't remember how much sex there is in it, though, which could make it hard to a) teach to 15 year olds and b) get past the concerned parents. Maybe something like The Electric Kool Aid Acid Test would be good. It's almost hard to see how you could analyze either of them but I'm sure you could come up with something interesting.

Another question: what would be some more cheerful books that people could study alongside Shakesperian tragedy and victorian miserablism?

The ones that spring to mind for me are Cannery Row by John Steinbeck, or Saturday Night and Sunday Morning by Alan Sillitoe. But I'm quite a miserablist anyway.

[Serpentine]

I think the books I read were mostly pretty ordinary (and in one notable case bloody awful), and one of them was about euthanasia, but we didn't even get to do any "classics", depressing or otherwise - never done any Shakespear at all, for starters. I managed to do pretty well with film, though. At various times, I did: Princess Bride, Edward Scissorhands, Willow, Gattaca, and The Sixth Sense. That's what I can remember, anyway.

[Swordguy]

Quite. Even though the ones that survived were often the minority of the cast. For some reason, I can't really remember the bright side of Othello...

There isn't one. I was just in it (and did the fight choreography) in Cincinnati - Othello, Desdemona, and Emila are all dead. Cassio is wounded both in body and reputation and will almost certainly never walk again. Roderigo is dead. Bianca has been taken away to an uncertain fate. And Iago is taken away (presumably to be executed).

There's no upside for anybody. Every single major player has had something horrible happen to them. If you wanna stretch, there might be an upside for Montano, since he'll probably be put back in charge of the city...but it's really a stretch.

[Sam]

Well, alot of stories are dark because they need conflict and since most of the books in the library tend towards softer and more humorous ones, they go for more serious ones.

I had to read the Crucible and Death of a Salesman. They are rather depressing. They aren't the "no hope" depressingness of 1984 or Animal Farm, but a differant kind- a kind that for me is worse. It is the sheer waste that gets to me- the feeling that things keep on going and people keep on dying an nothing changes:smallfrown:.

[Enlong]

Oh man, back in my Sophmore year of High school, we had this textbook full of short stories that just kept getting more and more depressing. We had this one where a guy gets a hold of a mystical book with infinite unique pages inside it. He becomes obsessed with the book, loses his job, his freinds, and his sanity. He becomes afraid to burn the book, afraid that burning an infinite book would result in an infinite fire that would choke the world to death with smoke. Eventually, he hides it away inside a library.

Or this other short story set in sci-fi, where a little, like 8-10 year-old girl stows away on a space-shuttle so that she can see her brother on the planet it's going to. The problem is, as a stowaway, her weight has thrown off the delicate balance of fuel needed for a safe voyage. Basically, her choices boil down to two: Be thrown out the airlock and die in space of explosive decompression, or stay on the ship and die in the crash, which will kill the pilot and indirectly kill all the people on the planet who are dying without the medicine on the ship. That story haunted my thoughts for a week.

I also think that was the year we read House on Mango Street. Man...

Then I got to my Junior year: we read Of Mice and Men. I'll never look at an addled Loony Tunes character the same way... EVER.

[Semidi]

Oh man, back in my Sophmore year of High school, we had this textbook full of short stories that just kept getting more and more depressing. We had this one where a guy gets a hold of a mystical book with infinite unique pages inside it. He becomes obsessed with the book, loses his job, his freinds, and his sanity. He becomes afraid to burn the book, afraid that burning an infinite book would result in an infinite fire that would choke the world to death with smoke. Eventually, he hides it away inside a library.

Off topic: You wouldn't happen to remember the name of that story? I remember reading it as well and quite enjoyed it, but can't for the life of me remember the name or author.

[averagejoe]

Off topic: You wouldn't happen to remember the name of that story? I remember reading it as well and quite enjoyed it, but can't for the life of me remember the name or author.

"The Book of Sand," I believe. Incidentally, that story kind of reminds me of what happens whenever I visit TV tropes.

[Enlong]

"The Book of Sand," I believe. Incidentally, that story kind of reminds me of what happens whenever I visit TV tropes.

Either that or "Rope of Sand"
Yeah, I don't get it either, but if Book of Sand doesn't work, try that.

I found it less depressing then the others, but it was still a part of that Textbook of Trauma, so I kind of grouped it in.

[Semidi]

Thank you for the reply, I found it. I had not idea it was Borges, but it makes sense (he's amazing).

[Sam]

The other is "The Cold Equations".

Usually I unleash nightmares that claw at people's sanity, but for this I have a balm::smallsmile:
http://home.tiac.net/~cri_d/cri/1999/coldeq.html

Summary: The story is so unrealistic it fallas apart with a touch. It is an example of someone trying to make it as depressing as possible to mind screw people.

[UncleWolf]

I had to read To Kill a Mockingbird (pretty good)
Enders Game
Macbeth (i had three teachers who could of played the witches)
October Sky
The Fellowship of the Ring
Old man and the Sea
and The Grapes of Wrath (and teachers say they are shocked at teen suicide rates:smalltongue:)

[UncleWolf]

Oh yeah i also had to read Julius Cesar

[Nevrmore]

If it breaks the mold any, my English teacher for this year (senior year) had a giant-ass selection to choose from, but said we could pick any book we wanted as long as it at least won a Pulitzer or some other note-worthy award. I chose to continue reading A Confederacy of Dunces, as I have been.

[snoopy13a]

Another question: what would be some more cheerful books that people could study alongside Shakesperian tragedy and victorian miserablism?



Traditionally, you can balance Shakespeare's tragedies with his comedies and throw in an history as well.

For tragedies you have Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juilet, Othello, among others

For comedies you have A Midsummer Night's Dream, 12th Night, etc

For histories you have Henry IV part I (part II is a bit obscure), Henry V, etc. When I studied Henry IV part I in college, we watched My Own Private Idaho as that movie is based off the play (and even lifts lines directly from the text). My Own Private Idaho is definitely not high school viewing material though :smalltongue:

Then you have The Merchant of Venice which is a comedy but has a disturbing context and The Tempest which is kinda in its own category.

For other literature, Jane Austin would be a classic choice. I suppose one could also study Robinsion Crusoe or Treasure Island (that may be too escapist though). Wodehouse may be an option but those books have a sort of satiric, cavalier attitude towards alcohol and responsiblity (some high schoolers might view Bertie Wooster as a role model)

[TheFarq]

For me it was a Holocaust something almost every year. they just kept pouring it on. a lot of stuff like Night by Elie Wiesel (I get chills sometimes just thinking about that one)

and then there was The Child called "it" series (man was that one painful to read). The Things They Carried (already mentioned several times)

there were the obligatory works of The Bard: Romeo & Juliet, Merchant of Venice, A Midsummer Nights Dream (never did get to Macbeth or Hamlet in class)

John Steinbeck: Of Mice and Men, The Pearl
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton ( i liked that one alot, but it was sad too)
The House of the Scorpion by Nancy Farmer (kinda bizzare...)
Death of a Salesman
Lost in Yonkers
Fences by August Wilson
Catcher in the Rye, The Great Gatsby (didn't like either of 'em)

on and on the list goes...

[TigerHunter]

For me it was a Holocaust something almost every year. they just kept pouring it on. a lot of stuff like Night by Elie Wiesel (I get chills sometimes just thinking about that one)
Is it bad that, by the time I was 14, I'd read so much about the Holocaust that not a single thing in that book so much as phased me?

[Tirian]

For other literature, Jane Austin would be a classic choice. I suppose one could also study Robinsion Crusoe or Treasure Island (that may be too escapist though). Wodehouse may be an option but those books have a sort of satiric, cavalier attitude towards alcohol and responsiblity (some high schoolers might view Bertie Wooster as a role model)

Those are good calls. Dickens wrote some light stuff (A Christmas Carol and Pickwick Papers come immediately to mind), as did Mark Twain if you are not averse to American lit. Jules Verne is another choice, and I believe that I recall friends of mine who were made to read the collected works of Sherlock Holmes in high school.

At the same time, I'd feel that someone's education were neglected if they skipped all of the Western literature that featured war, death, class and race inequity, and any other extreme struggles because they are all "downers". Some of these are just categorically unreadable "emo" (I'm looking at you, A Separate Peace!), but the majority are studied because they are critically important and properly well-regarded character studies.

[Sam]

To be fair, ALOT of human history sucked. When we talk about the past we tend to either use rose tinted lenses or view things as unimaginably bad. However, things tended to be bad with the occasional horrific thrown in. I mean, you can't read about any plague without understanding why people thought it was the end of the world- "The Plague" is a good example, even though it is fiction and set in the 1950s.

The worst book by Eli Wesel is "The Accident". It isn't even about the Holocaust!

Of course, the reason we probably read such depressing books is simple- if something gets a strong emotional reaction you are more likely to remember it. Do you remember the plot for books that had happy endings or decent endings? You probably have a better recollection of the stories that are dark- they stick with you.

[TigerHunter]

Of course, the reason we probably read such depressing books is simple- if something gets a strong emotional reaction you are more likely to remember it. Do you remember the plot for books that had happy endings or decent endings? You probably have a better recollection of the stories that are dark- they stick with you.
What does that have anything to do with improving my critical thinking and reading comprehension skills, though?

Rant time: My main problem with High School reading isn't that it's depressing, it's that it's depressing and it sucks. Last year we read The Red Badge of Courage, and I spent too much time thinking about the horror of having to read this awful book to do any sort of critical thinking about the horrors of war.

And don't get me started on Shakespeare. His plays are excellent, but treating them as books is just... moronic. Sorry, English teachers, I really can't find any other way to describe it. If the top student in your class has to glance at the footnotes twice in each sentence because he has no idea what that person just said, then how can you expect him/her (let alone anyone else) to understand any sort deeper philosophical meaning, or be impressed by the character portrayals?

Then there are the didactic novels. Anthem was nothing more than a philosophical lecture with a shoddy romance tacked on to give it some semblance of plot. If you want us to read a philosophical paper, give us a philosophical paper, don't force us to read through a crappy plot that does nothing more than distract the reader from the message at hand. The only didactic novel I've seen that both worked and was enjoyable was Ishmael, because at heart, it really was nothing more than a lecture transcript with plot thrown in around the edges. Siddhartha... was the only book I actually stopped reading in order to protest the fact that we were having this crap shoved down our throats.

I consider myself an avid reader, and one thing that always strikes me is this: if the novels we read in English class completely fail to engage me or encourage me to think at all, how intellectually stimulating can they be for my classmates who profess to hate reading?

Education is most effective when the student is interested in the subject. Someone who enjoys computer programming will pass a class on C++ far easier than someone who is only taking it because they need the credits. Likewise, someone who is assigned to write an essay on their favorite book will put out a better essay than someone assigned a book they hate. So why teachers continually select books that completely fail to engage the majority of the class continues to elude me.

(Not to mention that apparently there haven't been any books worth reading published in the last 50 years. Would reading a book written in a style that the class is familiar with and more likely to enjoy really be so painful?)

[TheFarq]

I honestly remember very little from most of those books they made me read, except the ones i took a personal interest/liking in.

i only remember vague things like the general mood and an occasional mental image from the book. I Don't really remember the details in Night just this kind of dark snowy evil prison of death kinda vibe. I know details from the holocaust in general (don't think i can ever forget those awful pictures i've seen) just not specifics in a given book


Is it bad that, by the time I was 14, I'd read so much about the Holocaust that not a single thing in that book so much as phased me?
I hit that point a little later than you, but it does kinda make me wonder if i didn't break something in my psyche to be like that


Rant time: My main problem with High School reading isn't that it's depressing, it's that it's depressing and it sucks.
...
I consider myself an avid reader, and one thing that always strikes me is this: if the novels we read in English class completely fail to engage me or encourage me to think at all, how intellectually stimulating can they be for my classmates who profess to hate reading?
Yeah, this was my attitude most of Junior year, I love reading, but not if it's crap.
Catcher in the Rye and Great Gatsby seemed like just a lot of wasted time to me, no point whatsoever, I even had trouble faking like I thought it had a point for my assignments...

[snoopy13a]

(Not to mention that apparently there haven't been any books worth reading published in the last 50 years. Would reading a book written in a style that the class is familiar with and more likely to enjoy really be so painful?)

Read some Toni Morrison. The Bluest Eye is a very powerful book. However, it isn't really appropriate for high school study. Also, a former collegue of mine had her students read Speak. The kids were extremely receptive to it. All of them actually read it. I know because some of them were reading it during my class (and some of them weren't exactly the reading type).

[TigerHunter]

Read some Toni Morrison. The Bluest Eye is a very powerful book. However, it isn't really appropriate for high school study.
That's actually the first book we'll be reading after school starts on tuesday.

Irony strikes again!

But I'm pretty sure that's the only book on my entire High School reading list that was published post 1954.

[snoopy13a]

But I'm pretty sure that's the only book on my entire High School reading list that was published post 1954.

You could also check out Kurt Vonnegut. Slaughterhouse-five, among others, is a great book (not exactly a happy story though).

One thing about modern literature is that is tends to be escapist. Authors like John Grisham write page-turners that are enjoyable to read but they aren't powerful works. I'm sure that your English teachers read some sort of escapist literature, whether it is Harry Potter, or fanasty, or science fiction, Romance, or some of the big popular writers like Grisham, King, Dan Brown, Tom Clancy, Anne Rice etc. However, while they may personally enjoy it, they aren't going to have their classes study them.

Escapist novels are fun to read but they usually don't tell us much about the human condition so they aren't seriously studied.

[TigerHunter]

You could also check out Kurt Vonnegut. Slaughterhouse-five, among others, is a great book (not exactly a happy story though).
Ah, forgot about that one. Very good book. (Though this reinforces my point about more modern literature being more enjoyable.)


One thing about modern literature is that is tends to be escapist. Authors like John Grisham write page-turners that are enjoyable to read but they aren't powerful works. I'm sure that your English teachers read some sort of escapist literature, whether it is Harry Potter, or fanasty, or science fiction, Romance, or some of the big popular writers like Grisham, King, Dan Brown, Tom Clancy, Anne Rice etc. However, while they may personally enjoy it, they aren't going to have their classes study them.

Escapist novels are fun to read but they usually don't tell us much about the human condition so they aren't seriously studied.
You are correct, but I recently finished reading A Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin, which I've heard described on these boards as the best fantasy novel of all time, a summary I will heartily second. It was a far more powerful and engaging portrayal of war and its horrors (though the portrayed time period is more remote than the Civil War) than The Red Badge of Courage, and a more accurate portrayal of human frailty and our ability to be so casually cruel than The Great Gatsby.

I just feel that there's far too much emphasis on a small group of books that are viewed as 'classic'. Possibly because students that liked the books read in English are more likely to become English teachers themselves, teach those same books, rinse and repeat.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

In high school, the literature I read was quite diverse.

Huckleberry Finn: not that depressing, unless you count the outrage I felt for the way some of the characters behaved.

The Scarlet Letter: melancholy yes, but all-in-all it's more inspiring than sad, watching Hester not only survive after recieving the letter, but thrive.

Going After Cacciato: Also by Tim O'Brian (the guy who wrote The Things They Carried), pretty interesting. There's an element of hope in it, given that it's about leaving the war behind.

Hamlet: Shakespeare's tragedies are just that. They almost always seem to prefer them to the comedies for some reason. Only experience with them I had in high school was performing in Twelfth Night.

Oedipus Rex: I don't know what's more depressing about this one, how it turns out or the fact that practically every other character onstage is warning Oedipus to just drop the issue and he goes on anyway!

A Tale of Two Cities: I didn't hate this book because it was depressing. On the contrary, I thought it was quite filled with hope for the future, and everything turns out all right in the end (Dicken's does that). But I found it barely comprehensible!

Slaughterhouse-Five: This one wasn't so much depressing as it was strange. And any sad occurences are given little more than a shrug. As the Tralfamadorians say "So it goes".

These are just a few of the myriad examples.

I didn't really get to any truly happy sorta books until college. Their Eyes Were Watching God, by Zora Neale Hurston, is one of my particular favorites.

[Prophaniti]

I just feel that there's far too much emphasis on a small group of books that are viewed as 'classic'. Possibly because students that liked the books read in English are more likely to become English teachers themselves, teach those same books, rinse and repeat.
I would agree with that. I'm actually in college now, and considering teaching english, and I see this a lot. Those who are in the teaching positions advocate certain books and are often dismissive of other works in a very elitist manner. I see it reflected in quite a few of those who have already declared their major in english.

snoopy13a made a good point, I just get weary of the attitude that such literature is 'less' than the so-called classics.

Part of the reason I've thought about teaching english is because of the few teachers I've had who have not had this attitude. One especially was quite refreshing, and when we did the requisite "what's the deeper meaning" assignment for Of Mice and Men, they openly admitted to the class that they got the same thing most of us did out of it, and discussed it frankly with us.

The ones that I really bother me, are the ones who will tell you what you got out of a book is wrong, and the author was really saying X. Even worse are the ones that will mark you down on reports or papers for that reason.

[snoopy13a]

The ones that I really bother me, are the ones who will tell you what you got out of a book is wrong, and the author was really saying X. Even worse are the ones that will mark you down on reports or papers for that reason.

Honestly, those are poor teachers. If you present a well-written paper outlining your argument that includes passages from the text that back up your points then you ought to recieve a good grade. A good teacher will respect a difference of opinion if it is backed up with evidence from the text. A poor teacher will not.

However, that assumes that the paper was well-written and cited correctly. My hunch is that many of the people who complain about their paper's grades did neither.

Oh, and if you are concerned about your grades then the prudent option is to parrot back whatever your teacher says while using relevent citations from the text. High School is basically a game. Doing well in high school can mean admittance to a better college. Don't let your personal views affect your grade.

[TigerHunter]

Don't let your personal views affect your grade.
This is one of the many reasons kids are so eager to leave High School.

[Recaiden]

Yeah. We had to read Great Expectations, of Mice and Men, My name is Asher Lev, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Crime and Punishment, and some others. Mostly depressing, although not as much as some. I actually like the Great Gatsby a bit, but i'm only a third of the way through. In middle school we also read Night, The Sunflower, and a Separate Peace.
English does seem to be an arbitrary list of depressing "classic" books, except for Ender's Game.

[snoopy13a]

This is one of the many reasons kids are so eager to leave High School.

Honestly, wanting to leave high school is a sign of maturity.

High school is basically one giant test. It isn't that tough to graduate but those who drop out soon realize that employers think that dropouts are either morons or extremely lazy. So that cynical guy in your class who thinks dropping out is a good option because high school is worthless is in for a shock.

Colleges look at high school grades and compare them to standardized test scores. Those with high test scores and low high school grades are assumed to be lazy. Top colleges are hesistant to accept these students as while they are able to handle the work, they are more likely to "party out". Those with low test grades and high high school grades (tongue twister there :smalltongue: ) are assumed to be overachievers and top colleges question whether or not they can handle the work. Thus, the prudent thing for intelligent students is to get the best grade possible even if it means pretending to agree with concepts that they really disagree with.

A good teacher will accept a position contray to theirs if well-supported. However, it isn't worth it to gamble that your teacher is a good one. Thus, just agree with what they say. I know it is cynical but at this stage in your life, it is the prudent option.

[EllysW]

I think you can find depressing books in the school curriculum well before high school. When my daughter was in 6th grade, her class read a book called Out of the Dust, a Newbery Award winner by Karen Hesse. I read it too. It was quite lyrical, written as a journal in prose-poem form, and did end with a glimmer of hope. However, in the meantime
a girl is living in the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression. Her only joy is playing the piano. There is a horrible accident in which she throws a bucket of burning kerosene, I believe, out the door of the house, not knowing that her pregnant mother is on the way in. Her mother is terribly burned but manages to linger until the baby is born, but he's stillborn or dies almost at once, and the mother dies too. The girl's father is devastated by grief, and the girl's hands are burned and scarred in the accident so that she can no longer play the piano. So while the dust outside is blowing into the noses and eyes of the cows until they suffocate, she just sits there in the house with her crippled hands and her silent, grieving father, who then gets skin cancer.

It was one of the saddest things I had ever read, and for a bunch of 11-year-olds, no less. Although I think it affected me more strongly than her.

[UncleWolf]

I think you can find depressing books in the school curriculum well before high school. When my daughter was in 6th grade, her class read a book called Out of the Dust, a Newbery Award winner by Karen Hesse. I read it too. It was quite lyrical, written as a journal in prose-poem form, and did end with a glimmer of hope. However, in the meantime
a girl is living in the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression. Her only joy is playing the piano. There is a horrible accident in which she throws a bucket of burning kerosene, I believe, out the door of the house, not knowing that her pregnant mother is on the way in. Her mother is terribly burned but manages to linger until the baby is born, but he's stillborn or dies almost at once, and the mother dies too. The girl's father is devastated by grief, and the girl's hands are burned and scarred in the accident so that she can no longer play the piano. So while the dust outside is blowing into the noses and eyes of the cows until they suffocate, she just sits there in the house with her crippled hands and her silent, grieving father, who then gets skin cancer.

It was one of the saddest things I had ever read, and for a bunch of 11-year-olds, no less. Although I think it affected me more strongly than her.

I read that one in 6th grade too. It SUCKS!!!!
luckily i had to move away before i had to finish it.