I’ve seen more than a few comments on other posts talking about how forcing middle schoolers and high schoolers to read dry and inaccessible literature (even if it’s important) spoiled their love for reading, or put some people off of reading for good.

Now I’m not a US native so my impressions regarding the US “required reading” education is second-hand, but I’ve had this talk with an American friend multiple times. He absolutely detested having to read The Scarlet Letter and As I Lay Dying and The Catcher In The Rye and said it basically ruined literature for him for 10 years.

I totally get that. And it’s similar in Germany where I went to school - you read some really old texts for their historic importance and to learn about the evolution of literature, and then some more contemporary ones which can be… dry. Not what you want to be reading at 14 or 15 or 16. But at the same time I think there is value in exposing teenagers to literature that they otherwise might never pick up, especially older literature and classics. Maybe nine out of ten kids will hate it, but it might be an eye-opening experience for one in ten. And I mean, some of the point of school is just to expose you to things so you can learn what interests you and what doesn’t.

So I’m torn on this. Personally I liked most of the stuff I had to read in middle school and high school, but then I was a voracious reader and very interested in (art) history and philosophy and all kinds of nerdy things. I was wondering what this (book-positive, literature focused) subreddit thinks? Should all literature education be opt-in, or is there value in making everybody give it at least a fair shot? Should education in literature be done differently? Are there any books that you had to read that you think are particularly bad or good choices?

  • Puzzled_Shallot9921@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    I was the only person in my class who actually read all the books on the list and most of them I couldn’t wait to finish so I wouldn’t have to spend more time with them.

    I think a big part of it was how the book was treated like a chore that needed to be done and the way the class was set up was just to memorize certain details that you can be tested on. I only started understanding the importance of a lot of those books 10 years later when I had the background and willingness to actually engage with the literature.

    Another thing that annoys me is the insistence on reading big books. With they way that curriculums are designed it makes much more sense to have short books.