Question posted by Eileen

How important is it to have a separate literature course for high school?  I've been rolling this around a bit and would like some input.  If I need to teach "literature" as a separate course than just copious reading (both aloud and by the student), where do I go, what do I get?  Most of all--why, to what purpose?
 

Answer:  I've been waiting for someone to come along and answer in the affirmative, that, of course, it's highly important to have a separate literature course for high school. I've not ever been convinced, but haven't closed my mind and could be persuaded otherwise--I think. I, too, wonder what is the purpose of literature study.

Don't get me wrong. I love it. I love getting a book and discussing it in a class or reading folks' views on this or that aspect of a character's quirkiness or whatever in books. If the book isn't good, though, that's another story. I remember high school. Of Mice and Men. Lord of the Flies. Brave New World. That's when I don't like analyzing literature. And that's when I wonder "... why, to what purpose?" And I do wonder to what purpose? I have wondered for a long time and have had to come to my own conclusions because I think most people teach literature because "that's what's done."

#1
Now this is just my opinion, but I think a lot of high school novels are full of bad problems. Sure, it can be good to address them (be aware of them, look at solutions, etc.), but many of them just focus on the dark side of life in general. Depressing. Who needs that? Heart of Darkness comes to mind. Actually, a lot of books come to mind. I do wish that there were some books on reading lists that were full of happy issues or were at least barely troublesome.

#2
Also, many novels for high school were written by adults and recommended by adults. I think these books are often better read by adults. Not teens. I'm not sure that teens can always see or apprehend/grasp the gravity of the issues addressed in these books. Cry, the Beloved Country would be an example of this in my family. I read this aloud last year. I really loved it. True, I had to take a break about half way through because it's so sad. But the story is rich. It's replete with lessons on dozens of things. However, as a parent, I could see things the way the main character did. I could feel his disappointment. But there's absolutely no way that my kids could. None.

My children could only understand that book on a shallow level. The Cliffs Notes helped, but they were almost inconsequential because my children just don't have enough experience in life behind them to fully appreciate Cry, the Beloved Country.

And here's the kicker, I think:  They won't ever pick that book up and read it again. They've read it. They're done with it. They won't pick it up when they're 45 and read it again. They're done. Been there. Done that.

Sure they know the basics of the story, but that's not knowing the story. Paton didn't write it so that we knew the facts of the story. He wanted us to be touched and affected by the story.

Many of the books are for mature people. Why push something too soon?

#3
This leads right into my next point. A lot of books that high schoolers and college students are supposed to read are books about social issues. They have an agenda. I guess I don't care so much what the agenda is as much as I do the fact that there is an agenda. Can't there just be good stories that don't try to be political or based on controversial social issues of the day? And do our students even realize that these books are often written to influence them? Or do they blithely read them without asking the difficult questions? (This was me and still is all too often.) **Why are these books used for English class?** Why aren't they covered in Social Studies class? Even Oliver Twist, which we are enjoying right now, was a book about the new poor laws in Britain that Dickens didn't like. Oliver Twist is partially a social treatise.

Don't you just wish someone would jump in now and give the other side. I do. It would give me some balance, and I could reply with something like, "Oh, you're right; I hadn't considered that. I know this is a touchy issue with more than one side to it." I'm sure I probably sound much more emphatic than I really am and much more strident than I am. Perception is a funny thing.

Anyway, I'll continue.

#4
I'm not convinced that reading and analyzing all these special books of great literary note is really a skill that everyone needs. I think analyzing literature should be more of an optional exercise in life. If you stumble onto a good book, then fine, analyze it. Discuss it with your friends. Write a paper on what the author really meant by using the word "bark" 10 times each chapter. Read all the books by the same author. But why make kids hate literature by having them write paper upon paper about certain books? Or by making them dream up an opinion about something that they care nothing about?

Oh. I took a break to homeschool just now and can't remember some of the points I was on my way to make. So if this sounds disjointed, you know why. :-)

Sonlight has a a survey of British Literature. I've not seen it, but it's a separate class. Learning Language Arts Through Literature has a couple of literature courses. BJUP and A Beka all have courses, too. Non-religious texts can be found through fes.follett.com, but they're used. One book that I think looks fun is Using Picture Storybooks to Teach Literary Devices:  Recommended Books for Children and Young Adults Volume 3. There are 3 volumes in the series, and the most recent is 2001 so the books in it are probably still available at the library. The older volumes use more difficult to find picture books. If you use the "look inside" feature at Amazon, there's a list of all the literary devices that are taught.

Frankly, I'm not sure that students remember all of that stuff too well. I can barely remember much about Homer's dactylic hexameter. That is what he used, right? I can't remember for sure. When I'm reading a novel for pleasure, I sure don't remember much about literary devices. Now if you're going to write novels, knowing all the literary devices like the back of your hand would be wonderful!

We're not going to use a text for literature ... at least I have no plans of that sort. (We have them for reference, though.) We study about two or three novels a year with Cliffs Notes. We haven't covered all of the literary devices yet. I'd like to buy the book mentioned above, but I know we can find something cheaper at the library. Maybe we can even get that book through interlibrary loan. I just don't feel like spending $35 on that when I can spend $35 on something my children will have fonder memories of ... well, something like snowboarding with their friends next month.

For us, high school English classes are English I, English II, English III, English IV. They consist of light literature study, reading, writing instruction and practice, vocabulary, and grammar (maybe more, but I can't remember). I have a tendency to try to get more writing in because it's so easy to read good literature only. And I really think that literature study shouldn't squeeze out writing instruction and practice because the ability to write well seems to be a much more practical skill than the ability to analyze literature. You know, not too many professions require the ability to analyze literature well. Writing well is a more pressing need, imo.

When I first (a few years back) was grappling with the same question you asked, I read somewhere that literature analysis and interpretation squeezed rhetoric (of which writing is a part) out of the syllabus. But I can't remember where I read it. I read it way last century, you know. LOL! And I can't find any corroboration on the internet either.

So for us, we do a little literary analysis so that the kids have idea of what it's all about. And I do want them to be aware of certain authors and their writings. But for me, I don't see the point of spending a whole lot of time "responding to the text" in a two-page essay unless someone wants to and really enjoys doing that type of thing. It remains to be seen if my daughter will want to do that or not. Just today she finished a book, and she was rather upset by the lack of a good ending. She said that she liked books that contained epilogues. I told her to write a paper on it. She wasn't interested and went and got another book. :-)

Just yesterday my children got impatient with me because they're just not interested in the fact that Dickens has a plethora of corpulent figures in Oliver Twist to illuminate the fact that Oliver is starving. They just want to hear the story. And truly, did Dickens state that he had fat characters on purpose? Or was that just because some people truly are round and others are straight? Cliffs Notes thinks it was his intent to be symbolic. Oliver Twist is one of the books we're reading for "literary analysis."

Possibly I am not putting enough emphasis on literature study, but I've still not been convinced that it's necessary.

Return to List of Rarely Asked Questions