The Great Gatsby
discussion
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list...
Eve wrote: "And that brings me full circle - Why today's kids can't appreciate The Great Gatsby - they can't understand Jay Gatsby because they don't understand the capacity, the desire, the gumption to want s..."General statement about the incapacity of teenagers. How about, I didn't like the book just because I didn't like the book? The characters were all whiny rich folk with nothing better to do than get drunk and fight with each other. They were selfish people, each in their own way, minus of course, Gatsby (who was just plain oblivious and so in love that he didn't see his own death coming) and Nick, the passive voice. Nick was the only person I liked in this book, because he was so objective and not the least bit dramatic, as were the rest of them. Daisy was the reason I hated this novel.
Don't tell me that myself or people my age don't appreciate it because I/we don't understand it, because I see every one of its themes, lessons and possible merits. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate the book. Don't generalize about teenagers, and don't tell teachers it's their fault for presenting the information wrong. As a future educator, I will objectively present the symbols of this and any other book, the lessons themes and objectives of any other book, objectively. That's what teachers do. Students absorb the information given and do what they want with it. Lack of knowledge is not failure to understand, but unwillingness to learn and understand. Too many students today, but not all students (myself and a lot of my former AP peers, for example) understand what it is to earn what you work for. Input = output, and don't tell me I can't relate to this because I don't understand that. I spent my entire high school career, continuing on with college, working for the awards and opportunities I've been given. Just because it's not a career yet doesn't mean I don't get it. The American dream is working to get where you are, no matter how small the scope.
The problem is, too many people feel entitled, including my own generation, and it's downright sad. That is what's wrong with education today. Not our teachers.
I have hope. When I was 18 and went to university I began my education. When I was 21 and went to live in England and traveled in Europe my education and enthusiasm for learning broadened. Now as I am edging close to my half-century I have a greater hunger than ever to know this world a little better. The motto of my alma mater and good words to live by:
From breadth through depth to perspective”
Monty J wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students. If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well writ..."
The Outsiders, The Red Pony, Mockingbird, The Pearl are all too young and the language is too simple.
The issues and the language in Gatsby are perfect for high schoolers as long as they read it with someone who loves it, too.
Really, obsession, nostalgia, the meaning of success, carving identity, consumerism, genuine friendship, self delusion, aspiring to greatness (Gatsby's version and Nick's version), balancing what our parents want for us that *is* in our interest and the part that isn't, commitment, the ability to love more than one person at once, following your dreams, being able to let go of your dreams, home, what's not age-relevant about that?
Diane wrote: "wooo, I am itching to read "of Mice and Men" now. How come we didn't have this book as required reading? My school must have sucked major time. Found a interesting article too.
Who, what, why: Wh..."
Your school must have sucked because you didn't read every great book out there? Well, life must suck then because you aren't going to have time to read every great book out there.
How many languages do you speak?
Cait wrote: "Eve wrote: "And that brings me full circle - Why today's kids can't appreciate The Great Gatsby - they can't understand Jay Gatsby because they don't understand the capacity, the desire, the gumpti..."If you read this book and think that the hero of the book is Nick Buchanan - I hope you won't be teaching a course in 20th century lit.
Diane wrote: "Monty J wrote: "T wrote: "I do see sophomores perfectly capable of understanding "adult matters". I had the chance to read "Lord of the Flies" and "Catcher in the Rye" during my 9th grade years, an..."Shakespeare did not write Romeo and Juliet to be read. He wrote it to be watched. What on earth is wrong with getting up out of your desk and acting it out, slashing with newspaper swords, watching the movie? I'd take all my kids to a stage performance if I could, but I can't and I certainly don't see any reason to deprive them of a PERFORMED version of a performance piece because we're too poor to go to the theater.
Eve wrote: "Cait wrote: "Eve wrote: "And that brings me full circle - Why today's kids can't appreciate The Great Gatsby - they can't understand Jay Gatsby because they don't understand the capacity, the desir..."She never said Nick was the "hero" - she said he was the character she actually liked. I agree with her; I could not stand Daisy, Tom, and even Gatsby. Nick was tolerable. Don't insult her when you didn't actually read what she said: "Nick was the only person I liked in this book, because he was so objective and not the least bit dramatic, as were the rest of them."
Eve wrote: "If you read this book and think that the hero of the book is Nick Buchanan - I hope you won't be teaching a course in 20th century lit. " Did you mean Nick Carraway? Nick was my favorite character too, that doesn't mean I thought he was a hero.
Ryan wrote: "Eve wrote: "If you read this book and think that the hero of the book is Nick Buchanan - I hope you won't be teaching a course in 20th century lit. " Did you mean Nick Carraway? Nick was my favor..."
Wait... Did Ms. Literary Critic mix up characters? Did she think Cait meant Tom Buchanan as not being a hero or Nick Carraway? I didn't catch that on Eve's post!
Eve wrote: "Cait wrote: "Eve wrote: "And that brings me full circle - Why today's kids can't appreciate The Great Gatsby - they can't understand Jay Gatsby because they don't understand the capacity, the desir..."I hope the same for you, since you can't even read an analysis properly or keep the characters straight.
Cait like most ppl ut age u think u have all the answers. As someone twice ur age and then s some, I have learned nothing will turn out the way u think it will. That is when humans learn humility. And I will tell u that u should re-read Gatsby at that time to understand Fitzgerald's deeper truth. The reason I extoll great lit is because of the methodology and symbolism and imagery we must come to understand and the use of language to convey meaning. Like dislike favorite best are alright for a grade school classroom. But shallow for HS and not worthy of a college
Eve wrote: "Cait like most ppl ut age u think u have all the answers. As someone twice ur age and then s some, I have learned nothing will turn out the way u think it will. That is when humans learn humilit..."You are missing the point that you misread her comment. Did you think she was making Tom Buchanan the hero (since you called the character Nick Buchanan) or are you dismissing the fact that Nick Carraway is not really a despicable character when juxtaposed with Daisy, Tom, and even Gatsby. I don't find Gatsby to be a hero at all either even though you do. Go ahead and flaunt your sophistication all you want, but it still doesn't deter from the fact you were insulting her intelligence and degrading her. That makes you no better than an online bully. "If you read this book and think that the hero of the book is Nick Buchanan - I hope you won't be teaching a course in 20th century lit." RUDE.
I forgot Amy, since the age Ronald Reagan all intellectual argument is just Bad and if u use a word not commonly uttered on dancing with the stars well than u are a gosh darn bully from one of those unAmerican places like Nyc or SF.
Eve wrote: "I forgot Amy, since the age Ronald Reagan all intellectual argument is just Bad and if u use a word not commonly uttered on dancing with the stars well than u are a gosh darn bully from one of tho..."Insulting a person's intelligence has never been considered polite in any era. I hope I never reach a stage in my life where I think it is "intellectual argument" to degrade a person.
I feel sorry fot secondary school teachers today. You are hamstrung by a ridiculous ideology that insists that kids have s choice in everything and everything hsd to be fun. The kids are incapable of msking these choices and the teachers then have to find ever more new ways that entertain them. Years ago before all the endless choices ur mother told u to go to school and when u got there ut teacher told u what to read snf write. So I don't care what a 15 thinks about Tom Sawyer or The Great Gatsby or algebra or chemistry or gym class or brushing their teeth. They will be glad of it someday.
Btw I realized I had written Buchanan not Carroway but was on train and could not edit. For that apologies. A little battinage is good fun.
Happy Easter to you all.
Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students.
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
I didn't end up reading Gatsby until my second year of college when I took an AP Lit class. And I'm glad. I don't think I'd have appreciated it as much back in Junior High or High School. The only four "older" stories I was required to read were The Outsiders, The Odyssey, Romeo and Juliet, and Of Mice and Men.
I loved the first three. I am re-reading Of Mice and Men this month because I'm sure I'll get a ton more out of it this time around.
I do think the most relatable book these days would be The Outsiders. Or at least it's one of the most relateable.
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
I didn't end up reading Gatsby until my second year of college when I took an AP Lit class. And I'm glad. I don't think I'd have appreciated it as much back in Junior High or High School. The only four "older" stories I was required to read were The Outsiders, The Odyssey, Romeo and Juliet, and Of Mice and Men.
I loved the first three. I am re-reading Of Mice and Men this month because I'm sure I'll get a ton more out of it this time around.
I do think the most relatable book these days would be The Outsiders. Or at least it's one of the most relateable.
Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students.
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
Wait, are you suggesting that Gatsby isn't well written?
I was really ready to take part in this conversation, but if you're suggesting such a thing...THAT suggests you are in high school and upset that you have to read something you don't want to read.
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
Wait, are you suggesting that Gatsby isn't well written?
I was really ready to take part in this conversation, but if you're suggesting such a thing...THAT suggests you are in high school and upset that you have to read something you don't want to read.
Lara wrote: "There should be a book somewhere that deals with a boy who falls in love with a girl who is out of his league, yeah that's it...that would be relevant to teenagers. And then this boy would spend a..."
Best post ever!
Best post ever!
Why thank you Krissy. I appreciate that. And really, Eve, the more you engage in this conversation, the less sense you make. You have contradicted your original post, that the majority of teachers are uninspiring, and now you are pitying us. Frankly, we don't need your pity. And the younger posters on this thread have much more intelligent things to say about the actual book.
Kudos to Cait, Amy and others of you who actually can support a rational analysis of a book. You are the kind of people that made me want to be a teacher in the first place.
Amy wrote: "Eve wrote: "Cait like most ppl ut age u think u have all the answers. As someone twice ur age and then s some, I have learned nothing will turn out the way u think it will. That is when humans l..."Shout out to the lady who actually understands how to read and comprehend, and even respond effectively! If I ever need a lawyer, you're hired.
Eve wrote: "I forgot Amy, since the age Ronald Reagan all intellectual argument is just Bad and if u use a word not commonly uttered on dancing with the stars well than u are a gosh darn bully from one of tho..."And NYC or SF are un-American? Am I sensing a little ignorance here? I happen to be from New York. Woops, guess I'm not an American, nor am I qualified to assess American-made literature, having been born here and all.
Sheri wrote: "Eve wrote; "To the gentleman above, who mentioned Shakespeare, I will say yes, kids in HS don't understand it and are bored because most of their teachers are incompetent" Yes, Eve, let's definite..."
I certainly hope that this comment was sarcastic, although I don't think some people read it that way.
Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students. If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students.
If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well written, then mayb..."
Why do we care if they think Twilight is the best book ever written? If they are reading and enjoying it then half the battle is won. Maybe we should stop judging and be delighted that they are reading at all.
Eve wrote: "Amy wrote: "Eve wrote: "Amy wrote: "Eve wrote: "Lara wrote: "Eve, you have given me so much enthusiasm for getting to school this morning to teach my students. It's nice to read how respected my p..."It's the same throughout society: wear seat belts, wear a helmet (for bikes or motorcycles or skateboards); don't smoke; don't drink (not advocating either of the last two); just don't risk shit. Mother government knows what's best for you ALWAYS! And reading is dangerous; it allows you to think for yourself. It is subversive. Get ready for that Brave New World: Take a pill, make love, play games, etc.
If age-relevent means fitting for our society today I nominate Dracula. Because for some reason vampires are sexy things to teens today so lets give teens a vampire book, only not the hoorid book Twilight but a great litterary classic.
Shannon wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gatby is not age-relevant to today's high school students. If we could the replace Gatsby on the school required reading list, with something that's both age relevant, and well writ..."
Sorry, but that seems to be a defeatist attitude.
Robertson Davies once commented that great books are always ahead of their time. If you want to know what an era is really like, read the bestsellers whether they're trash or not. These books will reveal what the people are really like. Are our teens dying for fantasy? Maybe it's the world we gave them; maybe it's themselves. I often surprised by how many teens go to animated films, and why do they like to other teens chopped up in horror films?
Cait I was being ironic. See that is what u did not get. Amy u and ppl like u are the reason I am glad I got educated in Europe.
My last post on this topic. Criticism is a part of adult discussion. Facts are that American education is not working. Kids graduate knowing less than the generations before and they are less skilled yo enter the world. Patents schools kids society ideology economics all play a factor.
However I will conclude the answer will not come ftom the Twilight reading teens and their Harry Potter reading adults but from more serious minds.
And no...The purpose of high school reading is not to instill a love of pleasure reading. That should have been completed by eighth grade. By high school, students should be challenged to read because they are learning, not just for fun. They should be exposed to literature that is not something they would pick up on their own. The have plenty of time for that. Lara's quoteNevertheless it is not the goal for high school to deaden students' interest in reading. We need a careful balance between what we believe students should be reading in their latter teen years and what will sustain their outside reading habits. After getting through a rather boring university literature program it took me at least 10 years to regain the same level of high interest in reading. Too much of Jonathan Edwards, andre Breton's NADJA, The Sanctuary, (the faulkner potboiler that the author himself was ashamed of having written) and other abonomible readings, took its toll on me. I didn't regain my reading momentum until I started reading short story anthologies in my 30's and cherry picked those writers whose stories rose above the crowd.
I have been writing an academic article on exactly this topic and have found a dearth of literature on what students want to read, which leads me to believe that the education academicians don't care. Who out there is administering questionnaires to students as to what they are reading outside of class and what they would like to read in class. I am not suggested that we adhere to their choices, but when we carefully look at what they do like, we can choose better examples of that literary genre.If you're working with General Studies, non college students, why not choose Edgar Rice Burroughs if the boys in the class are reading Marvel comics?
If your college students are reading Stephanie Meyer, why not introduce them to Bram Stoker for once. And for goodness sakes, quit with this obsession with the novel, get an anthology of short stories to work with. Expose the kids to as many writers as possible so they can latch on to someone who resonates with them, have them read more of that person's novels and then assign a term paper, comparing them.
Eve wrote: "Cait I was being ironic. See that is what u did not get. Amy u and ppl like u are the reason I am glad I got educated in Europe."
I'm glad to see you have moved from insulting Cait to insulting me. It doesn't bother me in the least. If defending innocent people from getting mistreated makes me a "bad educator" than I am happy to be a bad educator. How wonderful you can judge me as teacher from a couple posts on Goodreads.
Geoffrey wrote: Nevertheless it is not the goal for high school to deaden students' interest in reading."Good point, and I am interested in your article. However, I will maintain that by high school, it is not my job to teach students to read. Nor can I possibly find a book that all my students, or even a majority of my students like. I cannot pick a book because the boys will like it. The girls would want Nicolas Sparks or Sarah Dessen. In fact, you are right that it doesn't really matter if they like it. That sounds terrible, I know. But do we change chemstry because students don't like the periodic table? Do we just skip Algebra because the book isn't likable?
Teaching literature is an academic endeavor, not a hobby. It is about the writer's craft and depth of meaning. It is about having a reader slow down and seek the finer details, rather than rush through a plot. It is about broadening our awareness of the world, not focusing only on what we particularly ejoy at that moment. It is about discovering how the past has influenced the present. It is about seeing the universal threads that bind us as humans across generations.
To acheive this, literature must be relevant to more than just the here and now and me me me. And, no I will not give up on the novel, but continue to teach it along with memoir, plays, essays, short fiction, and whatever else will teach my student the concepts above. Of course, It doesn't HAVE to be Gatsby. There is a trove of literature that is appropriate. But, (watch how I bring it back to the topic of the thread here) to say Gatsby isn't relevant is to avoid the issue. Gatsby IS relevant for reasons stated in prior posts. But there may be other works that could take its place. Just keep in mind the purpose of teaching literature in high schools is more than just reading books we think are neat because they are about things we like and people who are like us.
And if you want to quote me in your article as an educator who would rather her students learn from a book than like a book, please also mention that my job is to teach, not be a friend.
That being said, most of my students leave my classes thanking me, and I doubt I have ever deadened someone's love of reading.
Lara wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: Nevertheless it is not the goal for high school to deaden students' interest in reading."Good point, and I am interested in your article. However, I will maintain that by high sc..."
Very well said. When my juniors read Gatsby this year (my first time using it - I usually use The Grapes of Wrath), they actually really enjoyed reading it for the most part. They unfortunately drew parallels with the Kardashians(spelling?) and Jersey Shore (the rich, party scene), but that lead them to connect to what was going on in the story. They got sucked into the relationship dramas that were going on and were able to connect to Gatsby wanting something so much he would change his entire life to get it. My students were able to relate to this novel better than The Grapes of Wrath mainly because our part of the country wasn't hit as hard by the recession.
I try to incorporate both classics and contemporary "high-interest" reads in my classroom. I draw them in with a "high-interest" book and then challenge them with a classic that requires greater focus and intensity. I do believe that part of my job is to foster life-long readers along with strengthening their reading skills. Sometimes it takes just one "high-interest" book to snag a life-long reader who then goes on to enjoy more progressively complex texts.
Lara wrote: "It is about the writer's craft and depth of meaning. It is about having a reader slow down and seek the finer details, rather than rush through a plot. It is about broadening our awareness of the world, not focusing only on what we particularly enjoy at that moment. It is about discovering how the past has influenced the present. It is about seeing the universal threads that bind us as humans across generations."Well said.
Every great work of literature comments on the times of its characters. For some of us a survey of literature is like running a magnifying glass over the map of history for clues as to why things are the way they are--social ills, their causes and effects.
THIS is what writers should be writing about and readers reading. The Grapes of Wrath exposed the underbelly of capitalism, changed the world and saved lives. East of Eden gave us a solution to what The Great Gatsby and The Sun Also Rises illuminated--the corrosive effect on social values of war. Lord of the Flies pre-dicted what Hunger Games de-picted and Hunger Games makes us ponder the long term consequences of our current trajectory. Sleepers caused reform in New York's juvenile justice system while One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest caused reform of mental asylums. All Quiet on the Western Front exposed the gruesome realities of war and it's social aftermath, though not strongly enough because we keep leaping into unnecessary wars. Franzen's Freedom holds up a mirror and gives us a good look at ourselves. Look. Really, look.
We need solutions and literature is a candle in the cave of humanity. Otherwise we'll just continue to slide.
I have to be honest and say that I am a bit disappointed in some of the commentary posted in this discussion by some of the educators. With some of the negative mindsets, it's no wonder that some kids are uninspired to read. Insinuating that something is wrong with them if they can't relate to The Great Gatsby is just plain wrong on so many levels. I am not exactly the biggest fan of The Great Gatsby. Mainly because I did not like the any of the characters. I completely understand Jay Gatsby's drive to be a self made man and his pursuit of "the American dream". However, my problem with his drive was that it was for all of the wrong reasons. Scarlett O'Hara, Jay Gatsby and Heathcliff have a lot in common in that they all had severely dysfunctional and unhealthy obsessions with a person who was, imo, not even remotely worthy of that level of devotion. In the end, none of those characters ever truly gained the happiness that they were seeking. In the cases of Gatsby and Heathcliff, while they did attain financial success, they also devolved as human beings in the process. I think that it is perfectly fine to not like them as characters and to not like their respective books. If you can't already tell, I absolutely despised Wuthering Heights. :)
So many say that the Great Gatsby is a great book about the american dream. Imo, it is a great book if your goal is to sneer satirically at the entire concept of it and at what people are willing to do in their pursuit of it. That's why I didn't care for it. I didn't view it as a positive and uplifting read. Being the child of immigrant parents, the book countered everything that my parents, my neighborhood and my upbringing taught me about the possibilities of pursuing the American dream. In a completely jaded, biased and cynical nutshell....to me, The Great Gatsby was about a bunch of privileged people who had everything yet still weren't happy and never learned to appreciate what they had and among them was one guy who was determined to have what they had at all costs just so that he could win the affection of the most shallow and selfish woman on the planet.
The biggest problem that I faced with some teachers in HS was not having the ability to say that I can't stand this book and give what I felt were valid reasons why and have my opinions taken seriously. I've even tried to go back and read some of the novels that I hated in HS with an adult mind and found that my opinion of some hadn't changed at all with time and age. I just have more patience to LABOR through it than I did as a kid.
I don't necessarily think that it needs to be replaced with something else. The problem that I am having is that so many people seem to be completely convinced that it CAN'T be replaced by anything else.
If you want to teach about the lives of the very affluent right before the depression, then it is a great book for that. Maybe even one of the best books. However, if you want to teach about the American Dream, there are other books that most certainly could replace it. Mainly because that dream technically applies to more than just the affluent time-capsulated world reflected in The Great Gatsby.
Personally, I think the book with the most potential to replace The Great Gatsby would be one of Barack Obama's books. Either "Audacity of Hope" or "Dreams of My Father". There is also Bill Clinton's "My Life".
If we had to stick strictly to fiction and wanted to appeal to urban youth, we could use "A Raisin in the Sun" by Lorraine Hansbury. I'm convinced that I could also make a case for "The Godfather" as another American dream book. If you wanted to appeal to immigrant children, there is "The House on Mango Street".
I can understand what others see in The Great Gatsby. I just draw the line at someone telling me that if I don't see it the same way, that there must be something wrong with me. If that happens more than once during the middle school and HS yrs, I can completely understand why some kids are uninspired to read anything else that's assigned to them.
Mochaspresso wrote: "...my problem with his drive was that it was for all of the wrong reasons. Scarlett O'Hara, Jay Gatsby and Heathcliff have a lot in common in that they all had severely dysfunctional and unhealthy obsessions with a person who was, imo, not even remotely worthy of that level of devotion."Very well said. Brett Ashley, in The Sun Also Rises, is another example. Guys make fools of themselves over her because of her thin veneer of beauty and sexual availability, but underneath she's empty.
"I can understand what others see in The Great Gatsby. I just draw the line at someone telling me that if I don't see it the same way, that there must be something wrong with me. If that happens more than once during the middle school and HS yrs, I can completely understand why some kids are uninspired to read anything else that's assigned to them." --Bravo!!
Needful Things by Stephen King. Although I think The Great Gatsby is still a great book for students to read.
Monty J wrote: "Lara wrote: "It is about the writer's craft and depth of meaning. It is about having a reader slow down and seek the finer details, rather than rush through a plot. It is about broadening our aware..."Cuckoo's Nest didn't cause asylum reform.
Mochaespresso,I don't actually think The Great Gatsby is a lot complex than you make it, but that's another discussion.
The reason The Great Gatsby should not be replaced in the curriculum is that it's great writing -- Fitzgerald's use of language is exquisite, the apparent subject matters are easy to relate to -- love, money, status, ambition, it's easy to read (cf. Moby Dick ), many high school students do in fact love it even if some hate it, and it's short.
People don't only read one book in high school -- but this would be an odd one to lose.
If it's not to some people's taste, well, nothing is to everyone's taste. And really, so what? This is school -- everything isn't going to fun for everyone. Do we stop teaching biology or physics or ancient history or foreign languages because some people don't like it?
Or better yet do we skip the Krebs (citric acid) cycle in anatomy and physiology because some people find it boring even if it's an essential process (it's how we translate glucose into energy.)
If you only like reading about people who fall in love with admirable characters, that's fine -- well, there goes a lot of major literature. Anna Karenina comes to mind. If you have to like the character herself, there goes Madame Bovary .
And there goes realism because just maybe, in real life, people don't always make the smartest choices when the fall in love. Maybe never your friends, but I've known people like that.
I personally can't stand the character of Othello -- I find him totally unsympathetic -- but I wouldn't take the play off a reading list.
There's NOTHING absolutely wrong with you if you don't like a book. I don't like all great literature either. I've yet to understand why people love James Joyce. I don't think there's anything wrong with me that I don't.
But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with Joyce or that he shouldn't be taught or that Ulysses wasn't the more influential novel of the 20th century. It's a limitation of my taste. I'm not proud of it, but there it is. I wish I did get Joyce but I'd have to bet it's not going to happen. I'd have loved a teacher who was able to show make me experience his greatness, but it wasn't a teacher's fault that I can't.
I don't think all high school students will like everything assigned. I don't even think all English literature majors at a college will like everything assigned.
So what?
That doesn't mean it shouldn't be assigned.
I once knew a teacher who taught Freshman composition who said something like this: "When I started I'd do everything in the world to get people interested in the books. I'd stand on my head. But after a while, I realized that some people just don't get literature, and there's nothing you can do about it."
Some teachers are better than others. No teacher inspires a love of the subject in all of his or her students.
And NO ONE gets it all. But what I find annoying is that notion is that it's the book's fault.
The study of English literature is in fact the study of classic literature written in English. No one likes all of it.
Cait wrote: "Cuckoo's Nest didn't cause asylum reform."http://jhamann.hubpages.com/hub/A-loo...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...
"Huge, spirit-crushing state institutions – like the Oregon facility later depicted in the film – began reducing their excessive resident numbers and granting patients more rights."
I was forced to read OLD MAN AND THE SEA, and LITTLE WOMEN, and well, I'm sure some other books I didn't like. But I got over it without permanent scarring. I like GATSBY and was forced to read it too. Cool how things like that happen. Students should be forced to do things they wouldn't otherwise do sometimes. It's called learning, and amazing things can result from it. Then they can read TWILIGHT in their free time if they want to...at least they're reading. I would read Mickey Spillane in my free time as a teenager. And other than thinking of a pretty woman as a "babe" or a "dish" sometimes I managed to (yes it's open to debate) grow up anyway. Reading anything is still reading, still exposing oneself to another perspective, and much preferable to the alternative.
Bill wrote: " But what I find annoying is that notion is that it's the book's fault." Bravo!
"It's a lousy book" sounds so much better than, "I didn't get it" in the ear of the insecure ego.
William wrote: "Eve wrote: "Amy wrote: "Eve wrote: "Amy wrote: "Eve wrote: "Lara wrote: "Eve, you have given me so much enthusiasm for getting to school this morning to teach my students. It's nice to read how re..."William, I love it. Reading is dangerous.
Geoffrey wrote: "I have been writing an academic article on exactly this topic and have found a dearth of literature on what students want to read, which leads me to believe that the education academicians don't ca..."You have some great ideas. I think all of these are great ways to get students motivated to read classics. I'm not a big fan of the short story but I do believe this is a great way to introduce a wide variety of authors and genres.
Diane- I only skimmed a few responses and felt bad that so many flogged you rather than have a discussion. I can absolutely see your reason for broaching you question. When I re-read Gatsby in January, I thought to myself that this would be hard to teach now days. Not because it is not relevant, but because of the adultery, drinking, and the horrific car wreck in which the breast was left flapping. Parents will shut down what kids read in school while their nearly adult kids are watching Jersey Shore and 16 & Pregnant. Go figure. So, my thoughts are this (I can only hope you might still be reading!): Gatsby can absolutely be taught concurrently with history/social studies lessons about the 20's. While it does not parallel the lives of students, literature is truly working its magic when it begs us- even 16 year olds- to think about a world which doesn't entirely match our own. Kids, if led well by their instructors, will examine the rights and wrongs of Nick, Gatsby and the ladies who they adore. They will challenge the validity of friendships and social structure, the gains and pitfalls of putting on aires and focusing one superficial goal. There is so much that can be pulled from this book that is relevant to society. Though the students might not be witnessing any or all these behaviors in their world at 16, they will within the next ten years.
I think it is nearly criminal to cater so much to what the kids want to read than it is to raise the barre and have them truly dive into literature provides so much insight to the era that was just 90 years ago.
I am a high school senior and I had to read Gatsby this year. And I honestly absolutely loved it. This book immediately jumped to the top of my favorite books list. I can see why people don't like Gatsby, and I respect that, (a lot of kids in my class didn't like the book either), but I don't think someone's dislike for the book is a valid enough reason for them to stop teaching it in high school's altogether. I fell in love with this book partially due to the engaging conversations we had in class about it. We spent a whole class period arguing whether or not we believed that Fitzgerald portrayed Gatsby as an admirable character or a pathetic one for believing so much in this one dream (I think he's very admirable). I think the best books strike discussion, and Gatsby is clearly doing that as seen by the discussion going on right now. To take that away would be a tragedy.
I have also read To Kill a Mocking Bird, Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies, Othello, Romeo and Juliet, Of Mice and Men, Death of a Salesman, Huckleberry Finn, Into the Wild, The Glass Menagerie and so many more---all books I had to read in my English class. We read A LOT in our English classes guys, not just Gatsby. And we discuss the books too. We don't read the book and go to class and are told that Gatsby is a pathetic character, end of story. I guess, however, that relies heavily on the teacher and the school.
As for the relevance question, I think Gatsby is very relevant to today. The theme of following your dream is one that will always be relevant--don't parents tell that to their kids every day?--as well as the complex relationships between the characters. To say The Great Gatsby is simplistic is a vast understatement of the book, in my opinion. Not all of us watch Jersey Shore and 16 & Pregnant religiously. But also, just because we watch those shows doesn't mean we don't understand reality and the actual hardships of life. Teenagers often get so belittled for not knowing anything and what I say to that is, "Don't judge someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes."
Same goes for The Great Gatsby. To sit there and say you don't believe it is relevant to high-schoolers and yet many of you have been out of high school for a few years. I don't mean to come of harsh, I just think to answer this question fully, you have to ask the people whose curriculum you're changing. Even I am just one high school senior with one opinion and can't be the deciding factor on whether Gatsby should be taught or not. To answer this, both a large group of adults AND high school students have to be consulted, not just one or the other.
I think a lot of people have said good things in this discussion and brought up many well-rounded points. Literature isn't about right and wrong but interpretation of the authors intent as well as discussion of personal opinions/emotions. Gatsby has clearly brought up both of those and, so in my opinion, should stay.
P.S. As for the Twilight comment, I think that's a huge generalization. I, by no means, think Twilight is anywhere close to being the best book ever written, nor will it ever be. I read it when I was in middle school and I loved it then because I was the target audience. Of course young teenager girls think it's the best book ever, they're supposed to. However, thanks to the wonderful books we read in our English classes *wink*, I believe that most of us eventually grow out of that phase.
Eve wrote: "And he was. It was a truly American story. Rags to riches. All done on one's own. A self made man."Gatsby made his fortune illicitly. He was a crook. Are you saying that's American? Maybe in some circles, but not mine.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Handmaid’s Tale (other topics)
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (other topics)
Watership Down (other topics)
The Lord of the Rings (other topics)
More...
Ray Bradbury (other topics)
Ernest Hemingway (other topics)
John Steinbeck (other topics)
Edgar Allan Poe (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
American Gods (other topics)The Handmaid’s Tale (other topics)
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (other topics)
Watership Down (other topics)
The Lord of the Rings (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
John Updike (other topics)Ray Bradbury (other topics)
Ernest Hemingway (other topics)
John Steinbeck (other topics)
Edgar Allan Poe (other topics)
More...
Sadly, there will be many who do go to the grave without finding their song. But shouldn't we choose to teach them when they are young and still have a chance? Or should we decide that's too much effort and read the latest trendy fiction?
Myself, I will choose Gatsby's own vision and choose hope.