The Grapes of Wrath
discussion
On my 4th or 5th re-reading with students, and I'm starting to dislike this book.
Larry wrote: "Amen. Nothing more to be said. Except the teachers aren't putting forth the effort either if no one is understanding how to get someting out of a book and there is no one to guide them. Still great..."Good point, though as a teacher myself (there's a surprise!), I think it can be very easy to become jaded in the face of apathy.
There's always going to be a cultural gulf between teachers and students because when the teachers were students themselves they were among the maybe 7% of the class that gave a d**n.
Of course, it depends what kind of school we are talking about. I've taught in private as well as public schools and much as it jars to say so, you get a much better response and even genuine enthusiasm out of a lot more of the students in the former than the latter.
Sad but true. No wonder there's an ever-widening social gap.
Sam wrote: "Nik wrote: "This doesn't apply to anyone on this site (whatever their age), but I think that if classics (or almost any book) are hard for the majority of HS readers (which does not include Sam, Ar..."Ha ha ha - actually I love your friend's comment "Romeo and Juliet fall in love for like three days and then kill themselves. How is that a love story?"
Can I use that as an essay question with my students?
Kirby wrote: "Nik wrote: "They don't understand it because they don't know the 'rules' for reading a novelThey don't learn the 'rules' or even realise there are any because they don't really know what a novel i..."
Ha ha ha : ))))
You're right of course, though in my defence I did use scare quotes ... but anyway, what I meant is that you can't usually read a novel in the same way that you would watch a movie.
I think there's a misunderstanding that reading is a passive activity whereas I would suggest it's an aggressively active one.
One reason I think some Sherlock Holmes stories can be good (in class) is that being a detective and looking for clues is a great analogy for the novel reading process itself.
Even better is 'The Second Bakery Attack' short story by Murakami - I get great success with that one. Partly because it involves a wife with a pump action shot gun and a husband with the munchies in the middle of the night.
Contemporary, mysterious, surreal and appealing.
Anyway ...
Amy wrote: "Larry wrote: "Amen. Nothing more to be said. Except the teachers aren't putting forth the effort either if no one is understanding how to get someting out of a book and there is no one to guide the..."That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and individual one.
Nik wrote: "Amy wrote: "Larry wrote: "Amen. Nothing more to be said. Except the teachers aren't putting forth the effort either if no one is understanding how to get someting out of a book and there is no one ..."Students do want to do everything in groups, which is the direction the world is heading. It is a fine line to walk between allowing group projects and project-based learning and giving enough individualized work to ensure each student has learned. During the course of a novel, I usually do a couple group activities, but for the final essay analysis, students have to work on their own. I make students do all their writing in front of me in class so I know they are writing it by themselves. It also allows me to block sparknotes during the essay analysis. I always allow the use of the novel itself since I require textual support with citations, and this is where I can easily catch the non-readers. They are unable to find any examples, etc. to support their claims. This is when they admit they didn't even open the book, and then I direct them to a certain chapter to read and look for an example. That makes them at least read a few of the chapters to address the essay questions.
Andrei wrote: "Nik wrote: "That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and individual one."Maybe that's the reason we talk ab..."
Teaching literature is NOT about reading the classics. Literature is a tool to teach imperative reading comprehension skills. Students need to learn how to digest difficult text for college and for life. The novels used are the tools to teach such skills. My job as a English Language Arts teacher is to bolster my students' reading and writing skills that they will need for their other classes - science, math, social sciences - for college, and for their future careers. If you think that "literature" is some sort of an elective course for book lovers that has no place in education, you are entirely mistaken of the use/purpose of literature.
Just want to chime in and say that this discussion has turned into something extremely interesting! Glad to hear from learned teachers and their experiences.
Andrei wrote: "Amy wrote: "Teaching literature is NOT about reading the classics..."Don't get me wrong, I understand the value of literature and I appreciate that you put so much effort into teaching it.
What..."
The new National Common Core Standards is trying to address this issue by requiring a mix of ficition and non-fiction in the ELA classrooms. The goal is by grade 11, 70% of texts are in the non-fiction band of proficiency (a lot of historical and political documents, which I'm afraid will entice students LESS than classic literature). I agree they need more non-fiction reading skills, but I'm not looking forward to trying to pump up interest in those historical documents and political pieces.
@Andrei and Amy (and anyone really but essentially Andrei and Amy).I don't know about you guys, but I am unable to resolve the dilemma that you are talking around, i.e. do you teach something 'relevant' or something 'classic'?
Especially in the case of public (i.e. state-funded) school students, I can see the sense in teaching from works that are supposed to be 'relevant' to the students' backgrounds and life experiences.
However, 'relevant' is just as vague a category (I think) as 'classic' and - from personal experience as a student myself - books that are deemed 'relevant' are, and I use the precise technical term here "shite".
I'm British and many years ago there was a low budget Scottish movie called 'Gregory's Girl' that came out in the 80s. It was an OK comedy and quite popular at the box office. It was basically the story of a dorky HS kid who goes on a series of dates with several girls in just one evening.
It wasn't based on a novel but a novelisation of the movie ended up being specially-written for schools (public (US)/state(UK) schools of course, not public(UK)/private ones(US)) to be 'relevant' and ... my God, the tedium of having to read through that 'ca-ca' still burns me now I swear! Some guy had clearly sat down with a VCR of the movie and had paused every 2 or 3 minutes between writing a paragraph.
My point is that me and my friends would have been (and eventually were) happy enough to read Wuthering Heights, Persuasion etc. and enjoy them as well, but I was both patronised and bored into stupefaction by 'Gregory's Girl: the novel'.
But anyway, I digress ... basically, I actually think we should teach 'classics', especially in public(US)/State(UK) schools because:
(1) you never, ever hear debates (in the UK) about whether or not we should teach Austen, Dickens etc. in public/state schools - they just do it;
(2) one of the rewards of education is that it is a means of escape - getting students to read something that is outside of their everyday experience is surely by definition a broadening of their horizons. Why on earth would a 14 or 15 year-old want to read a fiction about the life they already live? How are you supposed to convince someone that literature is worth the effort if the literature you attempt to give them is a blurry out-of-focus version of their own experiences?
And as brutal as this may sound, seeds do sometimes fall on fallow ground and there's only so much a teacher, however dedicated, can expect to be able to influence their students. That's going to happen whether you teach 'classics' or Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code (apologies for anyone who likes that novel - I use the word in it's loosest sense - but I would refuse to teach that if I were ever asked to).
Nik wrote: "@Andrei and Amy (and anyone really but essentially Andrei and Amy).I don't know about you guys, but I am unable to resolve the dilemma that you are talking around, i.e. do you teach something 're..."
It is a hard decision as a teacher. I wish I could get 100% reader participation, but I know that's not going to happen unfortunately. I certainly get a much higher participation with the "high interest"/relevant reads versus the classics. I try to create a balance between the two. I start the semester with a high interest read to "snag" my students' attention. Then as the semester moves on, we work into the more difficult classics. For example with my freshman English literature class: we started the semester with The Hunger Games, moved on to Night, then read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and then finished the semester with Romeo and Juliet. I do find that the students can make more personal connections with the relevant reads (like The Hunger Games), but those who do actually read the classics have a much higher sense of pride and accomplishment when they finish the classic. Now with the new National Common Core standards, ELA teachers will have to incorporate more non-fiction works in the classroom (70% non-fiction by 11th grade). Students who do all the required reading fall into 2 categories: the avid book readers :) and the academics who do all the required work to be successful students (sometimes these 2 categories overlap). I try my best to reach the non-readers but have also come to accept that I will not be able to get 100% reader participation (I had 90% with The Hunger Games!). I wish I could meet the English teacher who can get every student to read every book and find out his/her methods.
Amy wrote: "Nik wrote: "@Andrei and Amy (and anyone really but essentially Andrei and Amy).I don't know about you guys, but I am unable to resolve the dilemma that you are talking around, i.e. do you teach s..."
My english teacher gave 5 point quizzes on the chapters that were due. She asked questions that would not be in the sparknotes and it really did get the class reading. It works, but it's probably not the positive motivator you are looking for.
Perhaps a screening of the classic movie adaptation of 'Grapes' would be helpful. Come to think of it, I am surprised that we in the U.S. don't ask our students to read a great screenplay or two as part of their education. Film is the medium for which, arguably, U.S. writers are best known around the world. U.S. kids should learn how to read movies as well as how to read novels. 'Chinatown' comes to mind, or 'The Empire Strikes Back'. These scripts are readily available. The students might be astonished to realize that the movies they love so much actually begin with a text that had to be pounded out on a word processor by a lonely individual sitting in a room. It might even get them thinking about Shakespeare, who, with his rapid-fire short scenes building into sequences would, if he were alive today, would definitely be drawing a seven figure income out in L.A.
Sam wrote: "Amy wrote: "Nik wrote: "@Andrei and Amy (and anyone really but essentially Andrei and Amy).I don't know about you guys, but I am unable to resolve the dilemma that you are talking around, i.e. do..."
I do this as well, but little 5-point quizzes, even when they are getting 0's, do not affect the overall grade enough to hurt them terribly unless they are happening at the start of a quarter when not that many other grades are entered. And you'd be surprised how detailed sparknotes can be and how it focuses directly with thematic details that teachers would focus on. Quizzes that would eliminate any sparknotes information would have to be on totally irrelevant details that I don't really want to focus on anyway. And yes, not a motivating tool at all. I have more luck having the students list 10 important/interesting details that happened in the chapter.
That's been done in my school! It was usually an easy way for teachers to wander out. After hitting play and saying "be back, watch take notes, quizz when its over!" Yes there is a great place to teach novels in the script form it's called, "film school!" However, I will agree that Grape of Wrath was a terrific adaptation of the book with terrific acting, one problem for students of this techno age, "its in black and white!" (Not unlike the letters in a book, which some seem to have a problem wiith). How about instituting an "Analog or even more bizarre anochronism hour," where all multi-media except pens, pencils, papers, books anc chalk are implemted(do they still make chalk?). The point is not the writing implements or such, its just to be sure that the digital age is excluded to all but on focus:books+reading=Lit. Class; and for the those saying this is a "social age", thats where "discussion," comes in, and possible the teacher to moderate and nudge into the salient direction or even be amazed by the brighter students and a fresh insight. This whole it's a techno age can't compete crap is a cop out. Yes, I'm sure you encounter problems, it's your job to be innovative, do that old saying, "think outside the box!" Oh! Its old(the saying) maybe to analog. Wait, everyone is in a box-the pc.(the irony I am on one right now is not lost upon me!) There are people who were students that don't read, and there always will be, to now attribute the shortcomings of teaching the classics is to the digital age is might go like telling Dickens, "You'll never be able to write that long hand! For heaven's sake wait for the computer!" "Compu...What?" "Trust me everyone will read when the ability to mass produce literature with such ease for accessiblilty will be a boon!" This is too long a comment, but it is no classic so maybe someone will finish reading it! Still believe there are good teacher, I had distractions, still overcame them with incentives by terrific teachers! So to those teachers I apologize, you are great! Thankyou, excuse me I have to go read being on this pc is killing to many brain cells for one night! No the book is not a classic! Its Murakami and he's great!
Argento wrote: "Classics are lost on today's youth, perhaps not so much because they're used to instant gratification, but because they lack perspective/experience. No cure for that at this stage."That's what education needs to confront though: providing perspective. I imagine reading this multiple times would be a drag eventually...
I would suggest Anthony Burgess(forgive spelling) A Clock Work Orange! To me its a love story of friendship and social reformation. Ahhhh.... Americn Beauty a great studio "Dead" album. Wait the movie?1 Oh, yeah an older guy lusting after a cheerleader...good suggestion Nabakov...oh sorry if you don't get the reference...oops, they did make that a movie...to bad that great entrepeneuar and innovator Larry Flint didn't make it! Hey there's a movie about him. Yeah! Movies, definitely movies, I think the topic was reading books. I bet they like reading menus at a resteraunt too.
That last one was pure comedy. An example of someone using writing as an axe to grind in classic form, is not only classic, its disguised as a quest though hell, where most of the circles of hell are populated by rivals of Dante. I don't wish you banished to the cirlces of hell. May you find your Beatrice and she inpsire you to READ.
Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Nik wrote: "That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and individual one."Maybe that's the re..."
You should teach technical manuals for how to get ahead in college and discard reading for its own sake because it is pointless. What are you watching on tv?
American Beauty is a great idea; I've always interpreted it as an instantiation of the Faust legend.
Larry wrote: "Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Nik wrote: "That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and individual one."Maybe t..."
What are you even talking about? Have you not read any of my other posts where I discuss the novels I do use in my classroom - a healthy mix of high interest reads and the classics? Before you spout off on my teaching skills, take a gander at the National Common Core Standards for English Language Arts for grades 9-12 that have reading split into 2 categories: literature and informational reading. By grade 11, students are expected to be reading 70% informational texts and 30% literature. This is what English teachers are expected to follow now. English classes are now designed to be teaching students skills needed for the outside world - critical reading and technical, critical writing. Sorry, I can't spend an entire semester "reading for its own sake" - I have more important skills to teach. Larry, if you are setting out to just ruffle my feathers, you have done so. I work my ass off trying to find ways to encourage students to read and enjoy reading; I pride myself in being an excellent educator who stays fresh and focuses on individual student achievement. I absolutely am not one of "those" teachers who teach the exact same way, day in and day out, for 30 years, student motivation be damned. So, I take offense that you - in a couple comments actually - seem to be implying that I am an ineffective teacher.
Amy wrote: "Larry wrote: "Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Nik wrote: "That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and individual ..."I stand corrected and apologize. Anyone who can write with such passion about a comment(no sarcasm at all!)is caring enough about their pricipals in teaching. I will admit ignorance or even outright stupidity in this matter. You are bound by a curriculum. I will qualify this by saying I had teachers that did inspire me to pursue learning past the expected norm for a degree or what is expected in skills in the workplace. Seems other course should and may very well be shoudering the load for reading books salient to their topics of study. It's been a long time. I do know I have got to go, I am a the library getting some books to read. Know irony intended, the point, I continue to learn and think it is important that, that be pointed out students. One skilled positon where this is constant requirement is being a pharmacist. Learning does not stop with school. However, students are missing out if they don't realize the wonder of books. In my time there was those who read and those who didn't, there always will be. There were also "cliff notes" and people(myself, guilty as well, of being paid to write papers for people who didn't want to read-easy money-poor ethics!). Forgive my skills in editing myself, or the fact that my writing has degenerated do to lack of constant practice, I am just frustrated at the number of excuses rather than solutions that are offered. No you will not get 100% readership, nor interest everyone. Yes you are bound by the constraints of what you teach, but giving incentive or passion like you did to the ivective of your response to me, is a good start, and as I said, I believe from your response you are passionate in your job! My apologies. All the best.
I loved to read as a teenager. Obviously, I still do. I love to read anything I can get my hands on. I read "The Three Musketeers" in fifth grade and loved it. That being said I detested "Grapes of Wraith." It's long, it's boring, it drags, it repeats. Personally, I don't see the big deal about Steinbeck. I appreciate what he was trying to say in all of his writings (I've read Of Mice and Men and The Red Pony both which I didn't like either) but to me, he's not my favorite. While you'll always have hit and misses with students caring at all, you'll have dedicated students, like I was, that will hate certain authors or works. Just a luck of the draw.
However, I have to agree with a lot of the comments. If you don't like it, you'll students will like it even less. I tolerated Grapes of Wrath because my teacher thought it was the bible of American literature. Teach something else of Steinbeck's and your students will probably appreciate him if you show that you do too.
I know that I enjoyed the Grapes of Wrath when I read it as a teenager. I don't think that it was assigned reading. I don't recall being assigned any Steinbeck novels. I agree that Cannery Row or Of Mice and Men might be better choices for high school students.
Lately I've tried to read a few classics that I did not read in school and I've had trouble staying interested because of the slow pace. I think in today's television and movie oriented world we have trouble adjusting to the slower pace of these novels.
Steinbeck, I am certain, would lament the death - by slow strangulation - of what used to be called a 'liberal education'. The implication that there is an essential difference between 'informational' texts and 'literature' is disturbing, and suggests that the capitalist commissars who mandated the 'National Common Core Standards For English Language Arts' (NACCSELA ?) are every bit as sure of themselves as the Russian Marxist-Leninists who restricted their literature curriculum to works of social realism (including, ironically, Steinbeck). Ezra Pound famously wrote that "poetry is news that stays news", to which William Carlos Williams added (In 'Asphodel. That Greeny Flower') "It is difficult / to get the news from poems / But men and women die every day / for lack / of what is found there." I am saddened that thoughtful and devoted teachers such as Amy are forced to take dictation from those higher-ups who seem to be more concerned with churning out a work force of 'good employees' than with enriching the inner lives of said 'employees'. I do not undervalue the importance of being able to make ends meet once one has been kicked out of the nest; I do think the recent spate of articles about 'useless degrees' (almost invariably in the arts and humanities) rather disingenuously conceal an underlying political agenda. I majored in comparative literature as an undergraduate and went on to a career as an orthopaedic surgeon. I never regretted for a moment the time I spent reading 'the classics'. One acquires a lot of knowledge in medical school, but very little wisdom; the person who has little or no acquaintance with the great poets, novelists, prophets, philosophers and dramatists will, over the course of a lifetime, have to reinvent a lot of wheels, and not all of them will be round. Are we in the U.S. really prepared to adopt the German model, and administer an Abitur to our sixth graders to determine whether they will get to go to trade school (= blue collar workers), general education school (= white collar workers) or prep school (= professionals, elite creative artists and business execs)? Why shouldn't 'informational reading' be taught in 'informational classes', like history, economics, civics, and, for the scientific literature, science classes? Do they even still teach civics? This wasn't completely off-topic. I mentioned Steinbeck twice. Amy, the world needs more educators like yourself.
Larry wrote: "Amy wrote: "Larry wrote: "Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Nik wrote: "That's a really good point ... especially nowadays when almost everything is a social and group experience rather than a private and..."Thank you. I am very passionate about being the best teacher for my students. You hit the nail on the head about other content areas shouldering some responsibility for reading - trouble is, they don't. They view "reading standards" as the duy/responsibility of the English teacher, even though the new common core requires a large quantity of non-fiction (primarily historical documents and political pieces, which "should/could" be addressed by the history teacher). Teaching is equally challenging and rewarding; it is too bad that not every student is as hungry for education as teachers are!
Mark wrote: "Steinbeck, I am certain, would lament the death - by slow strangulation - of what used to be called a 'liberal education'. The implication that there is an essential difference between 'informatio..."Thank you! I agree - there are many aspects of the national common core I am unhappy with, including the expectation that English teachers shoulder all the burden of reading instruction. In my mind, a better model would have the "reading informational texts" requirements attached to the science, math, and history standards and the "reading literature" standards left with the language arts standards. I believe the science/math/history teachers would be better suited to teach the vocabulary that accompanies the non-fiction texts students will need to read for the common core standards. Who better to guide students through Patrick Henry's Speech in the Virginia Convention than the history teacher who has a broader knowledge of the historical and political background? (for a single example) This year, I'm especially looking forward to my novels/creative writing elective class where students who do love to read can delve into the world of good literature with me!
I didn't read this in school. I wish my teacher would have made me... it was so sad, and terrible how these people were treated, but, I thought it still related to today's world... big banks, greedy, taking land (foreclosures) from people who work hard.. and for what? profit.... it's a sad, sad world.
I would be the first to admit that it's a bit clunky in spots (in the balance, I think Steinbeck, contrasted with someone like Fitzgerald, say, had more heart than writing skill), but it's an important document about how wonderful and how awful humans can treat each other, and the power of the instinct for survival. It just breaks my heart, though, that it's a teacher that started this thread. Please don't give up, though. Your students have all their lives to read mere entertainment (or give up reading in favor of television). If you touch just one student a year, you'll be doing great.
Mark wrote: "Steinbeck, I am certain, would lament the death - by slow strangulation - of what used to be called a 'liberal education'. The implication that there is an essential difference between 'informatio..." I couldn't agree with you more. I studied American Studies and have gone on to a career which bears no relation to what I studied. Narrow restricted curriculum and prescribed political opinion about what should be studied I fear will narrow people's experience of broader education. Whatever happened to the great traditions of the past such as workers clubbing together to create reading societies and to engage lecturers on a broad range of topics
Sam wrote: "Nik wrote: "This doesn't apply to anyone on this site (whatever their age), but I think that if classics (or almost any book) are hard for the majority of HS readers (which does not include Sam, Ar..."I feel for you. If those were an example of the critical skills of those around you. Good luck!
we read Mice and Men and would periodically have class discussions, quizes, tests and then watch the videos. In regards to Romo and Juliet we read it only in class, while the teacher explained the style of language. Afterwords we watched the 70's version of it, which of course was in Shakespeares language, but by then we had a better understanding of what was being said. Some people would complain they didn't like a book, but everyone read it as we would read it individually in class as well as out of class. I wasn't a fan of the Great Gatsby but others liked it and enjoyed the film.
Classics are classics for a reason. There's a good story in there, especially this one. It may not have had the happiest ending or a big action packed scene but it was a story about people, a very realistic one at that. I don't know maybe I love it because it reminds me of my grandmother who lived through the dust bowl and came to California. Steinbeck has a very hidden way of writing that I think is beautiful and makes the story even richer.
ken burns has a documentary called "the dust bowl" coming to PBS in november...just thought I'd share that. :)
BoBandy wrote: "I would be the first to admit that it's a bit clunky in spots (in the balance, I think Steinbeck, contrasted with someone like Fitzgerald, say, had more heart than writing skill), but it's an impo..."Why is it so heartbreaking that I started this thread? I believe my curriculum is pretty packed with meaningful literature - a great mix of high interest reads and the classics (please read through some of my other comments). Just because this particular novel no longer resonates with me doesn't make me a poor teacher - it just means I will be selecting a different piece of American literature to fill the slot. Isn't it better that I find a replacement for this novel in my curriculum than continue to teach it even though I don't "feel the love" for it anymore? I think it would be MORE heartbreaking if I had said that I was sick and tired of this novel but will still teach it so I don't have to do the work of finding a replacement and all the preparation that goes with it. I take it you are not a teacher.
Amy wrote: "BoBandy wrote: "I would be the first to admit that it's a bit clunky in spots (in the balance, I think Steinbeck, contrasted with someone like Fitzgerald, say, had more heart than writing skill), ..."Didn't intend to attack your integrity as a teacher. Nothing personal intended. Sorry if it sounded like that.
Sam wrote: "I am a teenager and I love to read, especially classics. With that in mind I still didn't like this book. Grapes of Wrath is the kind of book that you like once your finished reading, but when you ..."I was shocked to read "the way it was written makes it a drag for the reader". The "way it was written" is art, as far as I am concerned. Every sentence was crafted to be exactly what it is now. Its value as a classic is hardly the story itself (whether it's communist propaganda or not is besides the point). It is the text. The text itself is pure art.
macgregor wrote: "Valerie wrote: "Twilight's only purpose is for entertainment. You can't gain anything intelligent from reading that kind of book"I fundamentally agree with your overall post, but I take issue wit..."
I agree. When I was teaching high school English I found it very helpful to start with a book or film students loved and were comfortable with and then use discussion about themes and ideas to move onto more challenging texts. This helped students to relate to books from different eras and see the connections and also open their eyes to cultural and political differences. I used discussion about Twilight as an introduction to Romeo & Juliet and it worked well.
I believe the classics have a place on school curriculums but at the same time I know far too many people who were turned off not just the classics, but reading in general through bad experiences in high school with books they found boring and uninspiring. Grapes of Wrath is my favourite book of all time, but I didn't read it till I was at university. I'm not sure I would have appreciated it in high school. We did read Of Mice and Men though and it had a pretty profound and lasting impression on me.
Even with a three year break, Amy, I think teaching the same book repeatedly can become a bit stale, so maybe it's just time for you to try something new. I used to get bored teaching the same book twice!
Amy wrote: "I took about a 3 year break from teaching The Grapes of Wrath, but apparently, that wasn't long enough. I forgot how boring parts of this can be. I still see the story as valuable for my students t..."It's unclear to me whether you are criticizing the book (content, style, POV, characters) or complaining that it is hard to teach to modern students. I mistakenly took your headline to mean the former. I expected to hear something about the BOOK you didn't like. Which is it? And why did you change your focus in the middle of your post?
Leslie wrote: "Patrice wrote: "Amy wrote: "I took about a 3 year break from teaching The Grapes of Wrath, but apparently, that wasn't long enough. I forgot how boring parts of this can be. I still see the story a..."I agree with Patrice for the most part. Whether Steinbeck was or was not a 'communist', the story comes across to me as more 'socialist'. The idea, quite correct, is that capitalism rampant causes social misery to those with no resources.
I say that as a conservative: you don't have to be a socialist to see the truth of what Steinbeck writes. The problem is that no feasible alternative has been demonstrated. See the film OUR DAILY BREAD (1940) directed by King Vidor (?) for an illustration of what really happens when we all get really cozy, share our harvests ,,, and yet still the alpha preditors soon take over and all that "for the masses" rhetoric goes out the window. It happened in Russia, Cuba, China, etc. Steinbeck doesn't realistically propose a political/social structure that would protect the poor Oakies from exploitation and still function over the long run.
There are lots of reasons to teach Grapes of Wrath. I read it in 10th grade and didn't like it much at the time. I probably would never have read it on my own. But more than 30 years later, I still think about that book. I guess that is the definition of great literature.
Penny wrote: "Amy wrote: "I took about a 3 year break from teaching The Grapes of Wrath, but apparently, that wasn't long enough. I forgot how boring parts of this can be. I still see the story as valuable for m..."A bit of both. After reading it many times, I got bored with the style. I felt like the narration and descriptions dragged on and on. I decided since I got bored with reading it, most of my students would as well. I would rather select a new work that I find exciting to read and be more inspired to teach rather than use something I have grown to dislike. If that makes me a bad teacher, you have a skewed idea of education. It is the teacher who continues to teach the same old, same old every year for 30 years that is stale and uninspiring - NOT the teacher who admits to have a growing dislike of a novel and chooses something fresh and new for the curriculum. Also, why are you criticizing my first post? Sorry it didn't follow the format you were looking for. You could have just ignored it if it irritated you so.
While I will admit that "The Grapes of Wrath" is not my favorite Steinbeck novel. I do believe his novels belong in High School. This was not a novel we read in Literature class though. This was taught as part of our U. S. History II course in 11th grade. Maybe you should get together with the History Teachers and teach it when the students are learning about the great depression to put the novel in perspective.I did not like the character of the preacher man, either.
Kathy wrote: "While I will admit that "The Grapes of Wrath" is not my favorite Steinbeck novel. I do believe his novels belong in High School. This was not a novel we read in Literature class though. This was ta..."Excellent suggestion! One of the hardest things about teaching history is getting young people to understand how events of the time felt to the people who lived it. I grew up with family who lived through the Depression but my children did not. My parents were too young and don't remember much before WWII.
Amy wrote: "It is the teacher who continues to teach the same old, same old every year for 30 years that is stale and uninspiring - NOT the teacher who admits to have a growing dislike of a novel and chooses something fresh and new for the curriculum. "very true! I've been really surprised by how many people have attacked amy over this!
Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Amy wrote: "Teaching literature is NOT about reading the classics..."Don't get me wrong, I understand the value of literature and I appreciate that you put so much effort into teac..."
I agree that students should read more non-fiction, but in a specified Literature class it really should be "literary criticism" to prepare for college research papers. History and Science should require the bulk of non-fiction reading once a student enters middle school. If a literature teacher is responsible for all a students reading than why have all the other subjects? This is not meant to be a criticism of teachers, but rather curriculum designers who have forgotten that every subject required additional reading when we were all students. It was my 6th grade science teacher who introduced me to Sherlock Holmes. No, I was not forced to read them, but I did and greatly enjoyed them. I discovered Dickens on my own. In 7th grade Biology we were encouraged to read Jules Verne. Now I know my examples do not prove any particular point except that there was more reading recommended than assigned. Maybe students need to go back to reading in all subjects and given an additional list to explore. I comprehensive list should have something for everyone. Of course when I was in school the school library had more topics and yes one could find car repair manuals in the "Media Center" and was not judged for reading that over "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". After all reading is fun. Let the children know that there are assigned readings, additional information readings, and what you want to read. There should be a place for all types of reading.
Kathy wrote: "Amy wrote: "Andrei wrote: "Amy wrote: "Teaching literature is NOT about reading the classics..."Don't get me wrong, I understand the value of literature and I appreciate that you put so much effo..."
I totally agree with you! The new National Common Core Standards for English Language Arts is to blame, really, for taking away the literature. Yes, it really should be the history, science, and math teachers that address reading non-fiction works, but many of these teachers and some admin believe that "reading" instruction is the job of the English teacher.
Only as far as the Elementary Anthologies go. High School reading should be classics that transcend time and place and have lessons for everyone. Once children have textbooks for each subject let the Non-fiction subjects teach how to read their material.
Have you come across any grapic novel-type editions of GOW? I'd recommend them. Basic ideas conveyed, minus the 'wordiness'.
Many of the comments revolve around the book being classic but there do not seem to be any comments about why it is a classic. I think it is important to read this book, but not because it is considered a classic. This book be interesting if read through different literary lenses. For instance, I think it is a classic because it is a new take on transcendentalism. If teaching a literature course, one might think about pairing this with Emerson and make comparisons.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
When The Legends Die (other topics)
O Pioneers! (other topics)
Angle of Repose (other topics)
Obscene in the Extreme: The Burning and Banning of John Steinbeck's the Grapes of Wrath (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
The Grapes of Wrath (other topics)When The Legends Die (other topics)
O Pioneers! (other topics)
Angle of Repose (other topics)
Obscene in the Extreme: The Burning and Banning of John Steinbeck's the Grapes of Wrath (other topics)
More...
A lot of teachers try and try and then give up because many, many students are so apathetic they could care less if they do read/comprehend. They are of the era where the mighty Internet will answer all their questions for them and give them a short synopsis and character descriptions (sparknotes) - just enough to squeak by without doing any work. Students don't want to spend a couple hours a night reading for an assignment or even fun - that's time away from friends, texting, video games, TV, movies, Facebook, and the Internet. Why spend 2 hours reading a couple chapters of a novel when 15 minutes on sparknotes gives just "enough"? Not all teens are this way, but a majority are.