Poll: Should literature be a required subject?

[Chaotic42]

Not things like spelling and grammar, but literature. I used to think it was a waste (especially while in the class), but Chuck Colson recently made a good point that literature is very important to our society. He was specifically talking about 19th and early 20th century American literature, but I got the feeling he meant it was important in general.

So do you think that literature should be a required subject for high school and college?

 

[So]

Definitely, not only does literature make a student aware of our rich literary heritage, but it is an inexpensive way to force students to think critically, which is clearly a skill that every human being needs, if they are to do well in life.

 

[Feldenak]

Yes, it should be required.

I hated the literature classes I had to take my freshman year in college, but I'm glad I took them.

 

[dman]

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Yes, it should be required.

I hated the literature classes I had to take my freshman year in college, but I'm glad I took them.

I hated them also. I did well. I'm not glad I had to take them.

 

[Chaotic42]

Bump

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Yes, it should be required.

I hated the literature classes I had to take my freshman year in college, but I'm glad I took them.

Exactly.

When I was in college I hated classes that didn't pertain to my intended field of computer science/programming. Looking back now, I'm glad I had humanities and electives and wish I had branched out some more. If the only thing you know or can discuss at length is related to your job, you won't be a lot of fun at parties or gatherings!

 

[Whisper]

Definitely. Literature classes have more benefits than most people realize. I remember hearing in one of my classes that there's a pretty large number of successful CEO's and such that were either english majors or minors. Goes back to the whole critical thinking and being able to properly express yourself bit.

 

[nativesunshine]

i loved my lit classes in hs..they were awesome..i had two of the best teachers from my hs...awesome classes.

 

[Ameesh]

Originally posted by: Whisper
Definitely. Literature classes have more benefits than most people realize. I remember hearing in one of my classes that there's a pretty large number of successful CEO's and such that were either english majors or minors. Goes back to the whole critical thinking and being able to properly express yourself bit.

have you ever taken a literature class? there is not a whole lot of "critical thinking" going on but rather contrived bull$hit by a bunch of myopic sycophants.

I think it should be required as much as discrete math or calculus should be.

 

[isaacmacdonald]

yes. in a very rudimentary course, it will help develop reading comprehension. In the slightly more advanced settings, it will expose students to a large gamut of ideas and perspectives. That's great for developing independent thinking and analysis skills.

 

[johnjohn320]

Yes. So should rudimentary art and music classes. Poetry should be included with lit classes.

 

[ElFenix]

yes, should be required right next to calculus

 

[gotsmack]

I don't believe that my 2 required classes in literature has done anything for me except introduced me to a girl who shot me down.

I dislike literature class. What is taught there that was not covered in the 2 required semesters of English?

I had to take 2 semesters of Anthropology Sociology or Psychology. I enjoyed that very much. There I was taught a new perspective on things. I even minored in Anthropology.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Yes. So should rudimentary art and music classes. Poetry should be included with lit classes.

I think that the problem is some people are so analytical, they have problems with literature. Should they be denied a mathematics degree for that? I'm not capable of understanding symbolism very well. It's difficult for me to handle.

It's also quite subjective. "What did the author mean here?" There are right and wrong answers, but everyone will see it differently.

 

[johnjohn320]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Yes. So should rudimentary art and music classes. Poetry should be included with lit classes.

I think that the problem is some people are so analytical, they have problems with literature. Should they be denied a mathematics degree for that? I'm not capable of understanding symbolism very well. It's difficult for me to handle.

It's also quite subjective. "What did the author mean here?" There are right and wrong answers, but everyone will see it differently.

I'm more of a subjective thinker. But if I don't pass Algebra, Calculus, etc math classes, I don't get my music degree. The point is, we should be teaching students how think analytically, subjectively, creatively, all kinds. Everyone's better at some types of thinking than other types. But you have to be able to do it all to some extent.

 

[sandorski]

The liberal arts never hurt anybody, but helped many. There's too much atomatonism as it is, literature, art, music, and other higher forms of learning should be a requirement in all Universities.

 

[Willoughbyva]

I loved lit. classes. I didn't always agree with some of the interpretations that the instructor provided, but was encouraged to discuss my ideas about the topics. It also gives some insight into what people are thinking and going through in life. I felt I could relate or understand a lot of what we were discussing in class. I wish i would have majored in lit.

 

[BatmanNate]

I found it wholly beneficial as it's one of the few ways to see through the eyes of another person.

 

[ggavinmoss]

Originally posted by: Ameesh

Originally posted by: Whisper
Definitely. Literature classes have more benefits than most people realize. I remember hearing in one of my classes that there's a pretty large number of successful CEO's and such that were either english majors or minors. Goes back to the whole critical thinking and being able to properly express yourself bit.

have you ever taken a literature class? there is not a whole lot of "critical thinking" going on but rather contrived bull$hit by a bunch of myopic sycophants.

I think it should be required as much as discrete math or calculus should be.

You took classes taught by TA's with self-esteem problems, which is why the class was full of syncophants.

-geoff

 

[Encryptic]

I consider myself pretty well-read, but I hated being force-fed literature when I was in high school. The stuff we read usually didn't interest me at all, like Old Man and The Sea or Lord of the Flies and I never really got anything out of being asked to analyze it, etc. I feel that I've learned more from reading on my own than I ever did when I was in school. When I read books, I tend to find myself analyzing the author's style, use of language, plotting, etc. which in turn helps me improve my own writing.

 

[MisterPants]

High school english classes are usually terrible. Kids get little or nothing out of them because half of their teachers lecture directly from sparknotes, and the others ask them to analyze Lord of the Flies psychoanalytically without allowing them any time to read Freud or Lacan.

Nabokov began his series of lectures at Cornell by suggesting that his students read with their spines. Unless he and I are abnormal, there is a shiver that occurs when you recognize beauty. I've never heard one of my english teachers mention that they liked a line or phrase. Instead, they point out obvious symbols that seem sophomoric when you look at them for too long.

I think Literature should be a required subject, but I'd prefer that it not be taught to it being butchered.

 

[Chaotic42]

I have never read a work of fiction and walked away feeling impressed. The best fiction book I've ever read was 1984, which was alright. I did it for my Senior critical analysis.

The Hobbit would have to be next in line.

All in all, I'd rather read a historical account or a book about science than waste my time with some book about rich people in New York or a kid floating on a raft.

 

[SuepaFly]

Definitely. Besides learning about culture, it also shows us perspectives. I feel like a lot of people have tunnel vision when it comes to life. I think reading (especially well written literature) has illustrated how situations are rarely cut and dry. For me, it puts me in other people's shoes, a lesson I am so fortunate to be able to use in real life.

 

[MisterPants]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

All in all, I'd rather read a historical account or a book about science than waste my time with some book about rich people in New York or a kid floating on a raft.

I'm only guessing at what you've been reading, but I think I have a good chance of being right (about the books, not the pretentious bit about you being force-fed the wrong books). The Great Gatsby and Huck Finn were both pretty bad. I enjoy Orwell, but he's a storyteller, not an artist. Fitzgerald's first book, This Side of Paradise, had a very real, interesting protagonist and a decent set of supporting characters while everybody in Gatsby was lifeless and boring. Many of the "great books," imo, lack the greatness of something by Joyce, Dostoyevsky, or Nabokov.

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

I find it a little depressing that questions like these get asked (even hypothetically), but the arts seem to get a lot of short shrift in the U.S., due to an apparent notion that they're not directly related to earnings potential and are therefore somehow wasteful.

I do realize that they're not for everyone, but I think people need the exposure so they can determine that they're not interested, instead of writing it off from the start. It almost seems like there's a pride about willful illiteracy nowadays.