Is Shakespeare not taught in DCPS?

[Anonymous]

This is really a great thread on classic literature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a 45 year old book nerd and I recently re read Hamlet.

Honestly, I would be okay with my kids reading the cliff notes. Reading it as is is equivalent to a high schooler in 2521 reading the screen play for Clueless. There is wisdom in it, but wrapped up in so much trendy colloquialisms you need a map to make your way through a conversation.

I’m okay with reevaluating what should be considered “required reading” without giving too much stock to trends.

Fwiw, I also recently reread some Steinbeck and oh boy, that stuff would NEVER fly in today’s schools. A great writer, but hot he woke police would never let that fly.

Completely agree! Shakespeare was low brow back in the day. So funny that folks here think he’s so brilliant.

You find it funny that people think Shakespeare is brilliant?

It was said in the thread, you’re clueless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the value of Shakespeare in the curriculum? Is it for your nostalgic reasons? Just because it’s always been done, does that mean it’s always been right? Do you want to still teach Columbus as a savior and hero?

Because one cannot be properly educated in English literature without an understanding of Shakespeare.

Reason number 363,724,623,629,252 my kids are in private schools. DS 12th grade is having an entire semester of Shakespeare.

Is there a ginormous eye roll emoji somewhere, preferably with pearls in it’s clutch? Methinks the lady protests too much…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a 45 year old book nerd and I recently re read Hamlet.

Honestly, I would be okay with my kids reading the cliff notes. Reading it as is is equivalent to a high schooler in 2521 reading the screen play for Clueless. There is wisdom in it, but wrapped up in so much trendy colloquialisms you need a map to make your way through a conversation.

I’m okay with reevaluating what should be considered “required reading” without giving too much stock to trends.

Fwiw, I also recently reread some Steinbeck and oh boy, that stuff would NEVER fly in today’s schools. A great writer, but hot he woke police would never let that fly.

You sound clueless.

Wait I thought reading Shakespeare makes you smart? So if she’s clueless then no value in Shakespeare’s

Love everyone here thinks if you are going to be “well read” you have read the Bible and Shakespeare. Wow! What are you currently reading, do you still read? Waiting for the I’m busy responses. How many female authors do you read? How many non-American authors do you read?

Just because you did it doesn’t mean it was of value, just because you loved it doesn’t mean it’s right for ALL children.

Just because a bunch of white men said a bunch of white male writers are good doesn’t mean they were or are.

You completely missed the point of the conversation. It is about reading foundational works to give our children a proper English literature education. Nobody said the Bible and Shakespeare will make you ‘well read’ or smart. It’s about understanding how the English language developed.

The trope of old white men vs female vs non American is really tired. And if your proof is that Shakespeare is not great or relevant, you just unmasked yourself in modern woke parlance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the value of Shakespeare in the curriculum? Is it for your nostalgic reasons? Just because it’s always been done, does that mean it’s always been right? Do you want to still teach Columbus as a savior and hero?

Because one cannot be properly educated in English literature without an understanding of Shakespeare.

Reason number 363,724,623,629,252 my kids are in private schools. DS 12th grade is having an entire semester of Shakespeare.

Is there a ginormous eye roll emoji somewhere, preferably with pearls in it’s clutch? Methinks the lady protests too much…

Well read people don’t use words like ginormous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a meme making the rounds:

“White men did not produce great art and literature, white men produced art and literature that spoke to other white men, so they all just collectively agreed amongst themselves that it was great.

A lot of it ain’t great.”

Stop enabling this. If you live Shakespeare wonderful. But can you give the ISD reasons why it’s beneficial to teach it? Do you know what ISD means - I mean you know all the answers to curriculum development.

I don’t like how they teach math know. I love math but I see how my kid understands the machinations of how math works and it’s glorious.

Darling child might love Shakespeare and I will embrace that.

It is not 1951 anymore so why are you setting the bar based on that? If you do then stop helping your kids w their homework, stop involving yourself in school affairs, start baking pies and bringing yours husband your slippers.

So many smart women on here but they don’t look past their own experience. It’s sad. You could be great but chose to be basic.

If only those smart women would follow your advice and be great instead of basic! The world would be joyful instead of sad!

You are putting forward the woke argument that white men (btw the original is dead white men) wrote bad literature and don’t deserve to be in the canon, or that the canon itself needs to be purged. Some talking points you’re parroting from the resentment studies curriculum. In your warped view of the world, men write for men, women write for women, and minorities for themselves.

If you think the canon needs to be changed from what it was in 1951, you don’t really understand what the canon is. True, there are fewer women and minorities in the canon. It reflects who spoke English over time and who was afforded the privilege to write literature. This is the imperfect history we inherited, if you think that gives you the right to rewrite it you’re wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, no Bible.
Unless it’s being read as a fictional piece of work, which I assume will make some mad lol.
Might as well just do the Odyssey, it’s just like the Bible but people like to pretend it’s very different.

I think the difficulty in having it understood as a study of literature by parents (see: this thread) is enough to preclude it from public school. But ideally it should be part of any English lit curriculum.

No, it shouldn't. Kids today are barely learning at all, the last thing the need is filling up precious classroom time with more Jesus stories.

You grasp of complex ideas and canon is clear.

:waves white flag, gives up

I grew up reading Pushkin, Balzac and Voltaire, but nobody ever wagged their finger at me and said, "No, no, no, you first must read the Bible!" Maybe that's a uniquely American thing.

Nobody said you had to read the Bible first. That is a complete fabrication. But knowledge of Biblical stories and motifs is necessary for full education in English lit. Not sure why this seems to be at all controversial.

There’s a strong argument for not teaching things which people are very likely to encounter anyway.

+1

[Anonymous]

You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

I’m sorry you don’t get that we can expand literature to include a more diverse set of authors, and that a little less Shakespeare won’t ruin your child’s life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

I’m sorry you don’t get that we can expand literature to include a more diverse set of authors, and that a little less Shakespeare won’t ruin your child’s life.

Less is fine. Just asking for some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

Oh dear. Do you know what English literature is? Promise me you aren’t a DCPS educator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a 45 year old book nerd and I recently re read Hamlet.

Honestly, I would be okay with my kids reading the cliff notes. Reading it as is is equivalent to a high schooler in 2521 reading the screen play for Clueless. There is wisdom in it, but wrapped up in so much trendy colloquialisms you need a map to make your way through a conversation.

I’m okay with reevaluating what should be considered “required reading” without giving too much stock to trends.

Fwiw, I also recently reread some Steinbeck and oh boy, that stuff would NEVER fly in today’s schools. A great writer, but hot he woke police would never let that fly.

If there can be updated takes on Shakespeare 400 years later, maybe there will be another updated take on Emma/Clueless in 2521. With lasers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

I’m sorry you don’t get that we can expand literature to include a more diverse set of authors, and that a little less Shakespeare won’t ruin your child’s life.

Oh the horror of having an opinion as a mom, or gasp! while being older. Oh, wise 23 year old with a newly minted college degree, I beg you, share your wisdom with the plebeians.

Your post is a perfect example of why we need rigorous instruction in English composition and literature.
Your expression is a rambling of confuse ideas, a mishmash of incoherent borrowed snippets, poor vocabulary choice, and an appalling lack of critical thinking.
You clearly don’t grasp that staple denotes consumption of a commodity or you wouldn’t use it to describe Shakespeare’s works. You don’t seem to know the meaning of foundational, fyi according to the dictionary definition it means ‘denoting an underlying basis or principle; fundamental’. You don’t have critical thinking skills, otherwise you’d realize that English literature must have a foundation, it didn’t just came into existence while you were in high school. The works written as the language was developing are the foundation of English literature.

Regarding people still reading, none of your business what they chose to do with their time, if they read for pleasure or not. On thing I can assure you of, most decent jobs today require good reading and writing skills, and sharp critical thinking, and that’s across all careers and industries. We want our children to develop those skills to be successful in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

I’m sorry you don’t get that we can expand literature to include a more diverse set of authors, and that a little less Shakespeare won’t ruin your child’s life.

Oh the horror of having an opinion as a mom, or gasp! while being older. Oh, wise 23 year old with a newly minted college degree, I beg you, share your wisdom with the plebeians.

Your post is a perfect example of why we need rigorous instruction in English composition and literature.
Your expression is a rambling of confuse ideas, a mishmash of incoherent borrowed snippets, poor vocabulary choice, and an appalling lack of critical thinking.
You clearly don’t grasp that staple denotes consumption of a commodity or you wouldn’t use it to describe Shakespeare’s works. You don’t seem to know the meaning of foundational, fyi according to the dictionary definition it means ‘denoting an underlying basis or principle; fundamental’. You don’t have critical thinking skills, otherwise you’d realize that English literature must have a foundation, it didn’t just came into existence while you were in high school. The works written as the language was developing are the foundation of English literature.

Regarding people still reading, none of your business what they chose to do with their time, if they read for pleasure or not. On thing I can assure you of, most decent jobs today require good reading and writing skills, and sharp critical thinking, and that’s across all careers and industries. We want our children to develop those skills to be successful in life.

No your reading comprehension is off. Including more not less is better.

Are your pears warm from all the clutching.

We get it. You passed the dead white male test in school. They told you that was the standard so you will live with that standard. You don’t read because you already did. You probably resent book worms because they love books because they just do not because they have to.

Your living to the preset standard helped you bag a rich husband or get to some satisfactory place in your career. But you don’t have a love of reading. And when anyone else is successful but didn’t do it through this archaic standard you resent them.