Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?
What would be the "classics"?? I think the definition of this is subjective. Also society progresses as does literature. Would hope my kids don't read the same books I did 40 years ago. Maybe you sad they not reading Oedipus you know the guy that was banging his mom and murdered his father. Classic .
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On the classics question, there is more to being educated that just reading books a bunch of old dead white men wrote.
The classics are such a narrow range of human experience. They are best addresses in a history class as a way to study the values of the time periods in which they are written.
This is just not true. They are classics because their themes are eternal and still relevant in our day and age
While the books du jour they are replaced with - who knows if they will last?
What difference does that make? We can learn a lot from books even if they aren't books that stand the test of time and are read for decades. Students can learn relevant themes and experiences from books other than those written a hundred years ago by white men.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a vast difference in writing skill between Rowling and Tolkien. You may have noticed Tolkien's influence on Rowling's work. She used exact names, versions of names and similar characters that he created 40 years earlier (ex. Bagshot, Gandalf vs Dumbledore). A paranoid reader might even detect plagiarism. See also: Alice's Adventure's in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, which obviously influence Rowling's stories. Why not read the originals or, at least, not hold Rowling up as equally talented when she borrowed ideas and characters.
Tolkien also borrowed extensively. Why not read the Norse Eddas?
I have.
That's nice. When you see kids reading Harry Potter books, do you rip the books out of their hands and explain that J.K. Rowling borrowed extensively from Tolkien, who borrowed extensively from the Norse Eddas, so they should be reading the Norse Eddas instead of this modern trash?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On the classics question, there is more to being educated that just reading books a bunch of old dead white men wrote.
The classics are such a narrow range of human experience. They are best addresses in a history class as a way to study the values of the time periods in which they are written.
This is just not true. They are classics because their themes are eternal and still relevant in our day and age
While the books du jour they are replaced with - who knows if they will last?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?
The classics are no longer classic. A hundred years have gone by - there are way better books now.
I don't know if there are way better books now - better than what, as decided by whom? - but there are certainly plenty of good books now that did not exist 20 or 50 or 100 years ago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?
The classics are no longer classic. A hundred years have gone by - there are way better books now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a vast difference in writing skill between Rowling and Tolkien. You may have noticed Tolkien's influence on Rowling's work. She used exact names, versions of names and similar characters that he created 40 years earlier (ex. Bagshot, Gandalf vs Dumbledore). A paranoid reader might even detect plagiarism. See also: Alice's Adventure's in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, which obviously influence Rowling's stories. Why not read the originals or, at least, not hold Rowling up as equally talented when she borrowed ideas and characters.
Tolkien also borrowed extensively. Why not read the Norse Eddas?
I have.
Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?
What would be the "classics"?? I think the definition of this is subjective. Also society progresses as does literature. Would hope my kids don't read the same books I did 40 years ago. Maybe you sad they not reading Oedipus you know the guy that was banging his mom and murdered his father. Classic .
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a vast difference in writing skill between Rowling and Tolkien. You may have noticed Tolkien's influence on Rowling's work. She used exact names, versions of names and similar characters that he created 40 years earlier (ex. Bagshot, Gandalf vs Dumbledore). A paranoid reader might even detect plagiarism. See also: Alice's Adventure's in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, which obviously influence Rowling's stories. Why not read the originals or, at least, not hold Rowling up as equally talented when she borrowed ideas and characters.
Tolkien also borrowed extensively. Why not read the Norse Eddas?
Anonymous wrote:There is a vast difference in writing skill between Rowling and Tolkien. You may have noticed Tolkien's influence on Rowling's work. She used exact names, versions of names and similar characters that he created 40 years earlier (ex. Bagshot, Gandalf vs Dumbledore). A paranoid reader might even detect plagiarism. See also: Alice's Adventure's in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, which obviously influence Rowling's stories. Why not read the originals or, at least, not hold Rowling up as equally talented when she borrowed ideas and characters.
Anonymous wrote:Why don’t HS kids today read the classics?