Are literature classes intentionally designed to make books suck?

Cafe Society
1

I decided to give Moby Dick a try (I “read” it in High School*) and loathed it. I’ve poked through it a few times since, but other stuff has always come up.

However, I’m reading it now and it’s a blast. Forget all that metaphor shit about Moby Dick representing Ahab’s fear of aging or whatever it’s supposed to be…if you just take it as a book it’s fun. There’s action, adventure, a mutilated and crazed sea-captain, a (possibly) ghost/demon-whale and there’s even a freakin’ cannibal. Taken on it’s own merits, on it’s own terms and not of some pathetic high-school teacher who’s desperately trying to prove some dumbass theory about how the whale cost Ahab his leg and made him “impotent” proving that the whale is really the hero(ine) and represents the SACRED FEMININE and how Ishmael is clearly a stand-in for virgin males and his terror is the terror of men against the secret-sacred nature of all womynkind**

Look–if you enjoy analyzing every syllable of a book for secret clues: more power to you. I don’t denigrate the activity-unless it’s inflicted on high school students who might otherwise find that classic books don’t have to suck.

Once I’ve finished Moby Dick, I’ve gotta go back and see if “Tom Sawyer”, “The Scarlet Letter” and a few others were as dire as I remember or if the class was just designed to make it seem that way.

Kidding aside, what the hell is the intent of ruining a good book by picking it apart? It’s like trying to enjoy each individual frame of a movie–without getting to see the movie as a whole.

Anyone else have this experience? Books that were dissected in high school being much better when just read for their own sake and not for hidden secret clues?

(Note–all that crap about the whale representing Ahab’s fear, etc might be there and hell, might have even been what the author intended. It still doesn’t make for good reading)

*By which I mean we picked apart each chapter/paragraph/sentence/word looking for hidden nuances of meaning, allusion, metaphor…in other words, it was a big ol’ jerkoff session for people who like to navel-gaze.

**I’m kinda making up these theories. High School was a long, LONG time ago and I don’t remember the specific brand of twaddle the teacher was trying to get us to see in a fun adventure story (she did mention the “sacred feminine” but it might have been with some other book.) The only one I definitely remember is that the whale stood for Ahab’s fear of death or aging. Which, is bullshit. The whale? Stands for a honkin’ ginormous demon-whale.

2

Moby Dick is pretty damned boring unless you’re into 19th century whaling culture. So much of that book could have been cut out and it would have improved the pacing quite a bit.

That’s a seriously messed up interpretation. This is a much better interpretation from a well known scholar more in line with the typical view on the book. Interpreting works of fiction and discussing them with others is part of the fun. Check out the treads on The Walking Dead around here some time.

3

Discussing them with each other is great. Being told to analyze each word for hidden nuances and secret clues before you read the work or while you’re reading the work is tedious.

4

That is a far better interpretation of the book and it was done in less than 10 minutes. And it discussed the book as a whole, rather than dealing with every freaking word and syllable. I do have to say, though I was down with his whole interpretation, he was a little light on the whole cannibal thing. Any analysis that doesn’t focus on the fact that there’s a freaking cannibal in the book fails at least on that level :wink:

5

I thoroughly enjoyed Moby-Dick when I listened to it a few years ago. Yes, there’s a crapload of stuff about whaling in it. Why is that a bad thing? You’re reading a damn BOOK - be open to learning new information, even if it isn’t useful! I know stuff about the old whaling days now. Cool!

I think that if you’re going to try to argue that we should ignore symbolism, M-D is a bad book to plant your flag on - it’s clearly symbolic as hell. But I do agree that overanalyzing is generally boring and always makes books less interesting rather than more.

6

What… you don’t believe that the only way to appreciate Moby Dick is to count the instances of the word “griphorn,” starting from the end, working forwards and separating the count by capitalized and non? It’s remedial Lit for you, m’friend.

7

Geez, I still haven’t read any Dickens since high school, after having Great Expectations shoved down my throat. I hated that book with the passion of a million suns. Maybe I should try it again. Well, before that I’d read *A Christmas Carol *on my own and liked it, so probably I’ve been missing out on some good books.

Had to read Steinbeck’s The Pearl and it’s been the same for him as it’s been for Dickens. God, what a ghastly, depressing story.

And don’t even get me started on Shakespeare. The treatment of the plays was ghastly too, Luckily, I watched the BBC production of Measure for Measure, on TV many years ago now, and was astonished that the Bard could be FUNNY! There was cross dressing, dirty jokes, a slimy villain, a virginal heroine and a happy ending, with weddings all around! Since then I’ve watched and read as much Shakespeare as I can, and even seen some of the adaptations, like Throne of Blood, a Japanese version of Macbeth.

Yes, I probably should revisit Steinbeck and Dickens.

8

Right. Uh, Queequeg’s the Christ-figure… no, um, epic Classical tragic flaw of the whale… the ship’s a metaphor for transcendalist postremedial teaching of literature in schools, and when it sinks…

9

My experience with Moby Dick was similar to Fenris’: When I was ordered to read it, and then write a critical essay about it, it became the most tedious chore in the world. Years later, I bought a copy on a whim, read it cover-to-cover, and loved every page.

I had a similar experience with Romeo and Juliet. Frankly, I think 9th grade is too young to appreciate romantic tragedy. Once you have had your heart broken a time or two, then you can appreciate it. Fortunately, my 9th grade teacher did not shy away from explaining the dirty jokes. That kept me and my fellow idiots interested.

For many years, I was too intimidated to attempt War and Peace. It turned out to be a fun read. Every few chapters, Tolstoy interrupts the story to preach a sermon on the Meaning of Life. Those sermons are a good cure for insomnia, but if you force yourself through them, the main story is a very entertaining soap opera.

James Fenimore Cooper, however, has always been boring, no matter why I was attempting to read him.

10

Moby Dick should be savored by adults, not forced upon teens. Teens should get to read Dracula and Frankenstein and shit that interests them.

By the way, Thug Notes is great. Thanks for the intro.

11

In Plano, Texas we read Dracula, Moby Dick, The Odyssey, Hamlet, Romeo & Juliet, tons of Arthurian tales, Beowulf, The Old Man and the Sea, Great Expectations, and many others I can’t remember off hand back in the 1990s. I disagree that teens should get to just read the shit out of anything that interests them as I think there’s some value in being exposed to works of literature that has cultural significance and analyzing them. Unfortunately for Fenris, and others I suspect, he was subjected to an instructor who poorly handled the interpretation part of the lesson.

You watch thug notes on a regular basis and you’ll be straight up ballin, B!

12

I remember we read Wide Sargasso Sea in 9th grade and all the class got out of it was that the movie based on the book was NC-17; we never could convince our teacher that we should watch it.

13

I wonder how she missed the 500 mentions of “sperm” and maybe about two women, wives left behind, are mentioned?
Gay erotic literature is probably more feminist.
Just look at the title. So much Moby.

I love that about the book. If it wasn’t for the details of whaling it may be pretty but pointless.

14

We’ve got at least two Star Trek movies that reference Moby Dick. Pointless? Ha! When people reference the book it’s not usually to talk about the whaling industry.

15

Have you read The Painted Word, Fenris? I think you’re dealing with the same kind of mindset, one that is more about how smart the critic is for discovering an esoteric reading than how smart the author is for communicating effectively and coherently. The former wants to believe that important readings are hard to find, because then finding hard to find readings is important. The latter wants to believe that important readings are easy to find, because otherwise the author really sucks at communicating.

16

Hmm. I read Moby Dick on my own, and loved it. It probably helped that I’d read Victor B. Schaeffer’s The Year of the Whale, with all its trivia about whales and whaling, and its constant references to Moby Dick.

I also loved Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol (one of my favorite books, in fact) and a Tale of Two Cities, despite having read it initially in English class. I’ve re-read it since for fun. But I found DFickens’ other Christmas books boring as hell, hated Hard Times and The Pickwick Papers, and haven’t tried any of the others.

I’ve read plenty of “literature” for kicks – Wart and Peace, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn (multiple Times – I’m a big Twain fan), Gulliver’s Travels (a great many times – I love Swift), the works of Poe.

But, yeah, I agree that being forced to do it, and reading them with specific goals in mind can be a real turn-off. I lov ed reading Fitzgerald’s translation of The Odyssey in class, but not Dickens’ Hard Times.

17

This is largely what I’m enjoying about it. That and the cannibal and the demon fish from hell.

It’s not “ignoring symbolism” (although you’re right that I didn’t make that clear in the OP). But the way a lit. class should be taught is:

  1. Read the damn book. Start at page 1 and read to end.
  2. THEN discuss it.

In every litcrit class I had in high-school & college it was:

  1. Read chapter one.
  2. Overanalyze every syllable until every bit of enjoyment had been drained out of it.
  3. Repeat with chapter two.
  4. Continue till the end.
  5. Not actually read the book as a flowing narrative.
18

That’s exactly the problem. I enjoyed the hell out of Oliver Twist…or at least the first 1/2 of it…until we got to the book in class and the teacher drained all the fun out of it.

I’ve never heard of The Painted Word. I’ll look it up!

19

You might want to check the online reviews of Dracula. It’s boring, he doesn’t shine, why is it written in letters, why is it so full of cliches? smh

20

It often depends on the teacher. I had good ones and bad ones. The good ones pointed out good insight into the work (I remember a college teacher discussing “Invisible Man” and hitting things I hadn’t noticed when reading it).

As for high school, the problem is finding books that students can relate to. Good literature is usually pretty complex, and teenagers find the nuances and language difficult to grasp and relate to. If you read the books later, you’ll discover things you missed.

Moby Dick is a difficult case. It starts out as a book about the friendship between Queequeg and Ishmael, then turns into a book about Ahab chasing the whale. In the midst of the latter are many chapters that are detailed descriptions of live aboard a whaling ship; not much as a novel, but just fine as nonfiction. In addition, the book is smack dab in the tradition of the 19th century sentimental novel, something that’s hard to understand today.

I also hated Dickens in high school; neither Great Expectations nor A Tale of Two Cities impressed me. I reread Great Expectations in my thirties and discovered it was a damn good book; there was a lot I missed. I recently finished Tale and was impressed by it, too, so I’m reading more Dickens now.