# English Literature 101: Essential Reading **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 1, 2007, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438 "2007-12-01T10:45:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Miss\_Purl\_McKnittington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9a140/32.png) [@Miss\_Purl\_McKnittington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Purl_McKnittington)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/21 "2007-12-03T03:42:15Z")
Huh, interesting. I tried to read it a few years ago, and couldn’t latch onto it at all, most likely a result of the “vexing and ambiguous” nature of it. Maybe I’ll give it another go. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/22 "2007-12-03T04:14:38Z")
E.M. Forester is wonderful. The Brontes and Austen are very very very different. I love Austen, dislike the Bronte’s in general. I find Wuthering Heights to have far more in common with Tess of the Completely Hated (and the rest of Thomas Hardy’s books of self flagellation) than with Pride and Prejudice. The Brontes are known for Gothic Romance and Byronic heroes. Austen is known for playful romantic comedies (and a hell of a lot about the economics of the British gentleman class - if you stop reading Austen as romance and start reading her as social commentary, she is a lot more interesting). However, it is worth reading Jane Eyre if only to read Jasper Fforde and Catherine and Heathcliff may not be my favorite couple, but they are so iconic. The popular stuff (like most of the Austen) is available as Books on Tape or Audible, if one needs to get the content, but has time for listening but not reading. Don’t know how much that is “cheating.” A.S. Byatt’s Possession is one of my three favorite books (the other two are Pride and Prejudice and To Kill a Mockingbird) - and is worth reading alongside Robert Browning and Christina Rossetti (LaMotte started as Rossetti - ended as Emily Dickenson - Ash is Browning). Midnight’s Children is very good (and if you do Passage to India by E.M. Forester its an interesting set) ---
**Author:** ![Spoons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spoons/32/3141_2.png) [@Spoons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoons)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/23 "2007-12-03T05:59:06Z")
[QUOTE=Enterprise] I believe the rule of thumb is either the Brontes (or one of them) or Austen – and frankly, I’d rather pick one, than do both. [/QUOTE] I would be very careful with these, and if you do use any of them, approach with caution. None of them wrote “bad” works, and they are classics, but you may find some members of your class snooze through them. I went through many high school and university English Lit classes, each of which had some Bronte or Austen, and without exception, these were the works that engaged the girls, and alienated the boys. Girls would read, for example, _Pride and Prejudice_ in two days; boys would be up to page ten in a week. The Brontes and Jane Austen are the equivalent of “chick flicks,” and just not interesting to the males in your class, if my experience is anything to go by. That’s not to say you shouldn’t teach them–I did make it through _Pride and Prejudice_ with the help of an instructor who made the work interesting, and who made me want to read it. On the other hand, I never made it though _Wuthering Heights_, mainly because our instructor for that one made sure that our class discussions centered on topics that were of interest to the girls. At age 18, I wasn’t at all interested in the wonderings of Catherine and Heathcliff as to their relationship. This occupied three weeks of our course, and had all the 18-year-old girls discussing the book madly in our classes–while us guys sat back and wondered why we should care. Needless to say, our “class participation” marks for that part of our course suffered. If you must include a Bronte or Austen, make the effort to interest the boys in the work as well. Other than that, you have a lot of good advice in this thread. If you can tie Donne and Marvell in with T.S. Eliot, then so much the better (one of my instructors did, and I was amazed at how much alike they all were). I learned more from comparing “J. Alfred Prufrock” and “To His Coy Mistress” and Donne’s Holy Sonnets than you’d imagine. Just had a thought–if you absolutely must teach a Bronte or Austen, balance it out with Shakespeare’s _Henry V_–this is of interest to boys, with fighting, warring, and references to King Hal’s younger drunken days. And you can’t beat the St. Crispin’s Day speech. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/24 "2007-12-03T06:09:19Z")
If you’re _teaching_ these books, I would say that you must, must, must include 1984 by George Orwell. I’d say that every single citizen of the US, Spain, the UK, and _especially_ Germany and the former Soviet bloc needs to read that book at least once. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/25 "2007-12-03T16:50:54Z")
[QUOTE=Spoons] I would be very careful with these, and if you do use any of them, approach with caution. None of them wrote “bad” works, and they are classics, but you may find some members of your class snooze through them. I went through many high school and university English Lit classes, each of which had some Bronte or Austen, and without exception, these were the works that engaged the girls, and alienated the boys. Girls would read, for example, _Pride and Prejudice_ in two days; boys would be up to page ten in a week. The Brontes and Jane Austen are the equivalent of “chick flicks,” and just not interesting to the males in your class, if my experience is anything to go by. That’s not to say you shouldn’t teach them–I did make it through _Pride and Prejudice_ with the help of an instructor who made the work interesting, and who made me want to read it. On the other hand, I never made it though _Wuthering Heights_, mainly because our instructor for that one made sure that our class discussions centered on topics that were of interest to the girls. At age 18, I wasn’t at all interested in the wonderings of Catherine and Heathcliff as to their relationship. This occupied three weeks of our course, and had all the 18-year-old girls discussing the book madly in our classes–while us guys sat back and wondered why we should care. Needless to say, our “class participation” marks for that part of our course suffered. If you must include a Bronte or Austen, make the effort to interest the boys in the work as well. Other than that, you have a lot of good advice in this thread. If you can tie Donne and Marvell in with T.S. Eliot, then so much the better (one of my instructors did, and I was amazed at how much alike they all were). I learned more from comparing “J. Alfred Prufrock” and “To His Coy Mistress” and Donne’s Holy Sonnets than you’d imagine. Just had a thought–if you absolutely must teach a Bronte or Austen, balance it out with Shakespeare’s _Henry V_–this is of interest to boys, with fighting, warring, and references to King Hal’s younger drunken days. And you can’t beat the St. Crispin’s Day speech. [/QUOTE] Welcome to what high school and college literature was like for girls! The vast majority of literature was written by men, has male protangonists, a male point of view and deals with things that interest men. Hemingway! Steinbeck! Catcher in the Rye! Those books are just designed to reach out and grab female readers. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/26 "2007-12-03T17:08:00Z")
Frankly, I’m surprised Steinbeck reaches out and grabs anyone. Don’t tell anyone I said that, though; in California it’s an offense punishable by hanging. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Purl\_McKnittington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9a140/32.png) [@Miss\_Purl\_McKnittington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Purl_McKnittington)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/27 "2007-12-03T17:14:48Z")
I’ll say it all I want in Wisconsin. I hate that goddamned turtle. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/28 "2007-12-03T17:23:56Z")
[QUOTE=Dangerosa] The popular stuff (like most of the Austen) is available as Books on Tape or Audible, if one needs to get the content, but has time for listening but not reading. Don’t know how much that is “cheating.” [/QUOTE] It’s only “cheating” if you listen to an abridged version. (We had a thread about this question a while back.) [QUOTE=Spoons] I went through many high school and university English Lit classes, each of which had some Bronte or Austen, and without exception, these were the works that engaged the girls, and alienated the boys. Girls would read, for example, Pride and Prejudice in two days; boys would be up to page ten in a week. The Brontes and Jane Austen are the equivalent of “chick flicks,” and just not interesting to the males in your class, if my experience is anything to go by. [/QUOTE] I’m male, and I really like Jane Austen, especially _Pride & Prejudice_—but I was long out of high school before I read it, if that means anything. I did have to read both _Jane Eyre_ and _Wuthering Heights_ in high school, and don’t remember feeling very strongly about them one way or the other. I do agree with **Dangerosa** that Austen and the Brontes are very different. [QUOTE=Dangerosa] Welcome to what high school and college literature was like for girls! The vast majority of literature was written by men, has male protangonists, a male point of view and deals with things that interest men. Hemingway! Steinbeck! Catcher in the Rye! Those books are just designed to reach out and grab female readers. [/QUOTE] I wonder if there’s any significance to the fact that your examples are all American, rather than British. The list the OP linked to doesn’t strike me as, on the whole, dominated by Hemingway-esque levels of testosterone. It might make for an interesting thread (but would hijack this one) to talk about the extent to which the books that high school and college students are assigned to read are “boy books” or “chick lit.” Ideally, neither would dominate. But, to the extent that your point is valid, it may be because it’s harder to interest boys than girls in reading. ---
**Author:** ![Sebhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@Sebhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sebhal)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/29 "2007-12-03T17:31:22Z")
I did my degree in English Lit, so rather than go through what’s good to study, I’ll pick from the list what I enjoyed and have been back to in the last 10-15 years: I read _The Canterbury Tales_, but didn’t really enjoy anything prior to Shakespeare, esp. \*Othello \* and _Much Ado_ and _King Lear_. Blake, _Songs of Innocence and Experience_. Simple to read, but with a massive amount of depth (plus they’re short!). Not mad keen on Defoe, but loved Swift (had I had the money to do MA/ PhD it would have been on Swift). Always liked Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues. Nineteenth Century novels; could do a section for these alone, but edited highlights would be Dickens, \*Tale of Two Cities \* is in my top three all-time favourite books, _Barnaby Rudge, Bleak House_ plus some of the journalism. Another in my top three would be _Wuthering Heights_, I’ve read some Austen but much prefer this. George Eliot: i loved Middlemarch, liked \*Daniel Deronda \* (which my wife preferred to _Middlemarch_). Stevenson’s _Dr Jekyll and Mr Hide_ is fun and not too long, same with _Wilde’s A Picture of Dorian Grey_. I also really like Hardy, _Tess of the D’Urbervilles_, but it is a bit depressing. T. S. Eliot is good, but very dense, worth extracting the meaning but it’s hard work getting at it. Joseph Conrad’s _Heart of Darkness_ I’ve read and reread, \*The Secret Agent \* is also well worth a read. Golding, _Lord of the Flies_ is a must; personally I wouldn’t bother with _The Spire_. I really enjoyed The Dubliners, but the best part of Ulysses is finishing it! (Apart from the centre chapter, _Wandering Rocks_, which is about people walking through the city and their random meetings, I really liked the idea and the image has really stayed with me.) I liked Iris Murdock _The Sea, The Sea_ but haven’t read anything else of her’s. George Orwell is great, the titles on the list but also _Down and Out in Paris and London_. I’ve never read an Ian McEwan I didn’t like (except for \*Amsterdam \* which I thought was ridiculous), but _The Child in Time_ was traumatic but amazing. Looking back on this it’s mainly novels, but that’s what I really enjoyed reading and still go back to. I occasionally read plays, but rarely poetry. Hope this helps! S. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/30 "2007-12-03T17:49:03Z")
[QUOTE=Dangerosa] E.M. Forester is wonderful. [/QUOTE] As is E.M. Forster. Graham Greene is good, and readable too. Try also some more contemporary novelists. Salman Rushdie should also be considered, even though he’s of Indian origin, he’s British. Look also to Pat Barker’s _Ghost Road_ trilogy, which is absolutely stunning. Ian McEwan is worth a go (though I too hated _Amsterdam_) - try _Black Dogs_, perhaps? And William Boyd is almost universally good. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/31 "2007-12-03T20:35:00Z")
[QUOTE=Thudlow Boink] I do agree with **Dangerosa** that Austen and the Brontes are very different. I wonder if there’s any significance to the fact that your examples are all American, rather than British. The list the OP linked to doesn’t strike me as, on the whole, dominated by Hemingway-esque levels of testosterone. [/QUOTE] Possibly, being American, most of what I had as required reading was American authors, so I got the testosterone. British male authors do seem to be less … boy. Even the boy authors seem to be less boy (Nick Hornsby, Roddy Doyle - as opposed to Michael Chabon for instance). ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/32 "2007-12-03T21:41:48Z")
You know, I was wondering something recently. I have an English degree, and as an American that meant that I studied American and British Literature in college, with some additional focus on work in English from other regions and some translations into English as well. Do British English majors have to take American Lit classes? Recs: Charlotte Brontë Jane Eyre I find this book comforting and accessable, mostly because I read it for the first time in 6th grade and several times since. On the other hand, her sister’s most famous work is one I’ve thrown against a wall in frustration. ymmv. Mary Shelley Frankenstein I hated it the first time I read it, but when we read it in college it made a lot more sense. I liked it much more at 20 than at 17. Assuming you’re in college, I think you’ll be able to appriciate it now too. Charles Dickens Oliver Twist, David Coppierfield and/or Great Expectations The first two are easier reads, but the last is the most compelling Oscar Wilde The Importance of Being Earnest At the very least, you should walk away amused Wilfred Owen His war poetry was facinating, particularly “Dulce Et Decorum Est” Aldous Huxley Brave New World \ I like dystopias in general George Orwell Animal Farm T.S. Eliot Love Song of Alfred J Prufrock," “The Wasteland,” “Hollow Men” & “Journey of the Magi” ---
**Author:** ![Enterprise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/76d3ee/32.png) [@Enterprise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enterprise)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2007, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438/33 "2007-12-05T16:40:25Z")
[QUOTE=Miss Purl McKnittington] I’d like to agree with everyone saying that Irish writers usually get lumped in with British literature, regardless of national sentiment. Unless you’re taking a course specifically dedicated to Irish writers, you’ll cover them in a Brit Lit course. I’m also very surprised that **Walloon** recommended “Troilus and Cressida,” which is a pretty zany choice for a highlights of English literature list. If I were to assemble a list of Shakespeare’s plays, I don’t think I’d pick “Troilus and Cressida,” just because it’s not one of the major plays. You’d be better off spending your time reading “Much Ado About Nothing.” It’s more enjoyable, at least. [/QUOTE] Since I may need another comedy, I’ll read _Much Ado About Nothing_, and then see if I can fit _Troilus and Cressida_ in somewhere just for the heck of it, something off the more beaten track may come handy in Shakespeare. > [@](#): > > “Angels” and “Howards End” are both pretty depressing, so you’ll need “A Room with a View” to get the taste out of your mouth. I haven’t read any of his essays, so I can’t help you there. If you find you are not sufficiently ground down by the cruelties of the well-meaning upper classes at that point, read [Maurice](http://www.amazon.com/Maurice-Novel-E-M-Forster/dp/0393310329). Or read it if you’re interested in homosexuality in post-Victorian Britain. You can really sell that kind of stuff :). I’m not sure I want to delve into either Victorian homosexuality (beyond Wilde) or upper-class cruelty, but I like the suggestion by **Dangerosa** to couple _A Passage to India_ and _Midnight’s Children_, especially since I already own _A Passage_. > [@](#): > > For Virginia Woolf, I’d recommend [Mrs. Dalloway](http://www.amazon.com/Mrs-Dalloway-Virginia-Woolf/dp/0156628708/ref=pd_sim_b_title_4), [A Room of One’s Own](http://www.amazon.com/Room-Ones-Own-Virginia-Woolf/dp/0156787334/ref=pd_sim_b_title_2), and maybe [To the Lighthouse](http://www.amazon.com/Lighthouse-Virginia-Woolf/dp/0156907399/ref=pd_sim_b_title_5). I didn’t enjoy “Lighthouse” as much as the other two. I’ve added the essays you recommended, and _A Room of One’s Own_. I’m not a real Woolf fan…I started to read _Orlando_, but I couldn’t get into it at all…so I’m not reading that. > [@](#): > > And now I’ve got to run, but before I do: If you absolutely must choose between Austen and a Bronte, choose Austen. There will be plenty of mopishness in the later Victorian and early 20th century authors, so grab a little lightness while you can. Of Austen’s works, I’d recommend “Pride & Prejudice” and “Persuasion”. Read them both and compare them; they have similarities but also significant differences. It’s not that I absolutely have to choose, but I’d prefer to, since I have so much ground to cover anyway. If there’s time, _Wuthering Heights_ will make it on my reading list. [QUOTE=elfkin] Oscar Wilde The Importance of Being Earnest At the very least, you should walk away amused [/QUOTE] Just did – got a cheap copy at a used bookstore and read it on the commute. It was amusing, but in a totally useless kind of way. That was a really sorry excuse for a plot there. I gotta run but will reply later to the other suggestions. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/english-literature-101-essential-reading/428438.md?page=1)