What books did you have to study at school?

[doubleshuffle]

Fun topic. Let's see what I can remember...

In German, Goethe's Götz von Berlichingen and Faust I, Schiller's Kabale und Liebe and Wilhelm Tell, Der Untertan by Heinrich Mann, Grete Minde by Theodor Fontane, Brecht's Der gute Mensch von Sezuan, Andorra by Max Frisch. Büchner's Lenz. There was probably more, but that's all I can recall right now.

In English, Huxley's Brave New World, Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, The Power and the Glory by Graham Greene, quite a number of Hemingway's short stories.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by Difflugia

I guess I need to pick a different book that nobody finishes. Atlas Shrugged maybe? I suppose it should be a book that people actually start, though.

Finnegans Wake

[toddhicks209]

The Great Gatsby was one of the books. We covered poems by Langston Hughes and Sylvia Plath in one of my English classes.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Isn't that the whole point of studying literature, though: to teach you how to understand what lies beneath the surface? Take Dickens, for example: most of his books have strong elements of satire and commentary on the social conditions prevalent at the time. A child isn't going to see or understand that unless they're taught to see the "sub-text", so to speak. That's the difference between teaching literature and simply reading for pleasure.

I remember when we read To Kill a Mockingbird; my best-ever English teacher showed us so much more in the book than I would have seen on my own and made it a wonderful experience.

[Cinisajoy]

What I hated about Literature class was read from page 5 to page 12. If you read any farther, you will be counted off.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Isn't that the whole point of studying literature, though: to teach you how to understand what lies beneath the surface?

Indeed, and that's fine so long as you're finding meanings that the author actually intended to convey. The way it currently seems to work, however, is that far too much is read into it, and deeper meanings are pronounced where there's no real indication that the author had the remotest intention of implying any of it.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Indeed, and that's fine so long as you're finding meanings that the author actually intended to convey. The way it currently seems to work, however, is that far too much is read into it, and deeper meanings are pronounced where there's no real indication that the author had the remotest intention of implying any of it.

Exactly. The best example of this is Huckleberry Finn, which (at least when I was in school) was read, studied, and analyzed by American Lit students. The first page of the book reads:

NOTICE

PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.
BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR,
Per G.G., Chief of Ordnance.

I pointed this out to my teacher when it was assigned, and questioned why we would do something that the author so clearly did not wish to be done.

I got sent to the office for arguing with the teacher again.

Shari

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by shalym

Exactly. The best example of this is Huckleberry Finn, which (at least when I was in school) was read, studied, and analyzed by American Lit students. The first page of the book reads:

I pointed this out to my teacher when it was assigned, and questioned why we would do something that the author so clearly did not wish to be done.

I got sent to the office for arguing with the teacher again.

Shari

We had the same English teacher?

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by shalym

Exactly. The best example of this is Huckleberry Finn, which (at least when I was in school) was read, studied, and analyzed by American Lit students. The first page of the book reads:

I pointed this out to my teacher when it was assigned, and questioned why we would do something that the author so clearly did not wish to be done.

I got sent to the office for arguing with the teacher again.

Shari

Sounds like my history teacher. I got in trouble for pointing out that the textbook was wrong.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Sounds like my history teacher. I got in trouble for pointing out that the textbook was wrong.

I remember my 7th grade history teacher. He was hard nosed and accepted no excuses. Years later, he was still teaching. He actually called one student's mom to ask about what her daughter had said. Reason for not turning in homework: my mom can't read. The teacher informed the child that he would call her mom and try to arrange help with her homework. Mom was livid (though she really could not read) and asked if I could help the kid. I made the child read the history book outloud to the customers at the bar after handing her the book she thought she had hidden. I told her she could either do her homework or I would call the history teacher myself to let him know she could read and did understand it.

[crossi]

I can't remember the titles but every one I found boring and depressing. This in spite of being a voracious reader.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Indeed, and that's fine so long as you're finding meanings that the author actually intended to convey. The way it currently seems to work, however, is that far too much is read into it, and deeper meanings are pronounced where there's no real indication that the author had the remotest intention of implying any of it.

Once a text is released into the world, it doesn't much matter anymore what the author intended--the work stands apart from its creator, and can be subject to different interpretations.

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by Difflugia

I suppose in a forum specifically for readers, I shouldn't be surprised. Maybe it's a topic for a new thread: "how many of the books that nobody else reads have you read?"

First we'd have to decide what books those are.

Does obscure non-fiction such as _Medieval English Literature_ by W.P. Ker, _Metfield Parish or _Poor in the 18th Century_ by Victor Peskett count? Or the the light poetry of Beeman Herbert _For Our Bureau_ (based on the subject matter of the weekly Luncheon Lectures at the Foreign Trade Bureau of the Vancouver Board of Trade)?

Or would we stick to the 'classics' such as Tristam Shandy(which I haven't yet finished) or Tom Jones (which I have).

[Philippe D.]

I actually cannot remember much of the books I was told to read in school.

Lots of Molière, for sure. Somehow I managed to completely avoid the other French Classic playwrights (Racine, Corneille...)
Other, later playwrights (Marivaux...)
Camus: L’étranger.
Flaubert: L’éducation sentimentale
Montesquieur: L'esprit des lois
Baudelaire: Les fleurs du mal (not sure this was required reading, though it was definitely recommended, and I certainly studied some of the poems in class)
Borges: Fictions (short stories collection - translated from Spanish of course)

I'm sure there were plenty of others, but I cannot remember them.

(Oh yes, I'm French )

[Barty]

Originally Posted by issybird

The test to see if someone has actually finished AK:

Spoiler:

They think the book ends with Anna's throwing herself in front of the train.

It doesn't.

Anna K is a great book.

Though why they make high school kids read it, I have no idea.