Harry Potter - Popular, but never to be a Classic

[leebase]

Has there ever been a time when "most" people were avid readers?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by leebase

Has there ever been a time when "most" people were avid readers?

I very much doubt it.

[issybird]

“Most” is hard to quantify. If we can limit the pool to the literate with access to books, there’d have been a time before radio, much less television, when most, or many, or a lot, read for pleasure - at least a higher proportion than do now.

[DiapDealer]

Just like I very much doubt that new avid readers can be "created" after they've taken their first literature classes where the classics will be encountered, and book reports will be expected. The only thing fluffying up the curriculum will do is make non-readers despise their literature classes a teensy bit less. Not to mention steering the readers who could most benefit from reading the classics away from them.

[Apache]

Originally Posted by Tarana

Scary but true. My cousin's daughter is now in high school and the number of kids that read books at all today, electronic or not, is very low. She's a HUGE fan of scifi, so reading a book all the time. Alas, none of them classics. I had suggested to her that a lot of the themes in scifi come from history, so I gave her a short list. She read Bullfinch's Mythology ($.99 at Amazon) while recovering from COVID. Now she's kindof excited about reading more - the librarian is making some recommendations on that.

Originally Posted by leebase

Has there ever been a time when "most" people were avid readers?

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I very much doubt it.

When I was in High School, a long long time ago, I only new one person who avidly read all the time..........me. I do not recall ever seeing another student reading except when required to do so.
Apache

[crich70]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I will disagree. Classics do not just become classics after the author is dead.

Star Wars is a classic and the writers are not dead. The Harry Potter series is a classic and Rowling is not dead.

Stairway to Heaven and Hotel California are classic songs and most who worked on them are not dead.

There are many many more examples that could be given.

I wasn't trying to say that a book has to wait that long to be a classic, just that a good many books we now consider to be classics are still read sometimes even centuries after the author has died while others that everyone raved about at the time are now forgotten on the shelves somewhere.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Apache

When I was in High School, a long long time ago, I only new one person who avidly read all the time..........me. I do not recall ever seeing another student reading except when required to do so.
Apache

I think that you really have to define both your terms and your time periods. I suspect that a lot more kids have been reading more over the past 20 or 30 years, but there are a lot of youth books that date back 100 years. Like most here, I was an avid reader, but certainly the various libraries around when I was growing up were stocked well enough for me to know that I wasn't the only avid reader around during that time.

[Question Mark]

Originally Posted by DuskyRose

Which is... not the same as reading the originals. Because no matter how well represented, they're not the same as reading the original

And this graphic representation of stories doesn't even have whole stories in them. Just scenes.

Exactly, which is why I said "in keeping with your thoughts about the ingenuity of modern readers".

I was, in fact, agreeing with you on how modern readers will approach the "Classics" when forced to confront them. They will find an easier alternative.

However, an alternative like The Graphic Canon, as opposed to Coles Notes or some more modern study guide, might actually inspire some modern readers to go to the original source. Not most, but some.

I have met a good number of young students who know much more about Greek mythology than I do. Why? Not because they have been forced to take classes on Greek mythology for their edification because it underlies a lot of our "Classic" Literature. But rather because they got hooked on the Percy Jackson series which began with The Lightning Thief and they got intrigued.

If you want modern kids to read Shakespeare, I would suggest writing a series like Percy Jackson which makes extensive reference to Shakespeare's works. Then let kids discover Shakespeare on their own. They will likely embrace it more if it is something which they have sought out than if it has been mandated upon them.

Would every child actively discover Shakespeare in such a manner? Of course not. Probably not even the majority. But those that did would be more likely to embrace him and then pass on their enthusiasm and their knowledge to their peers. Students tend to be influenced by their peers much more than by the majority of their teachers.

Schools do no favours to Shakespeare, their students or society in general by mandating that his works be read in school. Students need to be able to read, think critically about what they have read and then express their considered opinions about what they have read both in written and oral format. That can be done with any number of texts. There is nothing magic about the "Classics" in this regard.

Offer the "Classics" for those so inclined. Mention them in historical reference to more modern texts when they touch upon a shared theme. But don't force them upon students for purposes of "edification" unless the intent is to turn students off of reading to ensure that they remain sheep, beholden to the sound bites and slogans which plague airwaves and pollute discourse.

[Uncle Robin]

Originally Posted by Question Mark

If you want modern kids to read Shakespeare, I would suggest writing a series like Percy Jackson which makes extensive reference to Shakespeare's works. Then let kids discover Shakespeare on their own.

My own long-ago experience with Shakespeare was similar to this. It was not high school that awakened my interest, it was the works of Ngaio Marsh, especially Light Thickens. Her love of theatre and Shakespeare, including using many references as titles, prompted me to buy his complete works not long after finishing hers.

[Thasaidon]

Originally Posted by Question Mark

Exactly, which is why I said "in keeping with your thoughts about the ingenuity of modern readers".

I was, in fact, agreeing with you on how modern readers will approach the "Classics" when forced to confront them. They will find an easier alternative.

However, an alternative like The Graphic Canon, as opposed to Coles Notes or some more modern study guide, might actually inspire some modern readers to go to the original source. Not most, but some.

I have met a good number of young students who know much more about Greek mythology than I do. Why? Not because they have been forced to take classes on Greek mythology for their edification because it underlies a lot of our "Classic" Literature. But rather because they got hooked on the Percy Jackson series which began with The Lightning Thief and they got intrigued.

If you want modern kids to read Shakespeare, I would suggest writing a series like Percy Jackson which makes extensive reference to Shakespeare's works. Then let kids discover Shakespeare on their own. They will likely embrace it more if it is something which they have sought out than if it has been mandated upon them.

Would every child actively discover Shakespeare in such a manner? Of course not. Probably not even the majority. But those that did would be more likely to embrace him and then pass on their enthusiasm and their knowledge to their peers. Students tend to be influenced by their peers much more than by the majority of their teachers.

Schools do no favours to Shakespeare, their students or society in general by mandating that his works be read in school. Students need to be able to read, think critically about what they have read and then express their considered opinions about what they have read both in written and oral format. That can be done with any number of texts. There is nothing magic about the "Classics" in this regard.

Offer the "Classics" for those so inclined. Mention them in historical reference to more modern texts when they touch upon a shared theme. But don't force them upon students for purposes of "edification" unless the intent is to turn students off of reading to ensure that they remain sheep, beholden to the sound bites and slogans which plague airwaves and pollute discourse.

Hear! Hear! Nicely put.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Question Mark

Exactly, which is why I said "in keeping with your thoughts about the ingenuity of modern readers".

I was, in fact, agreeing with you on how modern readers will approach the "Classics" when forced to confront them. They will find an easier alternative.

However, an alternative like The Graphic Canon, as opposed to Coles Notes or some more modern study guide, might actually inspire some modern readers to go to the original source. Not most, but some.

I have met a good number of young students who know much more about Greek mythology than I do. Why? Not because they have been forced to take classes on Greek mythology for their edification because it underlies a lot of our "Classic" Literature. But rather because they got hooked on the Percy Jackson series which began with The Lightning Thief and they got intrigued.

If you want modern kids to read Shakespeare, I would suggest writing a series like Percy Jackson which makes extensive reference to Shakespeare's works. Then let kids discover Shakespeare on their own. They will likely embrace it more if it is something which they have sought out than if it has been mandated upon them.

Would every child actively discover Shakespeare in such a manner? Of course not. Probably not even the majority. But those that did would be more likely to embrace him and then pass on their enthusiasm and their knowledge to their peers. Students tend to be influenced by their peers much more than by the majority of their teachers.

Schools do no favours to Shakespeare, their students or society in general by mandating that his works be read in school. Students need to be able to read, think critically about what they have read and then express their considered opinions about what they have read both in written and oral format. That can be done with any number of texts. There is nothing magic about the "Classics" in this regard.

Offer the "Classics" for those so inclined. Mention them in historical reference to more modern texts when they touch upon a shared theme. But don't force them upon students for purposes of "edification" unless the intent is to turn students off of reading to ensure that they remain sheep, beholden to the sound bites and slogans which plague airwaves and pollute discourse.

At one time, it was generally accepted that a common culture was a good thing and that any well educated citizen was familiar with certain works. The purpose isn't to turn every student into a lover of Shakespeare, but rather to make sure that everyone who has reached a given level of education has enough exposure to it to be familiar with Shakespeare.

You seem to be making the argument that one should only study that which they find interesting at a given time. If you extrapolate that out to all subjects, then it's pretty obvious one gets poorly educated people using that method.

[DiapDealer]

I can't imagine I would have enjoyed needing to be told about Shakespeare's influence on genre fiction (after the fact) nearly much as I did noticing Shakespeare's influence in genre fiction myself.

Teaching the classics first is more in keeping with the "teach a person to fish..." proverb in my opinion.

Telling someone the theme of their favorite SciFi novel is straight from The Tempest (giving them a fish) isn't nearly as effective (or impactful) as them discovering it for themselves.

[Thasaidon]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You seem to be making the argument that one should only study that which they find interesting at a given time. If you extrapolate that out to all subjects, then it's pretty obvious one gets poorly educated people using that method.

We have a Hades lot of poorly educated people who were taught with current teaching methods.

[Question Mark]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

At one time, it was generally accepted that a common culture was a good thing and that any well educated citizen was familiar with certain works. The purpose isn't to turn every student into a lover of Shakespeare, but rather to make sure that everyone who has reached a given level of education has enough exposure to it to be familiar with Shakespeare.

At one time, a knowledge of Greek and Latin was considered to be essential for a proper education. That is no longer the case. Cultures and languages change over time.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You seem to be making the argument that one should only study that which they find interesting at a given time.

Not at all. I'm questioning what the purpose of a regular English class is and how best to achieve that.

[Question Mark]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I can't imagine I would have enjoyed needing to be told about Shakespeare's influence on genre fiction (after the fact) nearly much as I did noticing Shakespeare's influence in genre fiction myself.

And isn't it more enjoyable to discover how great an author is by yourself rather than being told how great an author is...

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Teaching the classics first is more in keeping with the "teach a person to fish..." proverb in my opinion.

Teaching students to read and think critically is more in keeping with that proverb and one can use any number of texts to do so. Nothing magic about the Classics in this regard.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Telling someone the theme of their favorite SciFi novel is straight from The Tempest (giving them a fish) isn't nearly as effective (or impactful) as them discovering it for themselves.

As it happens, I read King Lear because I had heard that Kurosawa's film Ran was based on it. I hadn't read Shakespeare in years, having been thoroughly turned off him in school. I rediscovered Shakespeare and came to appreciate his genius precisely because I had learnt that a film was based on Shakespeare.