ThisVicariousLife

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2ftm5z wrote

Yes, I can definitely see the aversion to it. And most students carry that aversion their entire lives, which breaks my heart. If I could read a book with my students without making them think more deeply, I would (except for the fun ones with Easter eggs and such), but all of this analysis for analysis’s sake aggravates me, too, and why I also got away from reading for many years. I only started reading for pleasure again about a decade ago. Being forced to read something sucks the fun out of reading, which is why I hate that we do it in school, but I understand why we do it so it’s a dichotomy for me. However, you don’t even need to do a deep analysis to see some of the hidden gems that are in literature (not even classics, but I read Stephen King and he has hidden gems everywhere in his books!). I read easy books when I just want to take my mind off something but when I want a good story or something to really think about, I go with more complex material.

3

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2fin2m wrote

I can tell you, though, as an English teacher, that when you just read for reading’s sake, you often do miss the very clever and wildly entertaining deeper meanings and Easter eggs built into classic literature! But admittedly, some texts are beaten to death and people are truly reaching past the intended meaning because, yes, sometimes a red curtain is just a red curtain!! But there are so many books I love teaching because I know when I read them in school, I had no clue that the author buried this little nugget in there because of the time period and inability to be blunt about certain subjects, so they’d obfuscate! The Great Gatsby!! The Yellow Wallpaper! Of Mice and Men! The Hour! The Lottery! The Tell-Tale Heart! So many greats that deserve a deeper analysis or else we miss some really important aspects of them.

11