Literacy in Schools?

[juliek293]

I just came across this atrocity: blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/07/_did_it_seem_to.html

It makes me wonder, do you guys think this is a fluke or is this where literacy in schools is headed? I mean, I feel this book takes the whole point out of the Great Gatsby and literature itself...

[devilishlybookish]

Ugh. If you ask me, things like this are the REASON literacy in schools is headed downward. Heaven forbid a student have the gumption to pick up the classroom dictionary once in a while. I think a big problem is that students are getting more and more lazy and instead of pushing, school systems relent by allowing watered down versions of books like this to be taught instead of the source material.

In college I took a course called Western Heritage Through Literature where we spent the entire semester mapping civilization through Homer, Vergil, Apuleius, St. Augustine, etc. I hated my professor for it at the time, but he would stop in lectures and make us write down what archaic words meant, tested us on our knowledge of the mythos invoked by the writers, and openly laughed at us if we didn't elevate ourselves to the language of the discourses we studied. But you know what happened from all of his pushing? We LEARNED.

Tl;dr- Don't dumb things down and let students get away without being educated. You're killing literacy. 'kay, thanks.

[Gina]

When I was about five years old, my grandma bought me a collection of books similar to this one because I had shown interest in reading the real versions. They were classics re-written so that a small child could understand them. I read them until I was about seven and loved them. However, when she bought them for me, she made it clear that these were not the real books and she expected me to read the originals someday. Obviously she couldn't buy me the real versions at that point, there was no way I could have understood them.

I guess I'm a little torn on the subject. In my case, it made me love the stories of these books before I could actually dive into the beauty of the original writing. However, I can't possibly condone kids reading these to get out of school work. It's worse than Spark Notes.

[devilishlybookish]

@gina- I think something like this for CHILDREN is fantastic. It introduces classic literature in an approachable way and encourages them to become readers. But to pass "This is my friend Jay. Jay has a big house" around a high school classroom and call the students educated...no. No. No. No.

PS. What an awesome grandmother you have!

[rayyychul]

I see no reason why children shouldn't/can't read the original Great Gatsby, though. Will it be over their heads? Definitely. I think it would be wonderful to get say, students in grade five to read Gatsby (and maybe write a little paper on it), and then have them re-read in grade ten to see how they interpret it then vs. now.

That is how you educate students, in my opinion.

[rayyychul]

Hmm, I only skimmed the article, but a comment I noticed pointed out that these abridged versions are not meant to be for students whose native language is English. Rather, they're for students who are learning English.

In that case, I think it's a perfectly acceptable way to introduce classics to those who may not grasp the language as well as a native speaker might. They're shortened and watered down enough that the English learners will be able to understand the story, and broaden their vocabulary at the same time. Who knows: maybe when they have more knowledge of the language, they'll pick up the original version!

Still, I see no reason why native English speaker in grade five (or whichever grade) shouldn't have enough grasp of the English language to read the original version of the novel. As I mentioned above, I doubt they'd truly understand it, but isn't half the fun of studying novels in class working your way to an understanding?

[Gina]

Jul 6, 2011 17:34:05 GMT -5 devilishlybookish said:

@gina- I think something like this for CHILDREN is fantastic. It introduces classic literature in an approachable way and encourages them to become readers. But to pass "This is my friend Jay. Jay has a big house" around a high school classroom and call the students educated...no. No. No. No.

PS. What an awesome grandmother you have!

She is certainly an amazing lady! I definitely think it is because of these books and the Madeline books that I learned to love reading. But yes, I would die if I found out that anyone in my school was reading one of these watered-down versions.

[onlyaworkingtitle]

... I have no words.

Though I do want to point out that this is hardly the first case of "dumbing down" a classic -- there are editions of Shakespeare with the original text on one page of the spread and a "translation" (in modern, American English) on the other. Those are atrocious, but this... takes it to a whole new level.

[Dodger Thirteen]

Jul 6, 2011 22:18:13 GMT -5 onlyaworkingtitle said:

... I have no words.

Though I do want to point out that this is hardly the first case of "dumbing down" a classic -- there are editions of Shakespeare with the original text on one page of the spread and a "translation" (in modern, American English) on the other. Those are atrocious, but this... takes it to a whole new level.

Hey, I like those.

My opinion of the NoFear Shakespeare editions are this: they are great for when you are just starting to study it. For a higher level, no. But if you're just doing a cursory reading of the text, then having the modern English equivalent makes it easier to understand.

Then again, most people probably don't do a line-by-line comparison of the two versions like I do. *sigh~*

[andreaisabbbw]

Maybe I'm like an old geezer, but I like everything better in its original version. Deviating from the original just cheapens it.

[devilishlybookish]

I think there's a big difference between NoFear Shakespeare and kind of editing being discussed in the article. At least with NoFear the original text is still presented to you. If we start publishing all classics watered down, there might come a time when the original content doesn't exist anymore.

[andreaisabbbw]

Jul 6, 2011 22:58:51 GMT -5 devilishlybookish said:

I think there's a big difference between NoFear Shakespeare and kind of editing being discussed in the article. At least with NoFear the original text is still presented to you. If we start publishing all classics watered down, there might come a time when the original content doesn't exist anymore.

I agree with this.

I think the only work of literature that I will read that is currently watered down is Beowulf. I tried reading a fragment in the original Old English and I felt I was reading another language.

[onlyaworkingtitle]

Jul 6, 2011 22:58:51 GMT -5 devilishlybookish said:

I think there's a big difference between NoFear Shakespeare and kind of editing being discussed in the article. At least with NoFear the original text is still presented to you. If we start publishing all classics watered down, there might come a time when the original content doesn't exist anymore.

Yes, of course I agree -- I just brought up the NoFear because it's similar. NoFear is okay as a companion to the original text, to increase understanding, but the Great Gatsby rewrite is NoFear^10 -- Just Not Okay.

[rayyychul]

If we start publishing all classics watered down, there might come a time when the original content doesn't exist anymore.

Abridged versions of novels have been around for ages. It's not the concept of an abridged novel that is new, but the idea to use them as school reading material.

[devilishlybookish]

Jul 6, 2011 23:50:55 GMT -5 rayyychul said:

If we start publishing all classics watered down, there might come a time when the original content doesn't exist anymore.

Abridged versions of novels have been around for ages. It's not the concept of an abridged novel that is new, but the idea to use them as school reading material.

I have no problem with abridging, but this is something different. One of the examples is Gatsby opening with "My name is Nick Carraway. I was born in the Middle West" (paraphrased) instead of the original opening. I thought something abridged meant pieces were removed, not that the language and story were changed.