On Wed, 02-21-07 11:54 am
Many years ago, at least 40 and perhaps 45, I was required by an English literature teacher to read a book. The book was Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, which many of you have also read voluntarily or involuntarily. In that I read the book only once so long ago, I truly remember very little of it, except for some of the conditioning programs perpetrated on children to prepare them for their chosen (by others) careers. It is a dark and troubling recollection, proof of Emerson remark that impressions are more significant – and truly more enduring – than explicit memories.
Huxley’s work was one of two prophetic novels produced during the early and mid-20th Century. The other, of course, was George Orwell’s 1984. I have never read Orwell’s work; I am in the process of reading it now. I suspect that 1984 will be far more meaningful to me than Brave New World was: I am an adult now and not consumed by adolescent distractions and hormones. I also have a feeling that I will return to Huxley’s work in the near future for a second, more profitable reading.
I have 1984 only because my older daughter had to read it while in high school. Her appreciation for Orwell’s genius was lacking at the time, although I am confident that she would have a quite different perspective as she approaches her twenty-fifth birthday. At least, she would if I could somehow get her to read it again. But that is unlikely: having been exposed to the book prematurely, she now is safely innoculated against willingly partaking of a book that left such a sour, bitter taste in her mouth.
Her experience is not uncommon. It seems that teachers are compelled to require students to read books that they (the educators) love now as adults and, perhaps, only now fully understand. Forgotten are the emotional, neurological, and spiritual thunderstorms of puberty and its immediate aftermath: teens are asked to read an intellectual novel in the midst of Mardi Gras or Hurricane Katrina. There is rarely any middle ground in the experiential world of teenagers.
As parents, we would do well to either discuss the problem with teachers to see if other books could be read – a pursuit not likely to succeed in many cases – or to read through such books with our teens and educate them ourselves. Without meaning to paint with too broad a brush, I simply do not trust high school teachers to emphasize the issues and teach the life lessons that I want my daughters to learn. It is not merely because so many do not share my worldview – indeed, some are truly Christians – but because I believe my daughters’ education is my responsibility and is not to be handed off to someone else. I do not do all the educating, obviously, but some aspects are too important to ignore.
If it were in my power, I would not allow anyone to read classic literature – whether Shakespeare, Orwell, Twain, Dickens, etc. – until they were at least past the age of twenty-five and had developed sufficient realism to benefit from such writing. To allow children – for teens are children – to read them too early is to rob them of the wisdom and beauty of such books in their later years.
I am certainly glad that it is not in your power. Otherwise, I would not have been able to read—well, many books that I did!
I see your point, though. There are teenagers who could enjoy those books—but they will do so on their own, which I did. There’s nothing lacking in a teenager who does not—they simply do not have a bent towards that sort of thing.
B:
Your point is valid, of course, i.e., some might never read classics were they not required to do so. Twain\’s words come to mind: \”A person who doesn\’t read good books is no better off than a person who can\’t read good books.\”
I have this ironic, cynical side, though, that imagines if teens were not allowed to read classics they might actually find away around the proscription and read them on their own! Sort of like underage drinking or going to R-rated movies when they\’re only 13 or 14. Being the rebel I am (and was) I undoubtedly would have read more and comprehended more if I had been forbidden to read such books in the first place!
I\’m glad, though, that you had such a positive experience. May your tribe increase.
Twenty-five?! Reconsider.
I read both books when I was in 9th grade. I read Stranger in a Strange Land in 10th grade. I appreciated them all and believe they had important effects on my formation. If I had waited another 10 or so years I would have probably lost something things that were unrecoverable.
Maybe what you wanted to say is that MOST people should wait until they are older to read certain classics. What may have set me apart from your daughter and others is that I read those books on my own, not for a school assignment.
Then again, it just may be me. My mother always said they broke the mold after me…
The way current school curriculums are going I doubt that they would get in-depth with the books. They’re pretty much teaching toward standardized tests which is a pity and makes your point that parents should be at home reading along and showing some depth to the book.
I personally loved reading some of these books when I was too young to know better, reading them again in High School and then reading them again post-college but I was the kid that They would wait for outside of the Library to persuade me to give up money.