Retarded high school books

Changethattape

Changethattape

Active member
I would like to comment on most of the books that i will assume most of you guys have read in highschool. Does anyone else feel that teachers are retarded and look into meanings to books in ways in which the author would most likely laugh? well after watching south park and the tales of scrodie mcbooger balls i feel like trey parker and matt stone cover exactly how i feel about books. People look into shit so much it makes it impossible to see the original meanings obviously because it is south park it was scaled up but I think that they have the right idea... DIscuss maturely please
 
are you talking about novels read as a class? if so then yeah, teachers make you think about meanings waay too much
 
Symbolism is a large part in novels, but yes teachers do tend to take it to an extreme. Mainly because that's the only way teachers figure they can get students to look for different meanings in texts. And perhaps the only way they can make some stories interesting.

Take Lord of the Flies for example, just because it's a book that my english 11 teacher loved to find symbolism in. You can read it as a bunch of boys stuck on an island who duke it out. Or you can look at it as a metaphor for politics or the debate between self-survival and the good of the society etc. etc.

I'm not necessarily saying that Golding meant for people to read the book as some wonder full of symbols and metaphors. There is, of course, a chance that he'd laugh and call us all idiots, but then again why would he write something so odd if it didn't have some sort of connotation behind it?

Honestly, I miss those "retarded high school books" and the things we had to find in them. Trust me, they were a lot easier than some of the stuff you get in University. (I say this because I just finished an analysis of what is quite possibly the driest short-story/novella I have ever read... Bartleby The Scrivener.)

 
I also agree
sometimes i think they are just trying to force rediculus things into books. but with a teacher like that it means that on essays or test you can pretty much back up any bullshit you want.
 
I agree also. It's sooooo annoying, that is all my teacher focuses on in any book we read all class, she seriously doesn't give a shit what happens in the book.
 
the worst part was reading a "post-modern" book. I could have wrote a story about the last shit I took, and there would have been a better plot-line.

"post-modern" is just a way of saying nothing will happen.

oh and the book i'm refering to is extremely loud and incredibly close... if you ever have to read it tell the teacher that the kid is a worthless pos who make believes that his dad is still alive.
 
Did you guys all have to read Ulysses too? WOW that was the epitome of retarded, like 800 pages of headache. I must be a secret philistine cause I didn't see the genius, and I really enjoed Portrait of an artist too.
 
this, I just read it in English and on my report, my teacher docked marks because I didn't delve into the "philosophical side" of the book. I said maybe Golding didn't have any hidden meanings and the book was straight-forward, and he just got mad at me.
 
Totally agree. Honors british lit, my teacher was going off on how the lion from narnia symbolism for jesus as our savior.
 
Books are not meant to be interpreted any one way. Sure, the author might have had a standpoint in which generally readers agree with, but there are also many other meanings that can be derived from books that the author never saw.

The point being; teachers are usually attempting at opening your minds to other possible interpretations of a specific book. This is a reason why books are so great. You are able to create the scene in your mind with the text you read, and the meaning you get out could be different for everyone.

Sure teachers exaggerate this, but this is the only way to get kids like you to truly understand a book. Its not all just jarbled text.
 
It's not just High School dude. I've had some college professors in short story/ literature classes that look way to deep into the story and are just trying so hard to get symbols and foreshadowing blah blah blah. I took a poetry class and that shit is 10x worse. I'm sure the authors intentionally put in symbolism, metaphors foreshadowing and all that good stuff but I think that the main purpose of writing is purely entertainment. It pisses me off when people try to break down the books and find the deeper meaning.
 
DUDE

when a teachers like

"ok so when ____ looks behind himself and sees the trees, the author was trying to show how ____ is suffering from his abusive childhood"

like what the hell? sometimes its reasonable but sometimes it goes way to far
 
I think it's good to try and find an underlying meaning in books especially the influential novels throughout our history, but the students should be able to have there own opinions and come up with ideas without the teacher forcing a particular point of you down your throat.
 
Thank you!

Your teachers are not in any way trying to instill some absolute view on literature in which we know all the intricacies of the story, they are just trying to make you think. Unfortunately, many people seem to discredit the works on the grounds of "I don't get it." While you might not understand the book or someone else's interpretation of it, that does not in any way mean that it is without merit--it just means that you do not understand that particular book or interpretation.

There is a reason so many of these books are taught similarly in schools, so please please please do not try to argue they are not worth studying just because you don't seem to comprehend what is going on. That's fine if you don't enjoy them, but making a summation of a book by saying "this fucking sucks," "you're over-analyzing it," or "I don't get it, so it's not worth reading" just makes you, as the reader, sound pretentious.

Sparknotes: "I don't understand" is not a valid or worthwhile criticism of anything.
 
they exaggerate the hell out of certain aspects of the books so as to make you realize that it isn't a one dimensional, single thing. It doesn't make much sense all the time, but it'll make you pay attention to detail later.

I first thought you were talking about text books being old and shit. My high school text books were ancient, referring to colonisation of the north american continent as "a good idea."
 
Before reading any book you must understand that unlike real life, an author has created every single thing in the story. When it rains in real life, it just fucking rained, but when it rains in a book, an author decided for a very specific reason to make it rain. This goes for everything in a book, the characters, the decisions they make, etc. Its all been decided by the author for a specific reason. Some authors make stuff happen for dumb reasons, they think it'd be 'cool' if the protagonist got hit by a truck...Well your not reading these books, your teaches have chosen the BEST books of all time, throughout all of human history, these are the best books written by the best authors. And all these authors write stories for reasons, and in order to get their ideas and opinions out, they reinforce their meanings with symbolism, metaphors, allusions and everything else you think is bullshit.

I suggest reading the book "How to Read Literature Like a Professor' by Thomas Foster it explains all of this and completely changed how I read and enjoy literature/movies/etc.
 
How about you give examples rather than just state that all book read in high school are "retarded." On the contrary, most of the books that you have been reading are probably very important in terms of literary achievement. You are just too lazy or "retarded" to comprehend their meanings.
 
I agree so much i have to wright a 3 page esay on the moral of the story. but the book didnt even have one its called the pigman and it due next period but i would rather complain and fail then do this
 
i forget the names but last year we learned about all the different styles of interpretation. one is that you interpret it how the author wanted and theres another where you interpret only whats on the pages regardless of author's intent
 
lol @ >implying you can put all dystopian novels into one category and compare them. 1984 is a completely different book from 451, suggesting that one is shit compared to the other is rather silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top