Amazon exiles discussion

I guess this question may be directed to readers from USA. I saw a few 1 star reviews a while back for Great Expectations by Chuck Dickens- mainly from young american people whose beef was that they had been "forced" to read this at school - early teens or earlier. Not surprisingly it was too much for them. Is this sort of English Classic still part of the Eng Lit syllabus Stateside, or back home? I suspect much of the problem was its lack of relevance to their modern lives and foreign culture, also its length but surely there is a better approach to introducing classic works, without resorting to abridged versions?

I don't know that we have many American posters here anymore Huck. I grew up in what was Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, and we did David Copperfield when I was about 14 (early 60s). I don't think it felt like it had a lot of relevance for me but I've never forgotten the characters - Agnes, Uriah Heep, etc. This was possibly because teaching methods then focused on reading aloud and repetition, repetition, repetition. Other set books are also fixed in my memory - Shakespeare's Julius Caesar and Hamlet, Patricia Lynch's The Turf-Cutter's Donkey - a rather odd choice!, Alan Paton's Cry, The Beloved Country - another odd choice in a country ruled by a white supremacist government, and a book whose title I can't recall but it was about a little Dutch(?) boy called Jan(?) and the family ate sandwiches with mashed potato on them (heaven!).

Re Dickens, I did read Great Expectations when I was quite young (10-12) because it was the custom at that time to give children gifts of the "classics". I also read Villette, The Last Days of Pompeii and Wuthering Heights around this time (only the latter made any lasting impression on me). I recently tried to re-read A Tale of Two Cities and will admit I struggled with it. I found the language rather convoluted and had difficulty differentiating between Darnay and Carton on the page.

I rather think any text set in the school syllabus is likely to be viewed with distaste by students only because they feel they are required to value its worthiness. I don't know how you get around this. Perhaps you start with the film version, then get students to read the original and discuss the difference. Of course, this approach doesn't favour imagination and students might be puzzled by characters who didn't make the cut in the filmed version.

I don't know any young people who would choose to read "the classics" these days. Perhaps our definition of classics has to widen. Mind you, I despair of the quality of writing in many current best sellers. It's abysmal!

P.S. I DO love the filmed version of David Copperfield with Daniel Radcliffe
https://www.amazon.co.uk/David-Copper...

it appears to be a counter-productive practice - although i suspect many of the young reviewers may look back on these ill-considered views with embarrassment - they are obviously genuine enough reactions. There are just so many very readable classics - Orwell, HG Wells, CS Lewis, John Buchan, RL Stevenson, William Golding, Graham Greene and others who have eft us with shorter, readable, intelligent works that younger readers can more easily digest and appreciate with the guidance of a good teacher. Dickens, Hardy, Brontes, Eliot, Austen, Forster, Lawrence et al can come later. I agree with yu that Dickens characters stay with you but the books are a bit long and wordy for most children. The David lean Great Expectations film is a masterpiece - perhaps your idea to prep them by showing a film is good - even if it spoils the ending :-)

I agree with many of your suggestions. H.G. Wells is very readable, as is Poe. I re-read Treasure Island a few years ago and found, while I loved it as a child (another set book in school), it wasn't a great read for adults. On the other hand, while I love Graham Greene, I'm not sure young people would get his fairly deep themes. I think they might enjoy many of Daphne du Maurier's novels/short stories. And maybe H.E. Bates, A.P. Herbert, and who doesn't love Jerome K. Jerome?

Presumably this is the current day set texts
https://schoolreadinglist.co.uk/tag/g...

Looks like all the old favourites are there - from when I did Form 6 in 1967 and my children did Year 12 (2002 - 2007) - but at least there are some newer options - assuming your school can offer them. I note that I did Silas Marner at school in Form 2.

"... Bates, A.P. Herbert, and who doesn't love Jerome K. Jerome?"

Ha! By coincidence I'm rereading right now, Three Men... of course.

I always crack up when they're boiling the kettle (with river water) and then they see the dog, the most peaceful dog ever .......

Yes, a classic, alonq with Diary of a Nobody, although IMO The Eliza Stories by Barry Pain is far better. Anyone read that - genius, very funny

Tim wrote: "Presumably this is the current day set texts
https://schoolreadinglist.co.uk/tag/g..."

Thanks Tim - really interesting to see quite a few yankee works listed. Would love to see Catch 22 and Bonfire of the Vanities there, perhaps a Carson McCullers? Steinbeck is perfect but i think SciFi should be represented more. And i find it worthy but surprising how much Shakespeare is included, perhaps at expense of other great dramatists - Shaw, Wilde, Ibsen, Jonson. I also note that Short Stories don't feature - which is puzzling?

neither at school or since have i read a word of Dickens or Shakespeare - to nutshell it, i just don't fancy them!
the only book i can recollect from school is 'The Invisible Man' by Ralph Ellison - the teacher thought i had ripped it off for a short story i had written (i hadn't), and lent me a copy to read - of course i still have it, and have read it at least twice, classic!

Tech XXIII wrote: "neither at school or since have i read a word of Dickens or Shakespeare - to nutshell it, i just don't fancy them!
the only book i can recollect from school is 'The Invisible Man' by Ralph Ellison..."

Hi Tech - would be interested to know why you don't fancy them? OK Shakespeare is difficult because the language is complicated and the vocabulary archaic but Dickens, although wordy, has some gripping stories, amazing characters and a certain relevance even today. If the Invisible Man isn't on the list, it should be -in fact both books by that name, although i think Ellison's is probably for 16years plus.

probably because it was thought that i should, that i steered clear. i've read and enjoyed many 'difficult' books in a variety of vernaculars, some even using 'made up' language, so it's not that. i dunno, guess i didn't deem them punk enough? just don' wanna!

i guess nobody likes to have their tastes "dictated" and Dickens and Shakespeare and Austen and Co are part of the establishment. I'd say Dickens does have some great punk characters. And there's nothing wrong with the alternatives. Spoiled for choice really. Strangely i'm reading one of the recent Mick Herron books - one of the Jackson Lamb spy series (brilliantly witty and entertaining) and it really reminds me of Dickens in style - more modern setting but his approach can seem unnecessarily wordy and he takes his time building up the plot, but at the end of the day it's the joy of words that keeps me reading and i like seeing a talented author indulging themselves a bit.

Tech XXIII wrote: "probably because it was thought that i should, that i steered clear. i've read and enjoyed many 'difficult' books in a variety of vernaculars, some even using 'made up' language, so it's not that. ..."

Not punk enough? Shakespeare practically invented it!

https://blogs.bl.uk/english-and-drama...

yeah, Shakespeare's not dead! 😁

his work endures and has never been surpassed in quality but i'm not sure if under 16's can really get much sense from it. his finest dramatic dialogue and verse is just too grown up or profound, subtle or difficult or archaic. it doesn't help that spellinge was very flexible in ye olden days