My youngest utterly despised having to read Lord of the Flies and I had to agree that whoever thought it a good idea to have depressive (and medicated for it) teenagers read this book is wacked in the head. As a good parent all I could really do was repeat that she didn't need to *like* it and she didn't need to pretend she liked it and when she had to answer questions about it, to tell the truth.
So... the final assignment sort of went like this... and ends like this:
The whole thing’s an analogy. Several layers of symbolism put together like a slightly foul and arrogant ice-cream cake. Probably with “Huminz sux” written sloppily on the top.
All I can say is that the punishment should fit the crime, and I'm assured that the teacher has a sense of humor.
21 comments:
You have a good daughter.
I recall reading that book and my son's HS English class is reading it in 2014. I don't recall despising it.
One book we read in HS was "A Clockwork Orange" which I thoroughly enjoyed. I still remember and occasionally use some of the Nadsat terms which Burgess introduced (but which Kubrick mostly dropped from his screenplay). High school English teachers can have a lasting influence.
Whether the English teacher has a sense of humor or not, the autonomy and humor of the writer shines through. The exchange that took place between mother and daughter and the end result both serve to lift my spirits, like lit candles on the Huminz sux cake.
Brilliant. Especially that whiz bang ending.
If I were the teacher I'd ask your daughter if she's comfortable using metaphor and analogy interchangeably. And maybe symbolism as well.
Oh don't be such a square, Mister Pedantic, she'd probably think, you knew what I meant.
"Yes I did," I'd reply, "but did you, precisely?"
That's a Socratic slider I'm sure your .300 hitter could handle.
Was the teacher informed that all the kids were "depressive (and medicated for it)"?
Is not liking an assignment now a good reason for considering it a bad idea to teach it? And does this thinking apply to other subjects? I'm a bit behind on the whole restless parents teaching restless kids that it's ok to behave horribly thing.
A less desperate metaphor than an "arrogant" ice cream cakes might have worked. Otherwise, the uses are endless. Arrogant highways and arrogant dried-up riverbeds. Arrogant snowstorms and arrogant foodstuffs. The whole world is arrogant! As is nature herself!
Oh wait, now I'm exemplifying the idea behind the story.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Was the teacher informed that all the kids were "depressive (and medicated for it)"?
Prolly. Among union teachers, it's Holy Writ.
I'm a bit behind on the whole restless parents teaching restless kids that it's ok to behave horribly thing.
Of course you are. Until what constitutes "behaving horribly" is cleared up and understood, it will be difficult to catch up.
A less desperate metaphor than an "arrogant" ice cream cakes might have worked.
What's desperate about it? I think it works very well as a play on "humble pie."
Excellent and wonderful stuff.
I say this after finishing grading 100+ research essays last week.
I had a high school teacher, probably my best one, who said that he gave extra credit if you could make a joke about the subject in an essay, as the ability to joke about it, intelligently, says you understand it the best.
Which is why a lot of academics tend to be so serious. They're insecure about what they are using to define themselves.
I sorta wish she would have added something about Modernity and Metanarrative, but that's just me.
Well done.
symbol X2--> analogy X2--> metaphor X2 -->allegory.
It is allegory! Rife with symbol. Aching, aching symbol.
Clang clang clanging with cymbals.
Best advice ever, Synova. True too with experiments, research papers, senior projects and such. It is not required the endeavor be successful, rather describing the failure is what counts. And everything counts in large amount. "More research required" the go to conclusion for additional grants. Thus climate science.
Colorado U. and Regis appreciate disaffection so long as the reasoning is spelled out with conviction.
My favorite part is humanity is scar on the earth. The plane leaving a streak upon paradise. Then humans come along, innocent humans at that, everything going for them, education, culture, the good things that money can buy, travel, music and such, but then left on their own BLAM instant disaster.
Each episode of Survivor is another iteration of Lord of the Flies. Which proves on a scale civilization really does need regulation, then need kill its regulators and start again afresh. Such is the brilliance of the American form. Until now, it appears.
I prefer to look to nature and to history rather than to fiction for metaphors.
Of course you are. Until what constitutes "behaving horribly" is cleared up and understood, it will be difficult to catch up.
Surely you have heard of classrooms filled with incorrigibly rude children and parents who think those kids could never do anything wrong. Which kind of makes you wonder what's behind those widely used antidepressants in the first place.
What's desperate about it? I think it works very well as a play on "humble pie."
That's a good point. Interestingly enough though, the origin of "humble" in that phrase was a literal French word for "guts"!
Oh wait, now I'm exemplifying the idea behind the story.
You can say that again, Ritmo!
So what is this?
Conservatives disdain for "intellectualism"...
Vs. "Liberals" independent thinking and disdain for "authority", otherwise expressed as...
"Thank you, sir, may I have another?"
Just so long as it's the approved type of "thought?" All other thought should be suppressed? Another brick in the wall?
I told her to do her assignment and to tell the truth.
Which parts of that do you view as bad parenting... the doing the assignment part, or the telling the truth?
Liberals have the *weirdest* relationship with authority.
I don't have any problem with what you told her to do. I just found the need to make a statement on the merits of the book, well, different.
I think someone could assign the worst book in the world, and still I wouldn't feel a need to be offended by the choice - or limited in what I could get out of the exercise of commenting on it.
But I'm probably biased. I hated most fiction and still find a lot of it to be more of a chore. I'm handicapped in the non-non-fiction department.
So I've always had to grapple with fiction being a subjective thing. How do you grade that? Or assess its value?
You could go by popularity - especially for the intended audience, but that would lead you to assigning all sorts of teen vampire fiction. Blech.
It seems most teachers go with authors important to the time, or with themes explored that were important to American history, good writing optional. Hence, Mark Twain. And Nathaniel Hawthorne. Stephen Crane. Etc.
Some explore philosophical developments: Emerson and Thoreau.
I can't remember if Lord of the Flies was required or optional, but IIRC it's about kids stranded on an island (or somehow without adult supervision) going about constructing their own society - to disastrous results. Or maybe results that were no worse than adults come up with, but just as bad nonetheless.
I can't see how that's a bad choice of thematic exploration for teenagers. Unless they're of the belief that they can only do right.
Anyway, why wouldn't conservatives like such a book? Isn't it about the shortcomings of human politics?
Did you read the essay at the link?
It's snarky, but follows the grading rubric (and thus neither Modernity nor Metanarrative came into it.)
I don't know how strongly the "humans suck" theme goes through it, beginning with the scar from the crashing plane... and lots of teenagers seem to like fatalistic depressive stuff a whole lot, but is "people ruin everything before they even get a chance to do anything" actually a healthy message for youth?
I don't think it is.
It looks at the dark side of human nature, and in an excessively sad way - in my view, having just read a comprehensive plot synopsis. Apparently the lady who wrote Hunger Games was massively inspired by it, which I think explains a lot. I hated Hunger Games, too (was dragged to see it by a S.O. who later expressed at one time being distressed by our differing impressions).
But it gets the same 4 stars and thousands of reviews on Amazon that Catcher in the Rye does, so I think that says something. The top reviewer explains that Golding wrote it as a response to a book called Coral Island, which took a utopian direction from the same premise of shipwrecked boys on an island.
Being published nine short years after the sheer horror of WWII, it's not hard for me to understand authors feeling a need to voice skepticism about human nature and human politics. Again, I agree with you that I'm sure I'd have found the book as written massively depressing, as well (despite making a good point and important comment), so I can't say if I would have been as negatively affected to have felt a need to make such a comment to the teacher in the assignment. It's entirely likely that I would have.
But as a conservative, I'm intrigued that you don't wonder if any current controversy results from a softened up society, and our reluctance to embrace the harshness of life that our lily livered modern generation allegedly devalues. I guess once even conservatives are opposed to praising the walking uphill in both directions every day then things really have changed!
Good luck to her in this and future assignments.
Sorry for not picking up on the link before. I think she does a good job of it. I especially like the way she found more characterological metaphors than I was aware of: Responsibility, Power as well as Intellectualism and Philosophy.
Post a Comment