Why do schools not read anything bloody cheerful ?

[Howlongtillbedtime]

I really think teens would be engaged with reading a wee bit more if they ever read a positive book.....

So far my son has read
Holes

Maggot moon
Of mice and men
Never let me go
Jekyll and hyde

And that is without the poetry and the Shakespeare.

Where is the uplifting or at the very least slightly bloody cheerful stuff?

Both my boys struggle with English which may cloud my judgement but surely we can have something a little more sodding positive !!!

*@LolaSmiles
People have been reading and writing these pieces of literature for centuries.
How is this relevant? People have also been writing witty, upbeat literature for centuries. The point my very intelligent and capable teenage pupil was making is that if fed a relentlessly depressing diet of literature, pupils may well imitate it. After all imitation is how we learn to do anything and everything. And the subtext of what he was saying is: give us more variety if you don't want us to reproduce more of the same. He sees the irony. Don't you?

There's a difference between writing on sad topics and writing something that's a potential safeguarding

It's one of those things that to me sounds witty but is really quite a superficial observation from them because there's a whole range of writing tasks across the English curriculum and specs so there's no expectation of then selectively emulating the few sections that would be safeguarding. Even then when you look at the range of themes if a student's response to a tip about exam writing is "yeah but you teach us sad texts so there's some irony there, if you don't want us writing sad things then you should teach different texts" shows their own lack of breadth of thinking. It's a vaguely amusing sound bite from a lesson but doesn't have substance.

Macbeth is a tragedy, but they could cover leadership, friendship, loyalty, kingship in their creative writing, if indeed they are emulating their set texts instead of choosing the same old depressing topics students have selected since the dawn of time

Then unseen poetry can be any poem and are usually quite interesting and not depressing so there's some non depressing opportunities to cover whatever poems the teachers wants.
Equally, going along side Literature is the study of English Language where the teacher can use any range of fiction and non fiction as a stimulus. The writing sections with images are often faces or landscapes and students can do what they want with it. The transactional writing is usually a fairly dull topic but a great opportunity for looking at world issues.

If a student can't honestly get past "we did some sad texts so how can you be surprised if we don't write anything other than sad things" then they don't strike me as that bright I'm afraid.

Never Let Me Go was depressing central!

As for The Wasp Factory - I didn't even finish it. I could probably if I was in a darker mood, but no.

I agree OP, something cheerful has to mitigate this!

I had to read Les Miserables at school. I kept crying it was so sad and I have hated it ever since.

I would never go to see the stage show and I can;t even listen to the music from it. Awful

I agree OP. My children despair at the books they are given to read. Michael Morpurgo really upsets and depresses them.

DD's just started yr7, is this what I have to look forward to?

I think it's crap and my DD who is in year 7 has had to be given a permit to leave the class if she is too upset by the book. If she is upset by the books then I'm sure others are too. I almost feel like taking her out of school as she can't handle history either.

PhilomenaButterfly
Typically at KS3 students will cover:

Fiction - Can be anything from modern young adult novels to classic literature, eg. Noughts and Crosses, Hunger Games, Animal Farm, Harry Potter, Oliver Twist, Frankenstein, Stone Cold, Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, anthologies of short stories, Greek myths and classics are also quite popular, Sherlock Holmes,

Shakespeare or a play - Common at KS3 are A Midsummer Night's Dream, Romeo and Juliet, The Tempest. Some schools have chosen to use KS3 play versions of stories here as well.

Poetry - Either slotted into existing schemes of work on a theme or an anthology in its own right. Once I did an anthology of poems about childhood and adolescence and that was quite nice. Other times they might focus on the work of a particular poet.

Non-Fiction - Again this will tend to be diaries or letters or newspapers either ojna topic for a half term, or they'll study them as offshoots of the book they are studying. This is usually really interesting and links to the wider world

Creative writing - continuing chapters from novels, writing skills, imaginative writing from images or film clips, writing to argue, writing speeches to persuade based on a key idea or topic from the text they're studying

Most texts deal with some form of experience or conflict. Often there's some sadness in some of them, usual mixed with a range of other themes.

That's an overview based on my KS3 teaching anyway.

Oh God, that is a bit grim Lola. She read the start of The Hunger Games in yr6, but I don't think they got to the bit where they were killing each other. I don't think a bit of humour would go amiss.

Smiling at the memory of DD writing to Michael Morpurgo to ask if he'd ever considered writing something cheerful. I think Private Peaceful was the last straw for her. Also thinking of my class cheering when the Trumpet Major died in Thomas Hardy's gloom fest of the same name, we knew the end was in sight.

Grim because they cover a range of texts between 11-14 on the grounds your child (unsurprisingly!) didn't get on with a young adult text being read in primary school?

The Hunger Games isn't a primary appropriate text (some suggest KS3, others sayb13+) so someone has messed up in school or her private reading material needs checking up on a bit.

Literally, I don't think there's been a year teaching where colleagues and I in a range of schools, all teaching different texts don't get some complaint to the effect of "I don't like the text".

If a student can't honestly get past "we did some sad texts so how can you be surprised if we don't write anything other than sad things" then they don't strike me as that bright I'm afraid

Actually he got 10 A*s. He's more perceptive than some people teaching to GCSE.

Its still not a perceptive comment to make, so either he genuinely believes it was some amazing insight (which suggests he's missed the obvious), or it was just a passing glib comment that sounds witty but is ultimately superficial. Either way, it doesn't stack up as a critique.

I like teaching a range of texts because they're interesting, but almost every text has a range of angles and themes to explore that aren't depressing. If staff teach a book with some sad themes in it and can't or don't cover them all, that's a teaching issue not a text issue. Last year the most uplifting and interesting and engaging set of lessons I taught were teaching tragedy. There was nothing morbid or depressing or get the kids writing depressing safeguarding concern stories about it.

You seem to be willfully missing so many points here, Lola. First it wasn't "some sad texts". GCSE set texts offer a relentless diet of stories about teens being killed or committing suicide, all of which need to be closely analysed for years and years. There is, in many schools, no let up or light relief to balance this. Given how little many pupils read outside their set texts, these are the sole examples of literature that many of them will come across.

Second, he raises a valid opinion you have dismissed without even considering its worth. Who is being glib? You then suggest he's not bright. He's exceedingly bright. Do you usually assume pupils are not intelligent if their opinion deviates from your own. You are not willing to explore his opinion or respect it. You swiftly dismiss. I admit, it surprised me, because I teach and love all the texts so much I had not even noticed how relentless the GCSE set texts are in their message. I respected him enormously for pointing this out and pointing out the double standards. We shove this down their throats with no othe roptions, nothing light or witty or warm or positive, but jump in alarm if they mimic it when asked to write creatively themselves. I can see his point is entirely valid. I am puzzled by how fiercely and rigidly you are defending the status quo.

My point is that "it's daft to expect us to write about other topics when we've studied sad texts" doesn't work as a criticism. You think it was interesting in pointing out a double standard, I don't.

There's many interesting debates to be had on texts, but I don't think what he has said is particularly insightful or remarkable. It sounds very much like a student has thought of something that is a witty superficial observation. It's the sort of thing I'd probably chat about in class at the time because it's interesting, but wouldn't go to the staff room using it as an example of a really bright and perceptive critique.

I'll be honest, I found a comment from a group of my Y11s about the dominance of socialist ideas and revolutionary ideologies in canonical literature (off the back of Agard's Checking Out Me History and a debate about Gove's education reform) a more interesting critique to explore than "our texts are depressing so is it surprising we write sad things".

The GCSE set texts are varied in their potential (and I was quite vocal against the changes), and within them there's a range of angles and themes, that's my point.

There's a whole range of opportunities for spin off text studies, a range of texts for stand alone English language study (that we can choose almost anything for!), signposts for wider reading, unseen poetry can be any poem and we can teach what we like for it. That's my point. If a student can honestly say that all they have done for 2 years is look at suicide and teens killing themselves then that's not due to the set texts. That's a teaching decision, either at a classroom level or if planning is centralised at a department level.

It's not about defending the status quo. I'm challenging the idea that the default is students spending years studying suicide and teen killings because that's not the GCSE course, and I've never worked in, or with, a department where that is the case.

What I was going to post got deleted.

Lola DD got on with The Hunger Games just fine, and it was read as a class, not her private reading material.

I'm merely suggesting that the curriculum could be a bit more cheerful.

I thought you meant she only got to the early point before she stopped because of the killing. Apologies for misunderstanding PhilomenaButterfly.

I'll be honest doing a book commonly rated as 13+ for content in year 6 was a risky (and in my opinion poor) decision.

The list I've shared with you covers loads of different texts with a range of themes, genres, plots etc.
I'm not exactly sure what's depressing about Greek myths, poems about childhood, a midsummer night's dream for example

Ultimately schools can't win. Like I say, I've never had a year without experiencing or being aware of complaints over text choice and it's a range of texts that are complained about.
I taught Frankenstein one year and we did some great work on philosophy fo children, good Vs evil, debates about science, created our own monsters that could be good or evil. It was so much fun. My colleague got a complaint that it's far too traumatic to do this aged 13 and they wanted the child moving classes.

I've also been lectured about why Victorian gothic literature is essentially indoctrinating students into satanism and making devil worship acceptable. That has to be one of the more unusual ones, but clearly not that unusual as a friend in a different city teaching the same era but different book also had a similar complaint.

Can we stop calling romance novels 'trashy'. Why do we do it? Because they are written by women, for women, and aren't High Art?

Still not 'trash'.

As a parent I would like my kids to have a love of reading rather than seeing it as a punishment and a drag!

This. I used to be an avid reader until it came to my reading list. My list was slammed by my teacher as being "below my level", and it really affected my joy of reading. I have read no more than 15 books in the last 15+ years as a direct result of that.

And I used to be the kid who was in the library practically every other week taking out multiple books.

I remember thinking similar last year when my 15yo DD brought home her reading list for the year.

Antigone
Death of a Salesman
Night by Elie Wiesel
Hamlet
To Kill a Mockingbird - she enjoyed this one but it wasn't very cheerful

at school we did Animal farm and Lord of the flies all quite disturbing and not books i want to re read

@Zaphodsotherhead I use it as a term to differentiate between the standard romance novels e.g Sophie Kinsella and erotic novels e.g Alexa Riley. I can say in public that I read trashy romance, wouldn’t be as relaxed saying I read erotic novels. In my mind trashy=slightly filthy.

I get your point that it can be seen as a derogatory term for both the content and readers. Hopefully with the huge success of novels written by and for women, that will lessen.

I was mocked in college English Lit for choosing a Sophie Kinsella novel to write a critique on. As it turned out about three quarters of the class chose The Lovely Bones which was a hit at the time. I got a great mark. (I got a reputation for picking uplifting books to write about when given the choice. Never hit a jellyfish with a spade was another one I recall!)

I also call Lee Child novels ‘Eye Gougers’ (you’ll know if you’ve read it!).

My kids enjoyed the darker novels in secondary but they enjoy Halloween and horror movies so this feeds into that side of their personalities. They enjoyed darker creative writing too. Dd sat her GCSEs this summer and was very inspired by the creative writing question with "abandonment" as the theme. (There was also the choice to write a descriptive piece on a picture of a marker too btw!)

I think that it's the perfect antidote to the "happily ever after" endings in children's literature. It's so predictable in kids material that young kids will know know to worry about the hero in danger as kids material always has a happy ending.

My choice of books tend to be on the sad side but I remember enjoying the Adrian Mole series when I was a teen.

We read To Kill a Mocking Bird and Northanger Abbey. Both great books with a lot of humour.

I still find Of Mice and Men too sad to finish and I remember crying in the classroom at the end of Romeo and Juliet.

They could read a Terry Pratchett. Very funny, easy to read but still deep.

No problem, @MrsLeclerc - it's just that, as a writer of 'trashy romance novels' I am constantly fighting that prejudice!