To think that American literature should stay in schools?

[superstarheartbreaker]

I am an English teacher and I don't agree with Gove that American literature should not be taught at Gcse. Sure, it's important to have the big British writers such as Shakespeare, the Brontes , Wordsworth etc but American literature is hugely important and influential. We played a huge part in the founding of America and the states is very influential in Britain today. All my students adore Of Mice and Men for example and find the historical context of the Great Depression very interesting.
Also, multicultural poetry is very important. As colonists we took our language all over the world and in turn literature from other countries teaches our young about the world.
Aibu to think that there is a bit of an isolationist agenda coming from Gove by insisting that our young only study British authors?

Oops pressed send too soon.

University reading lists are available online. Show them to your students. That's where the really interesting stuff is to be found.

'To Kill a Mockingbird' is one of the reasons I became a lawyer. Not that common a profession from my comp. The Irish author issue is a huge one I'd say.

I have a degree in American lit as well. Was going to suggest that Hawthorne might be a better choice for GCSE, and a little more demanding than OMAM. Would be interesting for them to see where American lit as an offshoot from England begins.

Primarily though Eng Lit as school should focus on England mainly. English literature is not only a means of delivering the English language, the lingua franca of the world, but informing native born children of the literary and historical background to this great language. It shouldn't come down to what text is easiest or most demotic.

I actually find what MaidOfStars has just written quite horrifying and sinister

Horrifying, I get. But sinister?

Never been a fan of the Dickens/Austen/Bronte stuff. Give me Steinbeck anyday. Or Morrison. Or Faulkner. Whatever.

Although my favourite books tend to come from South American or Indian writers...

Sinister

Only in British-spelling editions.

OMAM is a gift. It magically engages any child and is accessible to even the weakest student.....yet has enough for higher ability students to discuss too.
I don't love teaching it, but it just works so, so well.
What's interesting is not what's off the syllabus, but what's on. Animal Farm was a surprise. It's actually not great except for the whole Rusdian Revolution thing. It really feels dated now and you have to spend half your teaching time on explaining the context rather than actually teaching litetature. No English teacher would have chosen it, but I believe it has a handy political message!

And Pigeon English? Good grief! A book written by a white, middle class man from the persective of a young African boy living in a London estate. Deeply patronising and another odd choice.

I had the "benefit" of studying some Steinbeck including "Of Mice and Men" and some Arthur Millar plays, and my abiding memory was of how dire the quality of literature was. As if they came from a very era-oriented genre characterised by mediocrity being promoted as equivalent to great historical literature. Oh God, and "A Streetcar Named Desire". Just dire. The line that sticks in my memory from "Of Mice and Men" is "don't muss up my hair". And then theres Kurt Vonnegut...

Used to whiz through them in a tenth of the time it took to read Thomas Hardy or similar, and that was only partly because they were so tedious, and then re-reading for themes and symbolism was like scraping paint from the bottom of a dried and flaking barrel...

Some more Continental European literature, other than Dostoevsky, might have been more useful.

Chelsy-totally agree!

I think The Grapes of Wrath is fantastic and far better than imam. I do admit that it is overdone. Only trouble is grapes of wrath is massive.

Why Amercian? Why not Balzac, Flaubert etc?

Surely the texts should be the best of the best and a variety from everywhere.

Be it Norweigen, Amercian or whatever....and yes a core of English books because that is the cultural heritage of where we live.

I don't really think that Arthur Miller can be described as mediocre. I'm afraid not liking something really doesn't consign it to the not good literature bin.

Oh buy Flaubert, we would dissecting Emma, who was just...so...annoying.

Grapes Of Wrath - guaranteed tears at the closing words. Oh the humanity, oh the sheer sick and happy and closeness and knowing.

But.

As if they came from a very era-oriented genre characterised by mediocrity being promoted as equivalent to great historical literature

Can you expand on that? What does 'era-oriented genre' mean and why is it bad?

You sound like you've barfed up a textbook. Tell the proles.

I loved reading East of Eden and then later moved onto Edith Wharton, enjoyed the House of Mirth and the Custom of the Country was brilliant about a ruthless social climber. None of these texts were on my reading lists at school or uni but I discovered them myself. Never got into Henry James or Nathaniel Hawthorne.

At school we read Robert Cormier The Chocolate Wars a brillant book that everyone at school in particular could relate to.

Perhaps Mr Gove could have saved me from Z for Zechariah. But I don't think he would have, because he hasn't banned any American literature as far as I can tell.

Should America include more British authors in its syllabus?

We already have quite a bit. US educational systems are very different and much broader (and so less in depth for many subjects) than those in the UK (especially England), but I recently did a quick search regarding literature curriculum in some high schools in my state. What I found is interesting, especially since we are often accused of being a very insular nation.

The ones I looked at are similar to what I studied many years ago. Grade 9 is a general introduction to different genres of literature (and includes English and American works) and also emphasizes writing; Grade 10 focuses on world literature, including non-Western cultures, which means a good bit is read in translation; Grade 11 is American literature; Grade 12 is British literature. Each of these courses are often a year long and would, depending on the school, have lessons 3-5 days a week.

Speaking as an American, I would actually encourage the study of some American writers but for the love of crap do not allow/make anyone read John Steinbeck's "The Red Pony".

Amen! I actually don't care for Steinbeck at all, but The Red Pony and Of Mice and Men were the worst.

If British children weren't taught American literature, they'd miss out on The Great Gatsby, The Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, and Charlotte's Web. Would they not read Twain, Poe, Hemingway, or Capote?

In school I was taught Shakespeare (of course), Jane Austen, Charlotte and Emily Bronte, Charles Dickens, and George Orwell, among other English writers.

Can you expand on that? What does 'era-oriented genre' mean and why is it bad?

You sound like you've barfed up a textbook. Tell the proles

By "era-oriented genre" I mean a non-dominant but discernible theme characterised by a slight obsession with a certain short time period of the twentieth century, which can appear somewhat dated to the modern reader. I don't believe it should be mistaken for quality literature. Theres almost a certain type of self-satisfaction in Steinbeck, as if he is describing something very special, with his rather condescending depiction of the majority of his characters being tied to their dialect and their self-limiting lack of intelligence, which he appears to think his readership share.

Contrast with more global themes in Thomas Hardy's works, although I think Hardy uses similar plot devices viz. unlikely tragic events to Steinbeck, but does so far more convincingly and gets far more out of them. I'm not against American literature per se, simply dumbed down work masquerading as equivalent to superior works. I equally don't rate much of Jane Austen's output. Over-written and tedious. Of twentieth century literature, I really rate "Animal Farm" and "1984" and also "Sunset Song".

I haven't been near a literature critique in years. I used to make up stuff like that all the time. I did Higher English and then did an extra course in English Literature in the first year of my law degree. I could probably be more accurate if I put my mind to it but I do think its a poor state of affairs if you are commending something like "Of Mice and Men" for being accessible and a "gift" because the less able students find it easy. Its hardly a laudable aim in any field of study, once you get beyond a certain level, that something is simply easy to understand!

A fan of Shakespeare though. You find more and more delights the more you read and watch. How many of the plots and themes in his work can be easily transcribed into the modern era and still be very current? King Lear has been regularly played out in courts over and over again. Romeo and Juliet is as current today as when it was written.