Michael Gove 'axes To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men from GCSE syllabus' because he "really
132 replies, posted
[QUOTE=The Aussie;44904183]What's up with the shakespeare hate? That guy was a fucking incredible playwright. I thoroughly enjoyed Macbeth, Hamlet and R&J. Plus, Of Mice and Men is a great book too.[/QUOTE]
Shakespeare is good, but when you read it like a novel in a classroom and then have to analyse it it quickly loses it's appeal as a play
I think the whole reason people hate Shakespeare is because in school its presented as the most boring drivel ever, with people taking it as some upper class play that goes right over their heads, instead of just reading it as it comes and seeing it for what it is.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/90zMG.png[/IMG]
sums it up pretty well, and i've had to make points exactly the same as this in my exam and it got me a B grade when I was spouting utter shit
For those of you who haven't already worked it out Gove is a toxic shit stain on education and I wouldn't be surprised if my old English teacher is currently hatching a plot to assassinate him.
[QUOTE=The Aussie;44904183]What's up with the shakespeare hate? That guy was a fucking incredible playwright. I thoroughly enjoyed Macbeth, Hamlet and R&J. Plus, Of Mice and Men is a great book too.[/QUOTE]
Because analysing 400+ year old English isn't relevant in today's world. Shakespeare should be taught in History Class
I wonder what percentage of GCSE students like/dislike these books - I didn't enjoy reading To Kill a Mockingbird at the time, but disliked the subject even more so - the teacher making us scrutinise every single tiny detail in each sentence was mind numbing
[QUOTE=The Aussie;44904183]What's up with the shakespeare hate? That guy was a fucking incredible playwright. I thoroughly enjoyed Macbeth, Hamlet and R&J. Plus, Of Mice and Men is a great book too.[/QUOTE]
Since they were intended as plays its kind of hard to read it as a book, especially when the plays were supposed to be for uneducated old english people. It takes a while to get used to the speech but even when you do it becomes extremely annoying when the dialog is mostly monologues/speaking out loud/describing what is happening/staring into the eyes of the audience and making a joke. Its like reading Lord of the Rings, where exposition and lore is unnaturally crammed into the dialogue.
Of Mice and Men was miles better than that bloody Lord of the Flies we had to read. Axe that instead.
[QUOTE=Ruisu;44904215]I think the whole reason people hate Shakespeare is because in school its presented as the most boring drivel ever, with people taking it as some upper class play that goes right over their heads, instead of just reading it as it comes and seeing it for what it is.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/90zMG.png[/IMG]
sums it up pretty well, and i've had to make points exactly the same as this in my exam and it got me a B grade when I was spouting utter shit[/QUOTE]
I think the thing about this is that often the deep language analysis is bullshit but over arching meanings like the Crucible being an allegory to America and communism in the 50s (I think) is clearly there and was intended by Miller.
[QUOTE=download;44904222]Because analysing 400+ year old English isn't relevant in today's world. Shakespeare should be taught in History Class[/QUOTE]
Not really - I think it gives a lot of perspective, and it's a different way of writing a play. I thought it was pretty exciting, honestly.
[QUOTE=Ruisu;44904215]I think the whole reason people hate Shakespeare is because in school its presented as the most boring drivel ever, with people taking it as some upper class play that goes right over their heads, instead of just reading it as it comes and seeing it for what it is.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/90zMG.png[/IMG]
sums it up pretty well, and i've had to make points exactly the same as this in my exam and it got me a B grade when I was spouting utter shit[/QUOTE]
The problem with that picture is that the teacher is right in most cases. The average author normally wouldn't mention something so insignificant such as the colors of the curtains unless it meant something. Although there are a few exceptions where authors will literally do this to call other writers bat-shit nuts.
[QUOTE=Kwigg;44904233]Of Mice and Men was miles better than that bloody Lord of the Flies we had to read. Axe that instead.[/QUOTE]
Christ, Lord of the Flies was terrible. I can't even put my finger on why but it just had no entertainment value whatsoever, and the message the author seemed to be trying to get across was bullshit, too.
The best part about having to study Of Mice and Men was getting to watch the film with John Malkovich's amazing acting.
I've read Of Mice and Men (and seen the movie) in English class, don't remember what grade. I liked it. My school system axed To Kill a Mockingbird a year before I wouldn't have had to read it. I went out to the library and got a copy to spite them.
Of Mice and Men is a great book with great characters that you can easily attach yourself to. Its also not a bitch to do language analysis on like Romeo & Juliet because you don't have to spend your spare time looking at translations to understand some of what is said.
To Killing a Mocking Bird is a great book with a great moral, but its pretty boring for a lot of people.
If anything, they should axe shit like[del] "Animal Farm"[/del]* and "An Inspector Calls" which are literally just communist/socialist propaganda (its not offensive, just nauseating) and are both a bitch to analyse because there isn't a whole lot of anything to do.
*Lol sorry
[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;44906745]
I actually completely forgot about the last half, as Kennyawsum just pointed out :v:
Again as I said above, I only saw a video or something of the first bit, heard a bit about it from my friends and that was it.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=cdr248;44904267]The problem with that picture is that the teacher is right in most cases. The average author normally wouldn't mention something so insignificant such as the colors of the curtains unless it meant something. Although there are a few exceptions where authors will literally do this to call other writers bat-shit nuts.[/QUOTE]
Really depends on the genre, but yeah in minimalism that's basically half the point of the story.
I really hated [i]Great Expectations[/i], not sure about anyone else.
They should axe that.
[i]Of Mice and Men[/i] and [i]To Kill a Mockingbird[/i] were both excellent reads.
Live off the fatta the land.
[QUOTE=Ruisu;44904200]GCSE English is all about finding shit in the text that doesn't mean anything and trying to make it mean something. You pick out a phrase and then link it to something unrelated because it gives you the grades. I mean my teacher flat out said there are no wrong answers as long as you back up your bullshit with quotes since anyone can interpenetrate things differently.[/QUOTE]
Which is hilarious because there [i]is[/i] a clear answer if you look deep enough, and you'd be wrong to say anything else.
Thank god my junior high school teacher taught like that giving absolutely no shits for the curriculum.
[editline]25th May 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ruisu;44904215]I think the whole reason people hate Shakespeare is because in school its presented as the most boring drivel ever, with people taking it as some upper class play that goes right over their heads, instead of just reading it as it comes and seeing it for what it is.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/90zMG.png[/IMG]
sums it up pretty well, and i've had to make points exactly the same as this in my exam and it got me a B grade when I was spouting utter shit[/QUOTE]
The thing is that it really depends on what author you're talking about when referencing this graph. Some authors really delve deep into pointless meanings and others just do raw descriptive backgrounds, it really depends on the situation.
The real problem is that they over analyze the wrong things in the wrong way. Modern teachers have no freaking clue how to teach kids in ways that entertain them, which I think is principle in getting kids to learn. If you like something, you'd be completely willing to learn about it.
the films were great too
One perfect example would have to be history: everyone I know talks about it like it's the worst subject ever, but the class never really delves into interesting historic topics or even important ones to get the kids interested.
Seriously, when's the last time anyone's heard a history teacher talk about the children's crusade or the great tulip collapse of the Ottoman empire?
[QUOTE=Kwigg;44904233]Of Mice and Men was miles better than that bloody Lord of the Flies we had to read. Axe that instead.[/QUOTE]
that's kinda funny cos once you learn a bit about the political climate Lord of the Flies was written in, the metaphors are easy enough to understand that it's actually one of the more valid introductions to symbolism as a concept. idk about the book itself though
[editline]25th May[/editline]
like you could literally just write "THERMONUCLEAR WAR IS SPOOKY" and that would about do it
i hope this guy gargles shit one day because Of Mice and Men was fantastic.
All these people hating Shakespeare, what is wrong with you. He's a fantastic playwright and I thoroughly enjoyed Romeo and Juliet, and Hamlet. Best part was watching the movie with Kenneth Branagh
Axe Gove
[QUOTE=Coffee;44904282]The best part about having to study Of Mice and Men was getting to watch the film with John Malkovich's amazing acting.[/QUOTE]
that shit was amazing
[QUOTE=Ruisu;44904215]I think the whole reason people hate Shakespeare is because in school its presented as the most boring drivel ever, with people taking it as some upper class play that goes right over their heads, instead of just reading it as it comes and seeing it for what it is.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/90zMG.png[/IMG]
sums it up pretty well, and i've had to make points exactly the same as this in my exam and it got me a B grade when I was spouting utter shit[/QUOTE]
You think that's bad with Shakespeare?
Try being in a russian literature class, reading War and Peace and similar stuff.
Our teacher made me hate Crime and Punishment I thoroughly enjoyed when I read it for the 1st time.
I don't like Shakespeare because I don't like plays or his brand of humor.
[QUOTE=Leestons;44903747]Of Mice and Men was great. Hated Shakespeare though.[/QUOTE]
For me Shakespeare's been a mixed bag. Loved Othello but found King Lear to be a bit shit after rereading it a few times, though I liked the movie Ran which was based on King Lear.
i loved these books in HS, although the class would always read together and i would always read ahead of the class (just because of how slowly the teacher read and how fast i read), and i would finish waaay before them and i would have to sit there being bored out of my mind having read it already :(
i liked LOTF too, not as much as TKAM and OMAM though
Good riddance. Being forced to sit through that drivel in high school turned me off of reading for entertainment entirely. Let the kids choose their own novel within certain length and topic restrictions instead, they'll do better on the assignment and resent literature in general a whole hell of a lot less. I probably could have found something that I didn't mind too much...if I were to guess it'd probably be from Isaac Asimov...But nope. I was forced through these boring-ass fucking tomes.
Fuck you too high school.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.