Have you ever read a book and were ashamed at how much you enjoyed it? I know I have. Today in class it really troubled me to think of all the extracurricular reading I do, and how none of it really fits in the highly esteemed class of "literature". When I think of that term, I really think of classics like The Pride and the Prejudice , Huck Finn, Grapes of Wrath or some other so-called timeless piece thats really a snooze to get through. So I got this crazy idea, lets redefine literature. Who says it has to have some life changing relevancy, or be filled with extended metaphors and symbolism. Why can't literature be something we just enjoy, whether its Twilight,Green Eggs and Ham, or even Snookie's Autobiography. Whatever it may be, who's to say that it isn't real literature. I just wonder who is on this 'book committee' calling all the shots (probably the same lunatics who gave that Oscar to The King's Speech)? I just challenge and really encourage all of my classmates to look away from these so-called classics and really find a book that you enjoy and read on your own for this assignment that we're getting ready to embark on.
Good Luck!
-Talor T. :)
I agree that literature should be more of a variety rather than sticking to the classics, I wouldn't say little children books should be considered but books with a great story behind it should be seen as literature. If we were given a greater choice to choose from, i think more students would focus on their readings.
ReplyDelete-Danny D.
Danny,
ReplyDeleteI think literature can be experienced at different stages of one's life so why can't children's books be considered??
-Talor T.
There's a difference between literature and a book of literary merit. Literature is literature, but books with literary merit (by my definition) have sophisticated prose and meaningful theme. Those books can be considered, but when it comes down do it the books that truly stick with us are going to make us think. I don't understand why we do not study The Giver. Personally i think that book has very deep meaning.
ReplyDelete-Alicia Mouser
I agree, I have read many books that I loved, but most of them are not the books that most teachers assign.
ReplyDeleteRedefining literature or at least clearing it up would be a good idea :)
-Anthony Flores
Taylor
ReplyDeleteI love your analysis and thoughts. I absolutely agree on your thoughts of the term literature, who is to say that classic literature is the only thing we should read or is real literature. Although I do agree,I do have to admit that I already believe that literature is something fun and enjoyable not necessarily moving or life changing. But you are right everything is not considered real literature, but it is a form of art.
Oh and Snookie's Biography was def literature jk. :)
-Vaness C
I love how you open your discussion with the idea of being embarrassed at how much you like certain books. I too have felt that way from time to time in my recreational reading. And while it is true, that guilty pleasures may bring us the most immediate satisfaction, just how valid is this satisfaction? Is it life altering? Or Significant enough that you will find yourself continually drawn to the ideas presented within the novel? You see, to me I feel that to properly define "literature" all one needs is to feel an impact by said literature, no matter the size. And who is to say what books are allowed to warrant that satisfaction? Literature is a personal and intimate experience; No two people have the exact same feelings or reactions from a book. So "literature" is entirely objective to the individual, allowing us to pick and choose what books we will take with us through the rest of our lives.
ReplyDelete- Shelby H.
I definitely agree! I feel like if I read a book that's not known for its "literary merit", I haven't read a book of substance. When in actuality, anything that we read that captures our mind has substance! This post encouraged me to read more books for my own enjoyment, rather than for school. (:
ReplyDelete