Books that shouldn't be ruined by first reading in school

[locke]

My sister will be going into eighth grade this fall and I've realized all of a sudden that there are certain books she needs to get before school ruins them for her,

my list so far:

To Kill a Mockingbird
Lord of the Flies
The Yearling

Of Mice and Men or Grapes of Wrath
Huck Finn
Peter Pan

other suggestions? What books are too good to have them ruined by school, but commonly show up on curricula? What books defied being ruined despite having to read them for school? For me that'd be something like Where the Red Fern Grows. oooh now I want to reread that.

[Jayelle]

There has been evidence on this board that Ender's Game has been ruined by having to read it in school...

Let her know how awesome Shakespeare really is before some awful High School teacher ruins it for her. Even if you don't read it before being taught it, watching a good play or movie adaptation or just knowing that he was the originator of certain phrases (like "catch a cold") and that so many plots of other things are based on his plays (Lion King is Hamlet, etc).

[Mich]

Your list covers mine, except for Great Gatsby.

And Huck Finn was boring before I read it for school. Apologies all around. I just wish some of my friends had read Lord of the Flies before we read it for school, because they all hated it after we were done and I still loved it.

[wizzard]

There has been evidence on this board that Ender's Game has been ruined by having to read it in school...

Let her know how awesome Shakespeare really is before some awful High School teacher ruins it for her. Even if you don't read it before being taught it, watching a good play or movie adaptation or just knowing that he was the originator of certain phrases (like "catch a cold") and that so many plots of other things are based on his plays (Lion King is Hamlet, etc).

Yeah, I read Ender's Game freshman year of high school, but I had read it on my own before that, so I was good there.

Shakespeare I actually didn't read any of until senior year, and then it was for a class. Fortunately, the teacher was awesome, and I doubt I would have the same love of his works I do now if not for her. So school book readings do not necessarily ruin the book, if it's done right. Sadly, there are very few teachers who know how to do it right.

[Jebus]

I don't think many eight-graders have the capacity to appreciate Shakespeare in any form at that age. Except for maybe the modernised version with dashing Dicaprio and plain-jane Winslet.

[locke]

i think, like me, she's either already been in a shakespeare play, or will be. I was the Prince and the Friar in Romeo and Juliet. it was fun and I never wanted to do it again.

[Jayelle]

I don't think many eight-graders have the capacity to appreciate Shakespeare in any form at that age. Except for maybe the modernised version with dashing Dicaprio and plain-jane Winslet.

That's a load of hooey. A certain husband of mine studied Hamlet when he was homeschooled in Gr. 8 and loved it.

There are lots of adaptations you can read at a young age as well. If it's done well, it can absolutely interest an 8th grader.


... and it's not Winslet, it's Claire Danes.

[Jebus]

Kudos to him then, I said many, not all. I certainly didn't have the ability to fully appreciate the complexities of Hamlet when I was 13, but I was a dumb kid.

[Young Val]

Catcher in the Rye.

[Wil]

^ Agreed. Good book -- would have probably hated it if I had been forced to read it in high school.

[locke]

I was never all that warm about Catcher in the Rye cause I thought Holden was an emo dick. but yeah it's one that should be read before school kills it because it is a very good book.

[BonitoDeMadrid]

I don't think many eight-graders have the capacity to appreciate Shakespeare in any form at that age. Except for maybe the modernised version with dashing Dicaprio and plain-jane Winslet.

Agreed. I have studied Romeo and Juliet at 8th grade, and Taming of the Shrew at 9th grade, and thought they were the most boring plays I've ever read- until I saw the movies (the 1968 Romeo and Juliet film, and the 1967 Taming of the Shrew film), that is.

Though, watching the plays on stage before reading them is usually better than on film. (At least, for me)

[Eddie Pinz]

I don't think it is the reading for school that kills it, it depends upon the time frame and the assignment that comes along with it. I enjoyed the stuff that I would have read on my own and hated most of the stuff that I wouldn't have touched with a ten foot pole.

Of the list so far:
To Kill a Mocking Bird was okay and probably the only one on the list that I would have considered reading outside school.
Lord of the Flies: hated it
Great Gatsby: hated it
Catcher : hated it (sorry Kel)

But I would have never read the three I hated unless I was forced to.

In my two AP english classes, we used to have to read 4 books throughout the school year and give a synopsis and answer questions about the book. But you could pick from a list of approved books.

I think I read Huck Finn as one of those and enjoyed.

Other books I enjoyed that I read for school:
The Giver
Johnny Tremain (sp?)
Eyes of the Dragon
A Separate Peace
Merchant of Venice
Julius Ceaser
The Once and Future King
The Natural
Hanging Curve
The Things They Carried
Wurthing Heights
A Clockwork Orange

Any other book I read for school I either hated or was meh about it.

[LilBee91]

I first read Romeo and Juliet in 6th grade I think. I didn't much like it then, and liked it even less when we read it in 9th grade English. Although I think that dislike is mostly rooted in the fact that I find Romeo obnoxiously emo, and think that all of the characters are just too idiotic to care about (I know--I'm heartless). On the other hand, I really did like Othello when I read it in 7th grade. We were going to watch an abridged version of it on a field trip and I wanted to know what was going on, so I read it (yes, it was a little challenging, but I'm pretty sure I understood most of it, if not all those little snide/suggestive tidbits Shakespeare loves). The characters were really just as stupid about things, but I cared enough to actually feel the tragedy at the end. Since then I've gained a mild appreciation for Shakespeare--though I think he is a bit overrated--but I would still rather watch any of his plays than read them. I have yet to read any of his comedies, which if movie adaptations are any indication, I would probably like a lot more.

School ruined To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men for me, but I don't know if I'd have liked them anyway. I liked 1984 and Anthem despite reading them for school. Huck Finn was one I liked better when I read it in school, but my first attempt was when I was maybe 10 so I had a lot of issues with the language. Of course, I wasn't all that fond of it the second time around either.

I don't know if anybody reads it for school anymore, but Flowers for Algernon is one that just should not be ruined by school. I read Lord of the Flies for a school project, but it was a student-choice assignment, so I was the only one in the class reading it. It is definitely one that classroom reading could just destroy it.

[Eaquae Legit]

Eyes of the Dragon, zero? The one by Stephen King? (I also disliked Gatsby, Catcher, and Lord of the Flies, and I doubt I would have bothered to read them on my own. Possibly Lord of the Flies I would read, I don't know.)

Flowers for Algernon should not be read it school at all. My completely irrational opinion on this one is due to my being sick every time I've read even the short story version. Good as it may be, I will never, ever read the novel version.

I think Shakespeare should be covered in school, but it should always be accompanied by viewing it, preferably on stage. Kids often have a hard time reading it aloud in class, and that seriously distracts from the actual experience of it. When you see professionals doing it, you might not catch every word, or even every phrase, but you get what's going on. I saw a four year old completely transfixed by Romeo and Juliet last month. It's all in how you present it.

I agree about The Giver, and I'll add Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde to the list. Even though I read it for school and loved it, the rest of my class hated it.

[Petra456]

I don't think i've ever had a book ruined for me by reading it in class. Most books that were required reading i've ended up loving.

[Caspian]

I think Shakespeare should be covered in school, but it should always be accompanied by viewing it, preferably on stage. Kids often have a hard time reading it aloud in class, and that seriously distracts from the actual experience of it. When you see professionals doing it, you might not catch every word, or even every phrase, but you get what's going on. I saw a four year old completely transfixed by Romeo and Juliet last month. It's all in how you present it.

I could not agree more.

As for the thread in general ... I'm torn. On one hand, I agree that there are lots of books that are ruined by force-feeding. On the other hand many (most) of the books mentioned so far are good enough that everyone should read them, and if you weren't going to read them anyway, maybe someone should make you.

The problem, as I see it, is that too many teachers are teaching these books without actually knowing why everyone should read them--except that they were forced to read them when they were in school.

Basically, it's not so much that school ruins good books as that crappy teachers ruin good books. And no books are safe. A bad enough teacher can ruin any book for most kids.

[zeroguy]

Eyes of the Dragon, zero?

I'm not sure whether you're paging me, or giving that book a number.

Add me to the list of people who hate Gatsby.

Agreed. I have studied Romeo and Juliet at 8th grade, and Taming of the Shrew at 9th grade, and thought they were the most boring plays I've ever read- until I saw the movies (the 1968 Romeo and Juliet film, and the 1967 Taming of the Shrew film), that is.

Our class I think rather liked Romeo and Juliet, probably because we were shown the 1968 film in class (freshman year, high school). Our English teacher had forgotten about the scene with nudity (a 15-year old, no less, and rated PG if I recall correctly), until right when it arrived on screen.

[Eddie Pinz]

Eyes of the Dragon, zero?

That was actually me. But yes the one by Stephen King. It was one of the summer reading books I was assigned going into my freshman year of high school. That along with To Kill a Mockingbird. I thorourghly enjoyed Eyes of the Dragon, which is maybe why I felt meh toward To Kill a Mockingbird. That and the fact that everyone was telling me how good it was.

[BonitoDeMadrid]

Lord of the Flies: hated it
Great Gatsby: hated it
Catcher : hated it (sorry Kel)

Merchant of Venice
A Clockwork Orange

Those are the books I read from the list. Hated them, except for Lord of the Flies- which I read after seeing a presentation about it in school, and loved it- and A Clockwork Orange, which was OK.

[Gravity Defier]

if you weren't going to read them anyway, maybe someone should make you.

I can't say that I wouldn't have read the books/plays/short stories otherwise, but I read Pride and Prejudice, EG, The Giver, Fahrenheit 451, Martian Chronicles, The Illustrated Man, Bless Me, Ultima, The Good Earth, King Lear, Hamlet, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird and Silas Marner in English classes and loved them. I'm definitely glad I was forced into those.

I moderately liked Great Expectations, Giants in the Earth and Ask The Dust.

I never actually read Frankenstein or Wuthering Heights (still haven't, despite trying again earlier this summer) the way I was supposed to...I knew I could get along fine without doing so and they didn't capture my attention when I attempted.

I absolutely loathed One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

Hmm. I just can't remember all that we read, but that's close enough.

[Mich]

On the subject of Shakespeare, I've been forced to read a total of three Shakespeare plays throughout my education: the Tempest in 7th grade, which remains my favorite, Julius Caesar in 10th, and then Macbeth in 12th. The latter two our classes read out loud, and the first was the only we saw in play form (by the Idaho Shakespeare Festival). As far as I could tell, all three classes loved reading and discussing them, to the point that our mock trial of Macbeth was the high point of our senior year.

So... I guess I'm all for reading of Shakespeare, no matter how it is presented. The class just needs to have a good frame of mind.

And, in case you were wondering, Macbeth got let off: Lady Macbeth's testimony was massively cut off on account of some strange law prohibiting wives from testifying against their husbands, or something extremely inane like that, and Banquo was thrown out because the defense got him to admit he was on drugs. It was intense.

[UnnDunn]

The minute you force someone to read/listen/experience any form of art, you've tainted it for that person, IMHO. One of the joys of art is the independent discovery and exploration of it.

Telling kids what books to read isn't even the problem. The problem becomes when you tell them how to read them, how fast, what themes they're supposed to explore, etc., and often the proscribed reading plan is wholly incompatible with the kids' thought processes.

[shadow-petra]

I liked Gatsby, even though it was for school.

Locke pretty much covered it. Lord of the Flies, read at least half of it; Of Mice and Men, barely read it.

Bless Me Ultima and Things Fall Apart I absolutely hated. I really liked 1984, The Scorpion King, and Gatsby's up there too.

I don't know if it was because of school or not, but The Poisonwood Bible started out really slow. It picked up at the halfway mark, though. Is that just me and my class or do other people have the same feeling?

[zeroguy]

Telling kids what books to read isn't even the problem. The problem becomes when you tell them how to read them, how fast, what themes they're supposed to explore, etc., and often the proscribed reading plan is wholly incompatible with the kids' thought processes.

Well, telling kids how to read/interpret would be bad, yeah, but I don't know if I've actually experienced that. Usually it's about discussing things, and going back and forth between students in debates about themes and whatnot. Maybe I just had good teachers.

Am I the only one that has had books enhanced by having them be part of a lesson, at least once? In a college lit class we read The Turn of the Screw, which I actually liked. If I had read this on my own, there's no way I would have liked it, because it's confusing as hell to tell what's going on (which is really the point of the whole thing). And I certainly didn't like it for the first section of reading we were assigned, before any discussion or anything happened in class. Once the professor explained some things and asked questions about it, I was able to see a lot more of the book's appeal and a lot more of what was happening in general.

So, I guess that'd be an example of something that's the opposite of this thread: something that could be ruined if read at too young of an age without guidance or something. Of course maybe some people are just a lot smarter than me and will just get it, but I doubt that that's the majority of pre-teens (at least, I like to think so).

(Same goes for some of Poe's stories, though those are usually creepy enough even without entirely knowing what's happening)

[locke]

Am I the only one that has had books enhanced by having them be part of a lesson, at least once?

no, but it only happened to me in college. actually, strike that, I had one teacher in high school who did a superb job of teaching hamlet and macbeth. but it paled to the instruction on hamlet I got in college.

Shakespeare can be really horribly taught as well, like my ninth grade teacher or seventh grade teacher, I never got that Romeo and Juliet was funny til I watched OSC's adaptation on hatrack--thanks seventh grade teacher!

I also had turn of the screw in college, still didn't like it, same class we also had to read teh Crying of Lot 49 (Pynchon) didn't like that either, even with the instruction. Reading Neuromancer and the Mysterious Affair at Styles and Geertz's Interpretation of Culture from that class was excellent though. with and without instruction.

But I was mainly referring to books that one is perfectly fine to read on their own, but may be ruined by the group read curricula based madness of class. Rebecca is another one. Our teacher dragged that novel out for NINE WEEKS! it's a mystery/thriller. and we weren't supposed to read ahead because we might accidentally ruin it for others. I hated that book because of that. Imagine my surprise when I finally watched the Hitchcock film of it years later and found out that it's a fantastic story and a wonderful movie to boot. I was all prepared to hate it (and I think I did hate the movie when we took a tenth week to watch the movie) and was stunned. that particular teacher also managed to ruin the Yearling and when we squished the hobbit into a week or so (because we ran out of time due to spending so long on Rebecca) everyone in class but me hated it (I'd already read it like four times by that point) because she did an equally bad if not worse job with it.

[Ela]

I never liked Catcher in the Rye cause I thought Holden was an emo dick.

Word.

[Ela]

I don't think it is the reading for school that kills it, it depends upon the time frame and the assignment that comes along with it. I enjoyed the stuff that I would have read on my own and hated most of the stuff that I wouldn't have touched with a ten foot pole.

Agreed.

[Seiryu]

I have to be perfectly honest with you...I read like one or two books for school and that's about it. Oh, I was assigned others, but you see...I was the kind of person that brought my own books to school. I made a teacher mad one year because I sat and read my own book instead of the one she had assigned.

The funny thing is...I managed to pass all, but one of those classes and managed to take a test for the one that I didn't and got like a B on it.

And those books are:

-The Pearl, which I absolutely hated.
-Animal Farm, which I loved.

After High School, I did go back and read some of them for my enjoyment such as A Christmas Carol and Flowers for Algernon.