Any opinions on these books from my son's Catholic high school English class?

[Irishmom2]

What difference does it matter if any of us have read the books and can tell you what they are about? You asked for people’s thoughts, but then don’t like what they had to say. In fact, you came back to thank them, but tell them it isn’t what you were looking for.

Why is it hat you havent just read the books for yourself? You seem to already have made up your mind how you feel about them without having read them. And, not having read them yourself, you are indeed hoping to censor what your son reads, whether you want to call it that or not.

 

[JulianN]

I’ve read all of these books, and they are all appropriate for a senior in high school. If you were talked about a younger child, censoring his classroom reading at this level might be a little more understandable, but a senior in high school needs to learn to read broadly and thoughtfully. Next year, he’ll presumably be in college and you won’t have control over the course materials.

I second the suggestion to read the books yourself so that you can engage in conversation about them with your son—that’s an important component of participation in his education.

 

[Paul71]

I’ve read all of these books, and they are all appropriate for a senior in high school. If you were talked about a younger child, censoring his classroom reading at this level might be a little more understandable, but a senior in high school needs to learn to read broadly and thoughtfully. Next year, he’ll presumably be in college and you won’t have control over the course materials.

My son will a freshman (9th grade) next year, not a senior. You said that you find those books appropriate for a high school senior. Would you also find them appropriate for a 9th or 10th grader?

As far as having control over course materials in college, no, I wouldn’t expect to have that kind of control. However, we hope to send our children to colleges that are on the Newman Guide list of recommended Catholic colleges, if we are able to afford to do so. So it’s not as if we are primarily trying to prepare our children for attending a liberal, secular college. If that were the case, then I might have a stronger agreement with some of the comments here.

As far as the idea of censoring, brought up again by you and others, I’m not quite sure where that is coming from. If parents choose a classical education approach for their children (whether homeschoolers, or parents who send their children to a classically-oriented school), would you and others here say that they are censoring their childrens’ reading, because they choose an educational approach that has them reading Augustine, Dante, Austen, Shakespeare, Twain, etc., rather than books like The Bean Trees or Nickel and Dimed?

Perhaps you and others here believe that my main concern with these books is any objectionable content they might contain, and I may have given that impression with my initial post, though I didn’t intend to. That is one potential concern that I have. But my larger concern is the value of spending time on these books, as opposed to the value of spending time on some of the classic books that have shaped our culture.

And I understand that most responders here do see that kind of value in these books. I’m not sure that I would agree, but I do appreciate those who have shared those opinions, because that is what I asked for.

I second the suggestion to read the books yourself so that you can engage in conversation about them with your son—that’s an important component of participation in his education.

If he reads these books for school, I may indeed read them myself. However, having the intention or desire to read them is quite different from having the time, unfortunately.

 

[mVitus]

Nickel and Dimed, On (Not) Getting By in America by Barbara Ehrenreich

I read that book Freshman year. It was interesting. The book is about her taking entry level jobs in various cities for a month to see how she could get by. Now since you’re probably wondering about any potentially objectable stuff, there are 2/4 pages where she describes her going to a church worship service in a poor community. Being an atheist herself, her thoughts were on how poverty drove people to a church more because it’s all they’ve got. (I could be misremembering as it’s been 8 years.) But if your son has a basis of faith with you, it won’t shake his faith at all. And I’m sure the Catholic school teacher ain’t gonna try making a point against religion.

TLDR: Good book about poverty with a negligible objection.

 

[Paul71]

I read that book Freshman year. It was interesting. The book is about her taking entry level jobs in various cities for a month to see how she could get by. Now since you’re probably wondering about any potentially objectable stuff, there are 2/4 pages where she describes her going to a church worship service in a poor community. Being an atheist herself, her thoughts were on how poverty drove people to a church more because it’s all they’ve got. (I could be misremembering as it’s been 8 years.) But if your son has a basis of faith with you, it won’t shake his faith at all. And I’m sure the Catholic school teacher ain’t gonna try making a point against religion.

TLDR: Good book about poverty with a negligible objection.

Very helpful and much appreciated. Thank you.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I believe that a good literary education is one in which emphasis is given to classic books that have shaped our civilization and our culture. That doesn’t mean that I see no value in reading contemporary books, but I would not place much emphasis on contemporary books if I were designing a literary curriculum. I’m not asking anyone here to agree with me on that, but just explaining where I am coming from.

I find that the best and most beneficial approach to education is one in which parents supplement their child’s education at home. I’d recommend that you encourage/require your child to read some classic literature in addition to what is being offered at school.

I’m speaking as a teacher (social studies not English) here: the current emphasis in high school English courses nationwide is on 21st Century work place skills. Expect that your child will read some classic literature, but mostly contemporary lit from diverse perspectives and articles about current events.

 

[Mintaka]

Frankly, this school’s English class sounds pretty worthless, other than maybe the King book. Lord of the Flies is junior high stuff (and you live Lord of the Flies in junior high, heh), so why are they reading it in high school? The others are forgettable modern books with tons of problems and no Catholic values, so they seem like a waste of space or worse. Bleh.

The survival mode is “memorize the Cliff Notes and refuse to read the books,” but that’s intellectually dishonest.

Re: comfort zones, that’s ridiculous. School nowadays is nothing but enforcement of comfort zones. When I was in school, the AP History exam consisted partially of asking students to use Civil War documents to give a case for a POV they personally disagreed with - ie, extreme state’s rights including the right to have slavery. Now, that was working outside one’s comfort zone. Any assignment like that would now get you fired, and AP History tests would never include a question so “divisive” or intellectually challenging.

Now, you notice that “contemporary lit” here does not include, say, romance novels, mysteries, science fiction, or fantasy. So basically, they are giving courses in the kind of fiction that mostly isn’t read, and making the taxpayer foot the bill. Of course this amounts to a local government subsidy for writers who can’t entertain anyone. I would say it’s a matter of “eat your broccoli,” but broccoli is tasty and nutritious.

The classics are worth reading. You can carry them with you. (Although it would be nice for teachers to choose classics that are meaningful to young adults entering the world and which include humor or advice on understanding the opposite sex, as opposed to those more suitable for middle-aged teachers.)

Reading ephemeral contemporary works is an activity for one’s free time, and should be freely chosen. Reading annoying and boring books should never be forced on anyone – much less buying them and supporting their authors’ bad skills.

Oh, and learning Latin so you can read Latin? Awesome. Also Greek. Hebrew or Sanskrit are also useful literary languages. Learning any of these would be more mentally stimulating, and require more steps outside one’s comfort zone, than any kind of dead baby angstbrooding for profit.

 

[Mi_Rose]

I read every book my children brought into the house. That way we could discuss them.
Of the ones you listed the opinions on Lord of the Flies is spot on. The Secret Life of Bees is told from the point of view of a girl. It may be feminist. That is not what I remember from it. It has been a while.Ifyou don’t agree with some of the content discuss it with him. That is a great conversation starter with your child.
If you feel there are other books he should read give them to him. Discuss them too.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

You know, it is possible to take both a Latin class and an English class where you read both contemporary lit and classics. I know this because I actually did it in high school. You don’t get to just study Latin and Hebrew and skip English class, even though I would have preferred that because I read so widely outside school that most English classes seemed like a huge boring waste of my time.

 

[Mintaka]

Re: romances, I forgot to say that Monk Kidd is of course a romance writer, but this is more of a family saga book.

I also forgot to say that there are some significant kickbacks included in some publisher “incentive programs” for teachers or boards of education, or even state education departments. Teachers don’t pick these contemporary lit books because they think they are interesting and deep. They are the targets of the publishing industry’s intense salesmanship and incentive programs, because the industry urgently wants to sell hundreds of thousands of assigned books a year to a captive audience of schoolkids and college students. If teachers or school boards assign the classics (or worse, the public domain classics!), they don’t earn nearly as much in the way of goodies, because the publishers don’t make nearly as much profit.

At the lowest level, any teacher assigning a book or even considering assigning books gets free or super-cheap copies of the book, directly from the publisher (“desk copies” are free, while “examination copies” are cheap). So of course this encourages teachers to pick books that they personally like, rather than thinking about what students will like. If you like contemporary lit, over time you can get a nice little library for yourself for practically free.

Given the low level of actual outright sales of non-indy paper books (as opposed to ebooks, discount sales, discounted library and school sales, returns, etc.), and given that authors contractually don’t receive as much royalty percentage on any discounted book (including school sales), contemporary lit assigned books are actually a way to prop up the publishing corporations, while largely bypassing profits for the authors.

But that’s a whole other topic… The big five US publishers are a swamp.

 

[Augustinian]

When I was in Public school in the early 1970’s, they taught “Lord of the Rings”, but also Scarlet Letter, Great Expectations, Crime and Punishment, Silas Marner, Moby Dick, O Pioneers (Cather used to teach at the Pittsburgh Public Schools where I attended)

 

[Bradskii]

Prompted by this thread I downloaded ‘On Writing’ earlier (and am just about half way through it).

One of King’s points about writing is that to know good writing, you have to read a lot. And he means a lot. Which includes what you might class as ‘literature’ but also anything popular.

If you drink a wide variety of wines then you will know a good one when you come across it. And you will know why it’s better (personal preferences aside). The same applies to books. In fact, King hints at a proposal that it should almost be compulsory for students to read a few bad books (he was an English teacher before making it big) so that you appreciate the good ones.

And as for subject matter, as somone might have already pointed out, if you take out everything that contains scenarios that are not compatible with, for example, Catholicicm, then there goes Shakespeare already. Plus Faulkner, Dylan Thomas, Hemmingway, Vonnegut, Poe etc etc.

 

[Mintaka]

There’s a difference between reading books that talk about bad situations, and reading books that advocate and indoctrinate doing evil things, such as abortion or euthanasia.

As Chesterton pointed out, there’s nothing more moral than the average old mystery or horror book. They are cautionary. They expose human nature’s bad side as a way to encourage doing good (and avoiding falling into evil).

Reading a book that advocates bad behavior in a sophistical and winning way is an activity for sociologists, not high school kids. Being surrounded by other students and teachers who agree with the book is a recipe for peer pressure, but more often, for just being persuaded. If your parents don’t argue against it, they must agree too!

Think about it. It might be beneficial to read Mein Kampf or The Communist Manifesto skeptically, in a history class about the evils of totalitarianism. But in a class full of Nazis or Communists? You are either asking for a kid to be persecuted or converted.

Beyond all that, spending more than a couple of hours with a really nasty, horrible, boring book is not study. It is torture.

Given that high school is years 9-13 of a 13 year sentence in involuntary servitude with a side of daytime prison, teachers should really give kids a break.

 

[jeannetherese]

Ask the teacher how they plan to deal with the tough subjects.

In addition, you might ask the teacher about what aspects of our faith will be incorporated into the teaching and discussion and offer a few suggestions.
You might also want to read the books in accompaniment with your child and discuss them in relation to our faith.
I’ve read all but the Stephen King and would be comfortable discussing them around the dinner table.
If you run into teachings which seem to undermine the faith in course material you might want to share apologetics materials with the teacher (and department as teachers change). If the material is strongly objectionable be prepared to explain why it does not belong in class or what needs to be taught alongside it to give students the tools and ability to critique it. Be specific and give examples.

 

[redbetta]

The OP said this was a Catholic school. The taxpayer isn’t footing the bill here.

 

[Mintaka]

Great. The parishioners are footing the bill and paying the tuition! Yayyyyyy.

If you really wanted kids to read something challenging, shocking, and full of discussion material about racism, power, etc., you would assign an adult book about the life of St. Josephine Bakhita. Takes care of your nonfiction book for the year, and it certainly would expand minds.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I think one more point here is that some parents really overemphasize or get too heavily invested in something a kid is required to read for a school assignment.

The vast majority of teens are not going to be influenced or have their eyes opened or their views changed by reading some assigned book. The book is more likely to be viewed as “just another dumb thing I gotta do”. The parent making a huge deal out of the book like it is really going to influence their kid may very well be wasting a lot of needless thought and energy on something the kid is only devoting the required tiny percentage of time to in order to pass the class. Given that parents have limited time, it would be most productive to read and discuss those books that the kid is actually interested in. So if your son shows an actual interest in one of the assigned books, that’s the one you might want to look into. Otherwise, if the books don’t interest him, he’ll probably forget about them after the class or assignment ends, apart from remembering he was made to read some boring book back when.

 

[jeannetherese]

If anyone has read any of the other books on the list, I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on those books as well, especially in terms of whether you would consider them appropriate or worthwhile for high school reading. Thanks again.

If my kid were in this class, I would be pushing for a heavier course load or a move to AP/running start.
This is summer reading- entertaining but not challenging. The books can be read in a day or two and you will be able to have discussions of Catholic social teachings on just wages, the family, and distributism and the welfare state, for example (Nickeled and Dimed).
The freshmen at our local private school are starting with Lattimore’s translation of The Illiad.

 

[JulianN]

I do think they’re appropriate for freshman and sophomore years—and I’m not sure how you’ve assessed whether these books have value, since you’ve not read them.

While classic works are highly valuable, they would not have become classics had their contemporaries not read them. And I understand time being a premium, but when Catholics talk about parents being the primary educators of their children, it does involve a commitment of time.

 

[Mi_Rose]

I read everything my kids read but I read everything even cereal boxes.