<p>I love reading, but I hate literature analysis. over 90% of the literature I have read just seems too contrived to actually happen. This includes the “great ones” like W. Shakespeare, and C. Dickens. It is so easy for an author to just insert his own viewpoint into anything and make the scenario simply untrue. I much prefer to read academic history books, whether they are popular books like guns germs and steel, or more more traditional books like the 1300 hundred page bear of a European history book that I am reading now. I wish that my high school would offer English classes that were based not only on lit analysis, but on other things too, like philosophy, history, or a myriad of other topics that are easy to write about and have the focus of the class be on developing ones writing skill.</p>
<p>Great literature has universal relevance. Writers like Tolstoy, Shakespeare, Flaubert, all have themes of relevance that isn’t limited to a certain time period or generation.</p>
<p>I have to second Tboon. I enjoy reading classics but strongly dislike having to analyze them.</p>
<p>I always wonder if x-author actually meant for any symbolism or references, or perhaps the apple is just that: an apple, not a reference to the self-inflicted inner conflict of arbitrary muffin-making.</p>