<p>The problem with my English teacher was that she was WAY TOO ACCEPTING. I wish she would have just slapped it down at times and told people they were wrong. She just seemed to nod her head and acquiesce to even the most outlandish ideas. Ugh. This is why I like math.</p>
<p>NorthWestLover. I sympathize with you, but you should definetely take a few math classes when you get into college and see what it's REALLY about. You'll realize that it is something fantastic. HS math is something tragic though...</p>
<p>(at least for me, maybe you all had some great math teachers)</p>
<p>Simpsnut,</p>
<p>At the risk of sounding patronizing, let me offer a some advice from someone a little older who reads and writes a lot. Part of the problem in your thinking lies in your expectations when you approach a work of literature. Trust me, serious writers, like all serious artists, are not interested in "morals," "conclusions," "messages," or "self-evident truths." Artists are not about teaching lessons. What they are about, however, is rendering a vision of the world--and the human beings within it--that respects its richness, its beauty, its mystery, its complexity. You'll probably agree that human beings--and the experiences they go through--are fascinating, complex, ambiguous, and contradictory, subject to many meanings and interpretations. Well, if literature is an art form that seeks to represent human beings and their experiences, then it stands to reason that books (at least the good ones) will be all these things as well. Boiling a book down to a single lesson or truth is like trying to label someone; it only shows a small part of the picture. Even worse, it goes against what literature can do for us--make us more senstive observers of the world, the kind of people who are more awake to beauty (and horror), who see more than a single meaning in the things they look at, who aren't afraid to dwell in ambiguity. Come to think of it, this is what any subject can do for the people who love it, whether its literature, physics, history, or math. When I was in college, I remember asking a friend of mine why he majored in math, what he saw in all those formulas and numbers. His answer was simple: "It's amazing, beautiful, and true." I was always a terrible math student, and I had never felt what he felt when I was hacking my way through calculus, but I knew he was right. Why? Because this is the same answer I would have given him about English. By the way, we're still friends.</p>
<p>spoonyj: Awesome post! :)</p>
<p>I've tried especially hard to love all the disciplines by looking at them from the viewpoint you gave: "If somebody else can come to love the subject so much, then I must at least come to see why they do." I works..</p>
<p>:applauds:: spoonyj, that was a beautiful response spoken by a genuine lover of Literature.</p>
<p>But SpoonyJ, if a good teacher does not make this clear for students then they are turned off to English.</p>
<p>Also, don't make general sweeping statements about all artists.</p>
<p>Spoonyj, thanks for your insight, but it seems contradictory from what I've been told by all my English teachers and friends who like English. They say there is always one "correct" interpretation of something, and getting to that interpretation is the ultimate goal of studying literature. I would point to the AP Lang test in particular, which asks you to identify "rhetorical strategies" and say what they do in certain passages. There are very set requirements in the rubrics for these essays of what students MUST say the strategies are and what effect they have. I have severe problems with this idea, given how all literature studied in school (high school at least) is obtuse in the extreme and almost never gives you a straight answer as to what the author is trying to say.</p>
<p>Note: I did get a 5 on the AP Lang test, so I guess I figured out how to say what they want me to say, but I still think it tests useless material. I absolutely despised the class itself.</p>
<p>Even if your reasoning that literature is valuable because it represents the different possibilities of life is right, I do not understand comparisons to math or science at all. In these disciplines, there is only one correct way of doing something. Two plus two does not equal five no matter how many times you try it. Even in theoritical math and science where conclusions aren't obvious yet, people working at these problems know there is only one right answer out there.</p>
<p>WHY IS CHEMISTRY CLASS USEFUL??????
will it kill me not to know the law of conservation of matter, or the fact that nitrogen comprises nearly 80% of the earth's atmosphere?</p>
<p>WHY IS HISTORY USEFUL????
who gives a damn about the expedition of Lewis and Clark?</p>
<p>WHY IS CALCULUS USEFUL???
will I ever have to define the derivative of a function's value with respect to the change in the variable?</p>
<p>WHY IS.......???????</p>
<p>spoony,</p>
<p>i understand why you love literature, but i dont see how its USEFUL in real life. i hate analyzing books because i'm trying to explain something that isn't even real. ???? i dont think it should be a requirement in school. math and science however can be helpful in real life, obviously.</p>
<p>i wil admit that after a certain point math and science isn't that useful unless thats your major, but it is useful in terms of the fact that it IS used to further techonology and such. but what does lit do?</p>
<p>With that idea, Coqui, nothing beyond middle-school is really "useful" because Algebra II or Chemistry aren't going to help you in "real life" just like English isn't going to help you in "real life" unless you are interested in the field.</p>
<p>I hate how everyone is so bent on applying what they learn in schools. Why can't people be happy learning for the sake of learning. There need to be more people who go to school for the sake of becoming educated, not because it's going to be "useful" or because it will get them a bigger paycheck.</p>
<p>in response to MEAD13' s post</p>
<p>CHEMISTRY is the fundemental subject that has furthered medicines that are used by everyone everyday. </p>
<p>CALCULUS is used in computers, programs, and a lot of other technology everyone uses everyday.</p>
<p>HISTORY is a must to understand politics and why there are certain conflicts in our nation and others around the globe that affect everyone everyday.</p>
<p>LITERATURE is pointless because noone say "oh, the mood of my life today is melancholy and i feel and underlying sexual tone between my lover and I." nothing about literature is real. you're analyzing fake characters that don't exist. so you're making up sh it about made up sh it. how is that useful?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I hate how everyone is so bent on applying what they learn in schools...There need to be more people who go to school for the sake of becoming educated, not because it's going to be "useful" or because it will get them a bigger paycheck.
[/quote]
-davidav</p>
<p>haha. god forbid we actually want to apply what we learn. shame on us. so now people should go to school just to know something, not to put it to use? sorry, but thats the most absurd thing i've heard. i'm planning to major in chemistry and be pre-med to try and make a difference in medicine and research possible cure for aids and cancer, or at least help others in some way. i'm not majoring in chemistry ONLY because i think its interesting (though it is to me), i'm studying it because it can actually make a difference in more than just my life. an english major however affects nobody really. it doesnt further technology, medicince, or help global conflicts now does it. it just allows people who like to read to to do what they like and get a degree that makes them feel like they are experts at analyzing fake things. i'm not trying to undermine english majors or anything, if thats what you like, then so be it. but i do think that whatever you study, you should somehow apply it and put it to use, because if not you're learning for no reason except self satisfaction.</p>
<p>Amen coqui. Well said.</p>
<p>Of course that's not what I'm saying. I simply meant that there is nothing wrong with learning for the sake of learning.
I am not making any absolute statements. You are the only one making the absolute statement that learning for the sake of learning is absurd.</p>
<p>When asked by someone how an education in the classics would help his son Aristotle said: "if nothing else, when he is watching a play at the theatre, he will not simply be a stone sitting upon a stone."</p>
<p>English is by far my most frustrating class, it seems like I'll spend 10 hours on an essay and get a B. Then the kid next to me whips up a piece of crap to hand in the period before and gets a B+. </p>
<p>But it does condition you to think, to back up your statements with facts and to prove your point. It helps you if take a philosophy or theory of knowledge course, I use syllogisms all the time in my essays, saying since A is this to B, and B is this to C, then A and C must be related like this...</p>
<p>But I agree with the original poster, a lot of times, I'm stuck in English class reading some pointless piece of crap, and everyone has to pretend like it's well written. Basically since a big portion of our English grade is based on class participation, no one wants to admit the book sucks, because in the teacher's eyes it would only mean they were too stupid or something to get the "subtle nuances of the authors writing".</p>
<p>And I hate socratic seminars, especially for poetry. Ours were graded, so I was forced to say "how I loved the metonymy in line 14 and the ABAB rhyme scheme...", when what I really wanted to say was, "Woman, this poem blows, why do you keep feeding us this crap?"</p>
<p>Oh my gosh, I love socratic seminars...
It's not for everyone though, I agree, some people just aren't adapted to them.</p>
<p>davidav87 , it sounds like u think someone's an idiot if they aren't privy to class discussion</p>
<p>No, I said not everyones adapted to them. Saying the exact op****ite. Some people express themselves better through writing, others through speech etc,</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>When the teacher has a huge gradebook in front of her and judges every word you say, while you are saying it, it can be ridiculous nervewracking! The socratic seminars are a living hell, no one says what they actually think about the poem.</p>
<p>My teacher gave me a 2/5 once for my comments on a poem. That turns into a 40 for a quiz grade! That's a sure fire way to wreck your grade in English, those damn seminars.</p>
<p>Thats ridiculous, I agree. Seminars shouldn't be conducted in that way. And they aren't, generally.
I must be spelling op****ite wrong...</p>