The Book Thief and "A Class Divided"

Well, first off, I LOVED The Book Thief. I started out struggling with it - the constant interruptions by our narrator were a bit distracting at first, but I got used to it quickly. It took me a while to get really into it, but I balled my eyes out the last 75 or so pages!

I kept thinking about teaching The Book Thief. I think it would be a refreshing perspective (rather than reading Night or Anne Frank, though both are good books) to see the Holocaust through the eyes of a young German girl, rather than from the perspective of a Jew in hiding or in a concentration camp (or maybe in addition to one of the other books). The main problem I see is that with kids, first impressions are everything. They would take one look at how thick the book is and groan. I'd be lucky if a handful read it all through. And then there is the struggle of giving them enough time to read it without taking away from something else. I think there is a lot to talk about in the novel, but it would take a really long time to get through it with a group of adolescents, if I could get them to get past the length in the first place.

After watching "A Class Divided," I must say, I was stunned. Stunned that a teacher had the guts (and the OK from administration?) to try such an experiment. I could certainly see how something like this would create a lasting effect on kids who go through it. It really is an effective way (if you can pull it off, as she could) to teach about discrimination, and let them see what it is like for a short time to be on the receiving end of prejudices. I kept thinking, how is she able to convince them (and then the adults, too! I couldn't believe they were able to be duped by the experiment) that their eye color is reason for discrimination? But I guess if I were a kid (or adult) who hadn't heard of this experiment before, I could be made to believe that eye color mattered. Especially since she was so convincing and serious about it. I felt squirmy and uncomfortable, especially watching the adults during the experiment, because at times she was so convincingly prejudiced. It was a lot to watch the reactions and how upset people got.

After watching that video, I read the article on teaching Holocaust literature. I like the idea of encouraging students to think about discrimination and to empathize with people who are different (in whatever way), rather than throwing them right into the literature. So many kids shrug off the things they read about that have to do with racism or prejudice, simply because they don't know what it's like (or think they don't). But if they are made to talk about the differenes, or the many times they probably were discrimated against (like the kid on page 30, who was wrongfully accused of using some drugs, simply because he fit the look of a kid who would do it), they might then be able to bring more to their reading of the literature, and feel some sympathy toward those who suffered during these terrible events in history.

American Born Chinese & John Gaughan's "Constructing a Teaching Life"

I must admit my first feelings when I opened this book were both hesitation and a little dismay. I don’t particularly like comic books – at least, I never read them as a kid or thought much of them growing up. I like the movies that come out of them (Batman is one of my favorite heroes, and I loved the Spiderman movies, however they might differ from the comics, so I hear). But I don’t particularly like to read them. There’s something about reading thought bubbles for an entire book that turned me off. I love dialogue, but I also love the descriptions that go along with them. I like to visualize in my head and not be forced to see what the author sees. Reading a graphic novel reminded me of watching a movie in another language with subtitles. It goes by quickly, but you don’t get as much out of it.

So, while I opened this book with some attitude, I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it. I still have the same complaints (I still missed visualizing it on my own and the descriptions that come with a “classic” novel), but the subject matter was so artfully told in this poignant way. “Know Thyself” is a line in Shakespeare’s Hamlet that is still quoted today. This book had the same theme – be yourself, be proud of who you are, don’t try to be something you’re not, etc. – but was told in a way that students could understand. I’m not saying we shouldn’t teach Shakespeare, because I really believe we should. But I’m beginning to like the idea of pairing classics with modern novels that students can appreciate and maybe even enjoy. Exposure to Shakespeare may be important, but it’s useless if the students only dread, hate, and learn nothing from it.

I thought the article placed a lot of emphasis on this idea of knowing students, and teaching to their personalities. It really hooked me right away in the beginning by talking about three separate teaching styles of Huck Finn, another classic. I thought of Josh and his complete distaste for the classics and how sad it is to me, because as far as I’m concerned they have so much to offer! But I completely understand that it was likely he did not have a teacher that taught them to him in a way that made him love these novels! As I think someone said in class the other day, it is completely all about how we teach novels that can either make or break whether a student loves or hates it.

The ideas in this article played right into what we’ve been discussing in class for weeks now: What is our goal as teachers of adolescent literature – to foster a love of reading, or to foster a skill of critical reading and thinking and writing, or simply to inundate them with vocabulary and literary terms? Why do we need to teach the classics? How can we teach the classics in a way that is meaningful and enjoyable to our students, if we teach them at all? We’ve been discussing this for weeks and I love the discussion that comes out of it. Everyone has so many views, which is what makes us great up-and-coming teachers! There will be so many techniques and ideas and pedagogical styles among us, and all the while we will be trying to come up with ways to improve and be better teachers. It is an “evolutionary process” (6) as John Gaughan says in this article. We have the power to make our classrooms ones that students will never forget – we just have to learn how to use that power and work around the many issues that we will face with administrators and parents as well as students.

Monster & Multiculturalism

“You’re young, you’re Black, and you’re on trial. What else do they need to know?” (Myers 79)

Unfortunately, this statement holds too much truth, even today. The stereotypes that engulf this country and our culture are staggering and devastating. But when I read Monster, I found myself torn. Of course, I didn’t think he should go to jail for life at age 16, simply for walking into a convenience store, especially given the lack of evidence against him. On the other hand, though, he was a party to the robbery that took place (at lease I got the impression he was – he doesn’t deny being a part of it, though his lawyer convinces the jury he was not) that ultimately killed a man. I think this book does a really good job of making us question what’s right and what’s wrong, and the fine line that exists between the two. Teaching this book would be a challenge, but I don’t think it is quite as controversial as some of the other books we’ve read may have been perceived to be.

The article by Hade was really helpful to me in addressing the concerns that anyone has when it comes to teaching literature. His point that we should “expose” students to diverse pieces of literature without “imposing” our own views on them is a valid point. He mentions that students “read the social context in which they interpret literature and produce readings according to what they believe their teacher wants in that particular situation” (238). This statement goes along almost directly with something we discussed in class a few weeks ago about how students don’t know how to read critically anymore. They read and try to figure out what the teacher is going to ask them, and they know that if they don’t get it, they can count on the teacher to explain it to them. This creates a vicious cycle in which, as adults, people cannot think for themselves or interpret literature. Particularly with poetry, I always felt this way: I could read it, and if I couldn’t figure out what it meant, I knew my teacher would tell me. This way of thinking led me to where I am today as far as poetry – I have no idea how to read and interpret it.

He also mentions the importance of comparing works of literature to get a point across. I liked his example about The Giving Tree and Piggybook. I haven’t read either of these books, but I am sure if I were given them separately, I would react similarly to the students, and not get the point until I read them together. We talk a lot in class about the importance of pairing literature, especially the more controversial literature, with traditional texts. Comparing works can work to a teacher’s advantage, because not only are you talking about major themes of the works, but by pairing it with something traditional, the teacher has one more thing on her side to use when parents or administrators throw up a fit over a book.