The Future of Literature

[Shannanigan]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14823087/?GT1=8717

Just got through reading that article, and despite its low rating by readers, I think it will be more appreciated here.

It's pretty scary, at least to me. I mean, I understand that many, if not most occupations out there do not require that a person have extensive reading skill, and most people can live a normal, happy life without having read classic literature...even my own boyfriend has a promising future set out before him, and he never has, and never plans to, read any books from start to finish, except for The Hobbit.

I know also that literature is already an endeavor enjoyed only by a limited few...at least in the big picture. It's just like any other "hobby," some like cars, some like music, and some like reading...

But I still think that reading and analyzing literature in itself stimulates the mind in ways necessary for humankind to learn how to solve problems and see things in different perspectives. If literature really does become like this article depicts, I think we are all doomed to become just like George Orwell's 1984 world in which some people make it their goal to have only a handful of words make up a language...total elimination of creativity and ability to put thoughts together, to have ideas, to solve problems, and think for oneself.

Any thoughts? It's almost enough to make a future English teacher cry...

[Nightshade]

Oh my did he say what I think he said?
thats awful... Imean it makes sence that litrecy is falling high literacy levels have never really been around that long and when you think more and more peole are going to uni/college to study things that dont really require that high a literacy level. But is he saying we should just stop worrying about reading? Thats awful!

[Virgil]

That was a good article Shan, especially for lit net. I'm going to have to give it some thought. I'm sceptical, I must admit. First I'm always sceptical of these studies that somebody performs. They seem to come up with all sorts of things. Reading and writing is still the only way to communicate complex thoughts. Can people communicate strictly by pressing icon buttons in the future? I don't think so. He says that most people wont need to read or write. Well, that is no different than the 19th and 20th centuries. Most people who do physical labor, and that is the majority of people, did not and never did read whole books. I doubt my garbage man reads James Joyce. Most people don't read literature, now, in the past, and probably in the future.

These are my inital thoughts on this. I will have to give it more thought. I'm also interested in what others think here.

[grace86]

Oh wow! There is a lot wrong with this.

Language is what sets humans apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, our brains can process ideas further than "Danger" "Food" and "Sleep" to think of something in the future...figuratively or literally. Written language is just another way to convey our messages.

When the article says:

The nation’s leaders must be able to read; for those who follow, the ability should be strictly optional.

I am just screaming ouch. 1984 here we come! If people are unwilling (not to get too political here) to vote and to read, well, we are saying that we are willing to take our political leaders at their "character" portrayed through the media. There won't be any future leaders.

This article and subject makes me angry. I don't take reading as a hobby. I do read as a hobby, but I think anyone who does read for leisure recognizes the importance it does have in communication with others, and its necessity to be taught.

The standards for education are going way down, and it is dissapointing (sp?). Reading expands the mind in so many ways, and the verbal skills are terribly necessary. I hate to hear someone in a college course stutter over something that isn't all that difficult to pronounce.

[Nightshade]

Reading and writing is still the only way to communicate complex thoughts. .

ok got to argue with that , course you can communicate complex thoughts through other means after all whhat are words but wierd pictures that symbolise somthing.
I dont know about anyone else but I discoverd somthing the other day i was struggling with this essay and trying to find a word it was their in my head but I could think of it ( dyslexia strikes again) anyway I kept seeing a concrete mixer in my head eventually the word came to me ( like a good 5-10 minutes later) materialise as in the Y2k scare failed to materialise. but the reason I thought concrete was that concreate is a building material . what I think Im trying to get to is that if you had drawn a concrete mixer a computer a virus symbol Y2K and a X that would mor eor less hav conveyed the same thing.
The only reason words are imoprtant IMO is that they are standardised symbols most people can understand.

[grace86]

Just a disclosure...all that was just my personal opinion.

[Virgil]

ok got to argue with that , course you can communicate complex thoughts through other means after all whhat are words but wierd pictures that symbolise somthing.

Like what?

[Nightshade]

like what what?
oh other means...art, moving picture ( im saying silent here you dont even need the words. But then again spoken word and written word are 2 different kettles of fish arent they? smilies!! ( well ok not yet but one day Im sure youll get smilies sophisticate denough to tell a story.)

I guess it depends how you see words I invented an entire new written alphabet 2 summers ago ( it was along plane ride and I got bored with gone with the wind) and it worked for me becasue they just became new letters , new symbols and completly replaced he tradional a b c , in some ways I think it was better because it was phonetic with symbols for the sh ch th er ar sounds anyway the point of all this is that a thought can be comunicated in all sorts of ways it doesnt need words. But the loss of literature and the ability to use it would be IMO the greatest inellectual tradgedy we could face.

[PeterL]

The majority of people have never had a high level of literacy. Having recently been in a college envitonment, I was amazed at how ignorant many of the students are, and that includes graduates students. I still think that there has been a major deterioration of primary education in the last few decades, especially that no child is left behind any more. But there are many people who are very literate, end I greatly doubt that books and literature will disappear.

Articles like that may become a wake-up call to educators at the primary and secondary levels.

[Shannanigan]

The majority of people have never had a high level of literacy. Having recently been in a college envitonment, I was amazed at how ignorant many of the students are, and that includes graduates students. I still think that there has been a major deterioration of primary education in the last few decades, especially that no child is left behind any more. But there are many people who are very literate, end I greatly doubt that books and literature will disappear.

Articles like that may become a wake-up call to educators at the primary and secondary levels.

I just had to add to this because my experience in college here has proven the same. I work at the Writing Center, and about 50-60 percent of the students who come in are coming in for "grammar checks" because their professor told them to! Sadly, most of the grammar problems are things that should have been learned in elementary or early secondary schooling . I feel bad, because I think it is really difficult to teach someone grammar, especially without a classroom setting, once they've reached college. I'm training to be a secondary school teacher, but the grammar problems I keep seeing make me think of switching to elementary so I can catch 'em when they're young!

...on a little side note to the general direction of discussion so far...there is some discussion of the article here (link to article discussion...remove if I broke a rule please): http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/th...ram=HIPDelay=1 and some very interesting points have been brought up about the value of reading and ANALYZING as a valuable brain activity that also makes us capable of analyzing true events and observations as they happen to us...

[Virgil]

The majority of people have never had a high level of literacy. Having recently been in a college envitonment, I was amazed at how ignorant many of the students are, and that includes graduates students. I still think that there has been a major deterioration of primary education in the last few decades, especially that no child is left behind any more. But there are many people who are very literate, end I greatly doubt that books and literature will disappear.

Well, that's rediculous. No child left behind deals with standards of third graders. And that came into affect 5 years ago. At most the first wave is now in 8th grade. No child left behind has not affected any current college student.

They were saying the same things about college students when I entered college in 1979, 27 years ago. I got C's in my freshman grammar class too. And many people still think I can't spell. I don't think it's changed at all.

[PeterL]

Well, that's rediculous. No child left behind deals with standards of third graders. And that came into affect 5 years ago. At most the first wave is now in 8th grade. No child left behind has not affected any current college student.

They were saying the same things about college students when I entered college in 1979, 27 years ago. I got C's in my freshman grammar class too. And many people still think I can't spell. I don't think it's changed at all.

OK, I stretched a little. The standards have been dropping for a long time. I graduated high school in 1969. At that time there were reasonably well educated high school graduates who were expected to go on to college, and there were those who weren't ca[pable of absorbing much, and it was expected that they would be mechanics and plumbers, who wouldn't need much formal education. Since then the workforce has tended toward jobs that are less mechanical, but the education system hass not improved to accomodate those needs.

When I entered college in 1965, most of the people in my classes were pretty literate, and that was a state university. I gots A's in my freshman rhetoric and English classes, and continued to get A's and B's in such classes. Things have gotten worse, but maybe the change came in the 1970's.

The first people who were subjected to Federal regulations on secondary education have graduated high school now. The regulations started around 1990.

[PeterL]

I just had to add to this because my experience in college here has proven the same. I work at the Writing Center, and about 50-60 percent of the students who come in are coming in for "grammar checks" because their professor told them to! Sadly, most of the grammar problems are things that should have been learned in elementary or early secondary schooling . I feel bad, because I think it is really difficult to teach someone grammar, especially without a classroom setting, once they've reached college. I'm training to be a secondary school teacher, but the grammar problems I keep seeing make me think of switching to elementary so I can catch 'em when they're young!

See my reply to Virgil. It's hard to remember everything about education, but there have been many changes in the way that language was taught, especially in the early grades, and the teaching of grammar became unpopular at some times. If my mother were still alive, I'd ask her. She was a teacher of early chlidhood language arts. I wonder if high schools teachers are making students write.

[Charles Darnay]

In my opinion, literacy is not stressed enough in high schools. English classes seem to be primarily focused on essay writing, which, yes, it is important but there's so much more. And for me at least, high school novel study was a joke! The teacher says, "okay, read these chapters for tomoorw", the the next day we would sit in a group and discuss it. Of course, there would be 2-5 people in the class who actually read the chapters and they would provide the needed info for those who didn't bother.... et voit-la! No need to actually read the book yourself! There is no incentive anymore to read. And of course you could push it further back and blame the parents. If you want your kid to be good at reading, intsil it in him/her at a young age. It's not different that parents who force their kinds into early math programs or piano lessons..... the first 5 years or so is your time to dictate your kid's future..... use it! Hmmm.....ya, that's all.

[Shannanigan]

See my reply to Virgil. It's hard to remember everything about education, but there have been many changes in the way that language was taught, especially in the early grades, and the teaching of grammar became unpopular at some times. If my mother were still alive, I'd ask her. She was a teacher of early chlidhood language arts. I wonder if high schools teachers are making students write.

Yes, its true, the problem isn't limited to today. I've heard of what you've talked about, when "the teaching of grammar became unpopular at times," a professor of mine mentioned how over time, schools tend to focus alternately on grammer, then literature, then grammar, then literature, as each one is deemed to get focused on "too much." I remember public school in California always focusing on essay writing (more summary than analysis) and grammar, but when I moved here and went to private school, it was all about in-class discussion, analytical journal entries, etc.

I guess I got lucky and got both. I wish it could be more like that with other students. Maybe I can find a balance in my class. Personally, I would much much rather a student be able to analyze and understand something, and to voice thoughts on it, than to be able to write a summary down grammatically correct...though once that level is acheived I do think one should try to improve their grammar...