Garbage that they teach you in AP classes

[Robert E Lee]

I am starting to get sick of my AP class. My teacher is referring to everything as a symbol. The character can be opening a door and the door becomes a symbol of this or a symbol of that. Not everything is meant to represent an idea.

Consider the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. It's a work of children's literature. But my AP teacher tried to portray it as some deep allegory where the river represents freedom. Come on, that's like saying the police station in a detective novel represents security.

Absolutely ridiculous.

[Munro]

Even though English is my absolute favourite subject at school it is almost my most painful, so I feel your pain. Unlike you I am lucky enough to have a truly wise, knowledgable and passionate teacher, and the curriculum in New South Wales high schools are good. Its my fellow students that infuriate me.
Only perhaps four students in the entire class of 30 actually understand and value literature, the rest are there for the sake of it, or so they can get into some university course, or because it looks good on their certificate.
They cram and study Shakespeare, or notes on Miller (just recently), not because they love those texts, or have been swept by the magic of literature, but because "if we don't get good marks...it won't be good." None of them will remember what they studied when they go into the world, and therefore it was all a waste of time. Argh! Maybe I'm some Nazi literature fundamentalist. Maybe thats why I like coming here.

[Shea]

I think that the reason why the teachers mention so many symbols is because they're there. The only thing is those of use who actually adore these works understand the symbols without having to talk about them. I get frustrated too, because I love the sublty of them and when a class has to disect a passage of literature for the rest of the students, I am left with the scar of the surgery.

It's plainly obvious to us that a river represents freedom or a police station represents safety. I think that we book lovers are impatient to get to the meat of the matter. :-?

[Shuai]

I don't know Shea. I really don't thimk that there is meaning in every single thing. It can't be really plausible that these great authors meant for every single thing they describe to have a deep rooted symbol behind them, can it?
I mean, I love books and all, but when I read about a river or a police station, I read about just that. A river and a police station. It's the big picture that matters, not something that is so fundamentally simple.

[Shea]

That pretty much what I'm saying, it's just that a lot of teachers will pick and pry a book apart to reveal the obvious. When I read about a river and a police station, it's on a subliminal level that I recognize the symbolism. Didn't you just naturally feel the river as the path to freedom when you read Huck Finn (if you read it)? Was it necessary for teacher to tell you what the river meant other than that happened to be the way they chose to travel? I hate that I may have to do stuff like that when I begin teaching. :x

[Jay]

I was thinking about the same. Sometime we just see (or we're said) there are symbols, but the thing is, they might not be meant as symbols. If the author isn't alive, no-one can say this is a symbol, this is not. Sometimes river is just a river. But sometimes it's not. Sometimes the author uses a symbol and almost no-one can find the meaning of it. It's the beauty of literature. You read a book and you can find a lot of people who think different about it. And I think it's right that way. Don't you?

[Shea]

Yeah, that's why I'm enjoying this site so much. I never had anyone else do discuss the books that I've read.

[MarsMonster]

it's because the teachers have spent their life studying things some other people wrote about the books and those other people spent their lives analyzing the books. so possibly they found some things that the author didn't even put in the piece. but still, the book is meant to live independently from the author, and everyone should interpret it differently... and the class can help you to realize some things you may have missed reading the book, and after all, you don't have to agree with everything teacher says....... i don't really see the problem.

[tamontes]

to robert e lee. if you truly feel that Huckleberry Finn is a children's story than i am afraid you have been admitted ap status under shallow pretenses. as a suggestion, try examining the character traits of the spanish "picaro," and compare them to that of huck. oliver twist will also serve well in this regard

[b]

You can see every single creation of men - whether or not presented as an art - as a symbol or allegory for whatever aspect of life you can imagine.

But the context in which the creation is presented usually decides the chance that a person actually sees it as a symbol or allegory.

When you are a teacher that doesn't have anything else to do but to pester unwilling students with pseudo-literature, it isn't hard to believe that one jokes around with unmeant symbolism.

[Koa]

I don't know Shea. I really don't thimk that there is meaning in every single thing. It can't be really plausible that these great authors meant for every single thing they describe to have a deep rooted symbol behind them, can it?
I mean, I love books and all, but when I read about a river or a police station, I read about just that. A river and a police station. It's the big picture that matters, not something that is so fundamentally simple.

I agree with this. I don't think authors mean everything in a symbolic way. Sometimes things become symbols unwillingly, i mean it's the authors subconscious... Sometimes critics just go a bit too far and see a meaning behind everything, when instead a river is just a river.


Munro, here in italy people don't choose a literature course, people have literature lessons in the secondary school they choose, wether they want it or not. Same at university, if you choose to study languages or things of that kind, you have literature even if you don't want it. You can imagine the pain of someone that loves literature in the middle of class where people don't give a damn about it and complain because for the exams they actually have to read a book...

[Robert E Lee]

I don't know Shea. I really don't thimk that there is meaning in every single thing. It can't be really plausible that these great authors meant for every single thing they describe to have a deep rooted symbol behind them, can it?
I mean, I love books and all, but when I read about a river or a police station, I read about just that. A river and a police station. It's the big picture that matters, not something that is so fundamentally simple.

I agree with this. I don't think authors mean everything in a symbolic way. Sometimes things become symbols unwillingly, i mean it's the authors subconscious... Sometimes critics just go a bit too far and see a meaning behind everything, when instead a river is just a river.


Munro, here in italy people don't choose a literature course, people have literature lessons in the secondary school they choose, wether they want it or not. Same at university, if you choose to study languages or things of that kind, you have literature even if you don't want it. You can imagine the pain of someone that loves literature in the middle of class where people don't give a damn about it and complain because for the exams they actually have to read a book...

The people in my class are unenthusiastic, too. They just picked the class for the high school record. It irritates me when they don't read the assigned novel and instead read cliff's notes.

[MarsMonster]

why is that so iritating?

[Robert E Lee]

why is that so iritating?

It pisses me off when people take the easy way out of things like that. And it's like a slap in the face to the authors.

[Koa]

Indeed. Though i don't care much about the authors...Just taking the easy way usually seems to me a lack of responsibility...