What's the point of required reading?
in Students & Teens ·
wanderingbadger44 said:That’s just... how should I put this?... perfectly natural.
Someone is always going to find something stupid or dull. It's inevitable. Required reading lists are designed with a specific purpose in mind. Sure, you'll run into teachers who don't handle the curriculum properly, but that's beside the point. The point is the list itself. Don't forget that names like Krleža are on there, and think about how lucky you were to eventually discover his work. You could have easily avoided him because of your resistance to the assigned reading.
A curriculum shouldn't be built based on the whims of children or the tastes of the general public, just like you wouldn't let a crowd decide which classical pieces are played during a music appreciation class.
And help me understand why you're pushing back against the reading list so hard when you aren't even one of those kids whose only exposure to literature is what's assigned in class. It seems like you're protesting the selection specifically because you're someone who would have found their way to books anyway, even if you never stepped foot in a library. In a way, you're living proof that anyone who truly wants to read will find a way, regardless of whatever list they're handed.
That’s easily the most lasting impact those required reading lists had on my life. It wasn't about gaining some deep understanding of literary history; it was more about developing a visceral distaste for the specific authors and books they forced upon us. Honestly, it even made me recoil from works I actually might have enjoyed, simply because they were part of that mandated curriculum. 😁
So, go ahead—explain to me why you’re suddenly such a crusader against assigned reading lists. It seems to me you’re only making this noise because you aren't exactly part of that crowd whose only connection to classic literature is whatever happens to be on a syllabus. You’re shouting about "curated selections" when, in reality, you probably wouldn't even step foot in a public library if it weren't mandatory. Honestly, you are the living embodiment of my point: someone who actually wants to read will find their way to a book regardless of what some school board decides to put on a list.
In my view, the true value—the actual purpose—of reading literature should be found in the experience itself. For someone in their 30s or 40s, a book ought to serve as a source of genuine entertainment, deep intellectual stimulation, or even just a moment of quiet reflection through beautiful prose and insightful ideas. That is far more meaningful than the hollow memory of struggling through a text in a language you barely grasp, only to end up frantically copying assignments from an older cousin just to get by.
There are certain individuals who come of age surrounded by bookshelves, raised by parents who treated reading as a way of life and made early trips to the local library a cornerstone of their childhood. Then, there is the other breed—those raised by people who operate under the logic of, "Everything worth knowing, I picked up from the TV! And the bigger the screen, the sharper the mind. You can judge my intellect just by looking at my massive flat-screen. Just What a clever Fellow I am."
Required reading has occasionally repulsed me, or perhaps more accurately, driven me to sprint toward a local bookstore to find something actually worth my time—much like how you might instinctively grab the steering wheel immediately after surviving a chaotic traffic jam. For some, these assignments might serve as a gateway to discovering that a book can be a genuine companion, but this particular curriculum failed that mission entirely. It was far too preoccupied with dredging through the dusty annals of American literary history. To me, that’s just tragic; such an approach is nothing more than a colossal waste of time and energy for everyone involved.