Everyone has an opinion on this topic, even those who "like all kinds". Highly differentiated opinions tend to be held quite strongly, as in a lover of ‘classical’ music who categorically dismisses all music published after 1918 – or adhering to a single genre such as heavy metal. But seriously, what bugs me more is when people refuse to discuss their criteria of quality and instead give in to some kind of lukewarm relativism. So, this is your chance to have it out. How about complexity (rhythmic, harmonic, structural, etc.)? Technical virtuosity? Emotional impact? Popularity (just kidding)? Whatever makes you like a piece, spelled out and described as concisely as possible in objective terms. I suggest we focus on criteria and attributes, rather than merely placing your favourite example front and centre.
What can "celebrity animals" — like Dolly (the cloned sheep), Tilikum (the killer whale), or even the octopus who gained fame on the Netflix Original, My Octopus Teacher — tell us about "the human socially constructed natural world" as Nick Couldry calls it?
Animals (especially charismatic species with which we feel we can identify) can certainly ground environmental issues and cause us to at least feel something for environmental crises. However, there is often unequal distribution of attention that leads to inequality: mediagenic coverage that places certain animals in a positive spotlight allows us to care more for a gorilla or elephant than for an insect or fish, for example.
Media power is prevalent in the operation of animal fame. Given that human animals are the norm in studies of celebrity environmentalism, what difference does it make to consider the role of non-human animals? Consider, with reference to one non-human animal celebrity associated with environmentalism (like Dolly, Tilikum, or others that have come about in mainstream media).
I think this topic is great! Other examples that immediately come to mind are Harambe (the gorilla) and Cecil (the lion), both of whom came to be heralded as martyrs in the social media court of public opinion. I also wonder if less personalized/individualized examples might also fit into this paradigm, such as the nameless polar bears precariously photographed on shrinking ice sheets, or the much discussed declining honeybee populations (whose absence has been memorialized on boxes of Honey Nut Cheerios). How do these animals function as metonymical stand-ins for ecological destruction, and does the same logic of celebrity apply without the overtly anthropomorphizing gestures of assigning a proper name. On the subject of anthropomorphism, I wonder if there's also room in article to discuss the celebrity status of fictional animal protagonists, which seems to be most common of dogs (e.g. Call of the Wild, Old Yeller, Air Bud, Marley & Me, The Art of Racing in the Rain, etc.) and horses (e.g. Kholstomer, Black Beauty, and particularly War Horse -- on page, stage, and screen). Lastly, I'd be remiss if I didn't recommend the prospective author to read up on the recently scholarly literature in the booming humanities discipline of "Animal(ity) Studies," whose key contributors have been Carey Wolfe, Peter Singer, Jacques Derrida, Margo DeMello, and particularly the posthumanist theories of Donna Haraway. – ProtoCanon1 year ago
Verrrry nice! I'm assuming you've seen a lot of animal documentaries, including Blackfish (Netflix). If you can find anything, you might also use the story of Keiko, the orca who played Willy in the Free Willy franchise, as a source. I had some other suggestions, but it kinda looks like you're covered. :) – Stephanie M.1 year ago
Mark Z Danielewski’s House of Leaves is probably the most famous oddly structured book. For the most part there’s two separate narratives; the narrator’s own story is told in footnotes, the main body of the text being the discovered critical analysis by Zampano of a non-existent documentary film about an ever-changing house. Zampano’s also blind, btw.
It’s a little bit gimmicky, but at times the Zampano essay is stunning, with some of the most memorable sinister moments in modern literature.
Beside House of Leaves, I was surprised by the twist of the plot and development in these books:
Abraham Verghese: Cutting for Stone.
Orhan Pamuk: Museeum of Innocence. (This is a love novel, and you may not like this genre.)
Benito Perez Galdos: Fortunata and Jacinta.
Theodor Kallifatides: In her Gaze. (First written in Swedish, but it is translated into some other languages. I do not know if English belongs to them.)
Selma Lagerlöf: The Story of Gösta Berling. Repeatedly some one will predict an event that is easily seen to be impossible, unless supranatural phenomena are included. And then the event does occur, but because of perfectly natural causes.
Arnold Zweig: The Fight Over Sergeant Gruschka. (In WWI Gruschka is a deserter from the Russian army and had been living in a German P.O.W. camp. He had escaped. What he is most eager to avoid is to be send back to this camp. A woman eventually advises him how to avoid that – but he will actually suffer worse outcomes.)
Really interesting topic!
I would add The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison. Different narrative voices intertwine and the font plays a really important role too. The Dick and Jane story at the beginning of the novel is written 3 times - one normally, one without punctuation and one without any spaces between letters. Worth reflecting on what that is supposed to mean. And the book is structured by seasons, comparing the Dick and Jane vision of spring, all nice and pretty, and the afro-american's reality of spring in the 1960s - rape and violence.
And Gabriel Garcia Marquez' A hundred Years of Solitude. – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun8 years ago
What about Faulkner? I'm thinking The Sound and the Fury and As I Lay Dying. – Kristian Wilson8 years ago
I'm thinking Scandinavian crime/mystery-thrillers and their impact on modern fiction (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo). – Thomas Munday8 years ago
The structure and themes of Cloud Atlas could be another book to consider for this topic. I find the puzzling feature of the structure of linked stories or novel-in-stories to be intriguing and feel it could be inserted into this topic. Some other linked story novels include: Circus in Winter by Cathy Day. Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan, and Woman Warrior by Maxine Hong Kingston. – BethanyS8 years ago
Interesting. But would you mind explaining what are the questions this topic is going to answer/any potential central argument? For example, what the authors are trying to do with the unusual structures? What messages do they convey? I would also suggest to look a bit into the history of the novel. – Ka Man Chung2 years ago
I read another note entitled, ‘The effects of Iconic roles on an Actor and his/her career’ and I was excited that it might be a topic on something I’ve long contemplated on, but the description specified a different interest. So I decided to submit my own topic. I’m interested in hearing about the ways in which taking on certain roles have impacted an actor’s personal life. By acting as someone else, do they find themselves becoming that character at times in their personal lives? Having had practiced traits that were perhaps new to them before their role, does it change them? Does it help or hinder them? Have they learned about new things because of a specific role, i.e. an actor acting as an astronaut – have they learned about space? This might perhaps be interesting to research into child actors as well. Since they’re in a bubble surrounded by adults, is it daunting? Etc. Mainly though how specific roles have impacted their personal lives is my interest.
A new documentary on Netflix called "Jim & Andy: The Great Beyond" could be a great source of inspiration for this kind of topic. It shows the drastic effect a character can have on an actor. – Slaidey5 years ago
Of course, every actor is different and has different experiences with their roles. Thus, it might be a bit difficult to narrow down this topic without choosing a few actors and actresses to focus on. Perhaps the article can connect these individuals by ways in which their acting is similar and/or different from the others in the article. I think it would also be beneficial to look into how different techniques of acting can affect the actor. – Kabria5 years ago
A modern trend as it would appear, in superhero films-especially those within the DC comic book universe, would be the darker, more realistic cinematic portrayal of the heroes themselves. This trend seemed to be pioneered by director Christopher Nolan in his critically acclaimed ‘Dark Knight’ trilogy which showcased the most critically installment of Batman thus far. This article could discuss these titles as such.
It can be argued that Romanticism has continued to persist past the 1800s and continued on one form or another. With this in mind, it would be interesting to see a comparison between Romanticism and Hippie culture. Is Hippie culture a continuation of Romanticism? What are the similarities and differences between these ideals? How does it show up in literature?
Sherlock Holmes has had many renditions, but BBC’s Sherlock and CBS’s Elementary came out about the same time. BBC’s Sherlock takes the stance that Sherlock is a high functioning sociopath while CBS’s Sherlock is a recovering addict. These renditions affect how other characters in the series were represented as well as how they interact with him. How do these differences compare to the books and do both versions show a strong representation of a version of Sherlock Holmes in their own right?
Interesting topic however I would urge the writer to tread carefully. When examining multiple editions and origin stories things can get messy. A focal point (perhaps characteristics all the renditions share? what is it that makes Sherlock "Sherlock" ?) is very important to execute this successfully. – Mela6 years ago
You've misspelled elementary in the title. – Tigey6 years ago
Analyze and discuss how j-horror is distinct from other genres of horror, particularly its defining characteristics and notable directors or narratives (i.e. What makes them notable, to you as a viewer and the overall field?) Discuss its historical and recent developments. Have there been any emergent prominent themes? Compare it to remakes.
I believe that Japanese Horror is the most scariest horror there can be. I think the gruesome detail and illogical scare factor (i.e. monster, spirit, ...) is what characterizes the way horror is brought in Japanese Horror. – naturalbeautyqueen7 years ago
The struggle with motivation and focus can be helped by habit. I’m a fan of two steps, which has worked well for me, although of course everybody’s different.
1. Have some sort of master plan: an outline, a flowchart, a spreadsheet, a detailed synopsis, an index card for each scene, or whatever other organizational method works for you. Know the whole story before you begin writing; most novels that remain incomplete are that way because the writer started without knowing where he was going and how to get there. For a first novel, a plan is vital. Maybe you can write your second without one, but first you need to know you can finish a work that big.
2. Once your whole story is planned out, try the BIC method. That’s your butt in chair for a set amount of time every day, minimum 30 minutes. (An hour or more is better. You want to write this novel or not?) During BIC time you have two options, and only two. You may write, or you may not write. You can’t be online, have the TV on in the background, read or send texts or instant messages, play a computer game, do writing-related research, read what you’ve already written, adjust your outline, eat, smoke, or anything else. Write or don’t, period. (Those who give themselves BIC of more than an hour can schedule a break if they must have one–but it doesn’t count as part of the BIC time.) If others in the household might disturb you, you need to find a way to make that not happen, like doing it while they’re at work or school, asleep, or take your BIC time at the library or a coffeehouse. Most days, you’ll write. On the best days, you’ll ‘catch fire’ and go beyond your assigned time, which is great. However, you can’t amass credit. The next day, you still owe the same amount of BIC time as every other day.
Teaching yourself to write even when it doesn’t come easily or you don’t feel like it is part of the road to being a professional writer whose work other people pay to see.
If someone wrote about this topic, I'd definitely read it. There are a lot of different methods out there. I haven't heard of the BIC before, but the strategies I'm familiar with are very similar. Having a routine is crucial. Writing at the same time each day for a set duration of time ensures that you write everyday. Listening to music also helps me concentrate, especially if the music fits the mood of the piece I'm working on. Maybe also setting aside time to edit your work and do research is good idea. Every few days or so I'll reread what I've written just to make sure I don't have any glaring errors or things I can easily fix before continuing on. – S.A. Takacs8 years ago
I love the idea of this topic. I would definitely read it. It could also be interesting to do some research and add some tips/suggestions from successful authors on what they do to combat writer's block and maintain motivation. – bookworm2g98 years ago
I like the idea that you are presenting, You also have made some important suggestions. Motivation at the same time is a very personal matter and has to be catered to individual needs and talent. While I enjoy guidebooks or foundation books that provides instructions on successful writing, often it is difficult to follow all the rules. Perhaps one point that this article could address is how to successfully use such guides. – Arazoo Ferozan7 years ago
I am currently reading "Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation" by Stephen Johnson. In Chapter 3, Johnson explores how some ideas are shaped over the course of generations and pieced together from the findings of different individuals. He calls this process the "slow hunch." Here is a sample of the text: “Keeping a slow hunch alive poses challenges on multiple scales. For starters, you have to preserve the hunch in your own memory, in the dense network of your neurons. Most slow hunches never last long enough to turn into something useful, because they pass in and out of our memory too quickly, precisely because they possess a certain murkiness. You get a feeling that there’s an interesting avenue to explore, a problem that might someday lead you to a solution, but then you get distracted by more pressing matters and the hunch disappears. So part of the secret of hunch cultivation is simple: write everything down." – DoultonSchweizer7 years ago
Ideally there are some characters that come to life and just need to be written. Others stories write themselves. I always wait for it and never forget to thank my muse. – Munjeera7 years ago
Butt in Chair is excellent! Truly, the story isn't going to write itself, and instead of planning what you're going to do the next time you write, just start writing! Don't allow yourself to procrastinate! – gretawhipple7 years ago
I'm fascinated by anything to do with writers' processes, writers' habits and foibles. I'd read this. – J.P. Shiel7 years ago
Definitely focusing on the differences between intrinsic / extrinsic motivation would be a good angle for the story. You can only force yourself to write in a vacuum for so long, you need others to push you along. – MCSWM7 years ago
Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Macbeth – these plays could be considered the "Holy Trinity" for Shakespeare in academia; these plays seem to be the ones that are introduced to students most often and at the earliest ages (with an occasional Othello or King Lear thrown into the mix).
Why are these three plays seemingly the most prevalent in English classes? Some of the more "obscure" Shakespeare plays are, arguably, just as good for both reading and teaching as the aforementioned ones. Consider Much Ado About Nothing, Twelfth Night, Coriolanus, or the history plays (Richard/Henry) and how they would fare as a student’s first exposure to Shakespeare, as opposed to Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and Macbeth.
Although I would argue that Midsummer Nights Dream is up there as well as the most-often-done comedy. I think it would be interesting to ask how looking at more obscure plays would introduce new/different/more interesting aspects of Shakespeare. – Francesca Turauskis7 years ago
I'm not against first exposure to the "classic" Shakespeare choices that you mention, but I do agree that exposure to a comedic Shakespearean play would be more interesting and entertaining for newbies. I'll always love a good Hamlet in the traditional style or a basic Macbeth (ala Judy Densch as Lady Macbeth--all actors and set in full black, very sparse set, etc.) in which the language and beauty of the story can shine through without distraction. But they are heavy and violent, and some of the comedies are so irreverent and funny that they might help younger audiences appreciate the Bard more readily. This is a very interesting topic to me; I'd like to see how people explore the ideas.
– TheatreLife247 years ago
Never thought of Twelfth Night and Much Ado About Nothing as 'obscure' - I studied both of them before touching Macbeth. Obscurity for Shakespeare ought to be more of a question of going against type, or looking at his early material. – JekoJeko7 years ago
A lot of it has to do with the verse. Romeo and Juliet and Midsummer Night's Dream are usually the first Shakespearean plays to which middle/high school students are introduced (I disagree that Hamlet and Macbeth are the first). These plays also are written in much simpler iambic pentameter than his later works; as he developed as a playwright, the complexity of his verse increased. Plots also got more complex and convoluted; R&J and Midsummer are very easy to read and understand; additionally, the protagonists in these two plays are closer in age to teens, as opposed to Hamlet or Much Ado About Nothing (men and women in their late 20s/early 30s), and so are their love triangles and juvenile understanding of love. – Katheryn7 years ago
Recent animated shows airing mainly on The Disney Channel and Cartoon Network have established quite a large following among high school and college students. Why is this? Can it be said that recent cartoons initially targeted at children have taken on deeper meanings beyond young entertainment, while teaching some moral values along the way? With shows like Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Gravity Falls, and Over the Garden Wall attracting a more mature audience than probably anticipated, what does this reveal about the nature of these cartoons.
The power of previous children's cartoons on viewers of the past could also be an interesting topic, though not the era of the 80's or 90's but maybe during WWII? – smarrie7 years ago
One of the biggest reasons why the most recent Beowulf movie (2007) was so disappointing to some viewers is because it deviated too much from the original text, mainly in regards to Grendel’s mother and the circumstances of Beowulf’s death.
Is it important for modern adaptations of medieval works in film to be true to the text? How much liberty can/should be taken with a text before it "goes too far" and loses the original flavor of the work? Does this liberty affect how people view the original text, and is this an important thing to consider when making such a film?
This is a very subjective topic, and I think the answer lies in the quality of the adaptation rather than its trueness to the original work. A faithful adaptation appeals to those who love the original, but a remake that deviates from its source can keep hackneyed stories interesting throughout the years. Consider Shakespeare: there's an abundance of successful adaptations of Shakespeare's many plays, both traditional and creative. The more traditional 1968 version of Romeo & Juliet was highly successful, as was Baz Lurhman's ultra-modernized 1996 version. Whichever direction is taken, an adaptation's success relies on the same thing as any other film, such as good acting, good cinematography, etcetera. Although Beowulf is admittedly an extremely difficult text to bring to the screen, I think the 2007 version of Beowulf failed because of reasons beyond plot deviation (I'm not a filmmaker, but the acting and CGI are among the many points criticized in that version). That said, the Beowulf text has remained an untarnished classic. A classic text stands on its own merits, regardless of whatever adaptations are made. – NotVanHooten7 years ago
"A person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes."
I have no problem with this definition but it does raise a question.
Primarily, how important is it that the person believes themselves to be an expert vs actually being an expert in film?
From the little definitions of "snob" that I looked up, a common element is the superficiality of differences that the snob sees and looks downward at the person just because of the superficial difference that isn’t an indicator of any intelligence.
The term "film snob" sounds like it could fall under the same rank as "hipster." Both terms change in meaning so often with whatever material is designated as pretentious for the moment. It's more of an attempt to simply classify someone's arrogance (towards film in this case) when arrogance can happen anywhere without need for its own terminology. – dsoumilas7 years ago
If you look up "Cinema Snob" his entire show is a parody on this very subject and quite intelligent on the ridiculous notion of snobs. – smartstooge7 years ago
To add an interesting angle, I would tackle the question of whether someone can be a justified film snob. I mean, we all know That Guy who is a obnoxiously snobbish about their subject (film or otherwise), and we can all agree that these people need to get off their high horses and admit that they are not the pinnacle of good taste. But then, there's other snobs whose opinions we respect so much that we call them "critics" instead. These are the interesting snobs, because their opinions are often taken seriously and are, to some extent, justified. A film critic has seen far more movies than I'm ever likely to watch, and has watched them with a critical eye that I don't often use. Is there, then, some justification to his pretensions of good taste above that of us plebeians? To what extent can objective quality be measured anyway? – OddballGentleman7 years ago
One of the most interesting – at least to me – ‘thematic explorations’ in film is seeing works that depict a society in a state of profound, often radical change. Ozu was perhaps the very best at doing this. As Wim Wenders said:
"Ozu’s films again and again tell the same simple story, always of the same people and the same city: Tokyo. This chronicle, spanning nearly 40 years, depicts the transformaton of life in Japan. Ozu’s films deal with the slow deterioration of the Japanese family, and thereby with the deterioration of a national identity."
I can’t think of any other Japanese director that examined the disintegration of the postwar family, and the country’s sense of national identity with more profundity, depth and attention than Ozu.
Werner Herzog’s Heart of Glass (Herz aus Glas (1976)) is also a fantastic film that looks into a small, isolated village being impacted by the effects of industrialisation.
Further, many Italian neorealist films did a remarkable job at looking into a society completely brutalised by war, and the consequences of a collapsed fascist regime.
I personally love this topic, but it needs to be clearer on its goals. The article could be a reflection of films that either help us cope, or reflect how we cope, in times of change. I like idea of using Ozu as an example. Japanese cinema was founded on this change. An analysis of that might be really fitting, since most people are only familiar with Kurosawa (or samurai stuff in general). Another great director from this time is Hiroshi Shimizu. Not much of his stuff is left, but Criterion Collection put out a four-pack pretty recently. – Travis Cohen7 years ago
Books like The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry or My Sweet Orange Tree by José Mauro de Vasconcelos.
I think the age group the book is meant for should also be considered. Is the book meant for adults or for young children? – Cagney8 years ago
The Bluest Eye is a great example. The narrative voice switches from the viewpoint of two little girls, an external narrator who takes on the protagonist's (another little girl) perspective, and stream of consciousness. Sometimes you get the voice of adult characters too through diaries or letters, and at the end you get the voice of the protagonist and this is where you see the impact of racism, which damages the individual's sense of self. And this book is meant for adults. Great book! – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun8 years ago
A classic example of a book with a child's point of view is Where The Wild Things Are. It not only deals with a child's imagination, but also the anger and frustration that is prevalent at that age. – Aaron Hatch7 years ago
Prayers of a Very Wise Child by Rock Carrier is a great text to look at. It's told from the author's child point of view and satirically exposes society but is easily written so it can entertain children and adults alike. A child's POV is turned into a powerful tool for commentary. – Slaidey7 years ago
Another example could be Ender's Game, which is in the POV of a growing child (Ender). I've heard that some people wrote letters to the author complaining that the child's mindset didn't seem childlike at all, while the author argued that to a child, their own mind wouldn't consider themself immature. – VelvetRose7 years ago
I don't know why no one has mentioned Scout from To Kill a Mockingbird yet, but her perspective is really the best thing about the book. Without her innocent perspective, the story would not have been nearly as shocking with the inherent wrongness of racism in that town. – thekellyfornian7 years ago
Books like "World War Z" by Max Brooks, in which Max Brooks is a journalist collating interviews from the zombie outbreak. Or "And Then There Was No-One" by Gilbert Adair, in which the protagonist is an author of detective fiction called Gilbert Adair.
Philip Roth is the main character in at least 2 Philip Roth novels:
Operation Shylock – Philip Roth is the first person narrator who discovers that another "Philip Roth" has appropriated his identity and is using his celebrity to push a anti-Zionist political agenda.
The Plot Against America – Philip Roth, as a child, comes of age in an alternate history 1940’s America where Nazi sympathizer Charles Lindbergh has become President and keeps the US out of WW II.
An article could not only address different novels and how they approach authors as main characters but also how readers react to it. Does it help or hinder the novel? For that matter I was wondering if first person novels translate better into movies than third person because fans fall in love with the external characters... so does this work the same way? Do we come to love the author or try to treat them as a separate character themselves while within the literature? – Slaidey7 years ago
They are not the authors, they are fictional representations of the authors. – T. Palomino4 months ago
The author’s (assuming they reveal it in an interview or something) or the reader’s (they usually interpret while reading the comic, before watching/reading the filmmaker’s interview)? Is it different when the book in question has one ambiguous element and when the entire plot is ambiguous?
Same question can apply to movies, and often does.
If a film/book has a deliberately ambiguous moment, and the author film maker later reveals what they believe happened, this is just their opinion. When you hand a piece of art over the public you are free to interpret how you want and your opinion is just as valid.
The classic example that comes immediately to mind is the film Drive. At the end, the Driver drives away and we don’t know if he’ll live or die. My immediate thought at the end of that film was that he is going off to die. Later the film maker said that he thought the Driver lived, and he may even do more films with the character.
Until you give us another movie, the directors opinion is only that. If he wanted his films ending to be conclusive, he had the chance when he first made it. There is no point being arty and vague with an ending, if you just want to tell us later that you think the guy lives.
Calls for a great article nonetheless.
It would be interesting to discuss John Green, who refuses to answer questions about ambiguous events in his books (or symbolism, or what happened afterward) because he believes books belong to their readers and anything they interpret could be true. – Grace Maich7 years ago
Yes yes I'm so passionate about this topic! Does the book belong to the reader or the author? JK Rowling and John Green definitely support the idea of the reader having their own interpretations, but maybe seek out the other opinion, like authors who strongly support author-only interpretations. – Taylorsteen7 years ago
Currently in academia it is agreed upon to be up to the reader, because as they say "The Author is Dead." But it would be interesting to explore the hypocrocy. Many will say the author is dead in one case and then when it comes to David Foster Wallace, his word is literary law to the point that people are wondering if Wallace would be for or against the film about him. If the author is truely dead then why the hell would we care what David Foster Wallace would think? Yet, you say this and the literary mob will come at you with fire and pitchforks. An article on this topic should really enter into the academic conversation as well as the fandoms. It should have a nice works cited. – Erin Derwin7 years ago
Y: The Last man is another good example, as well the comic book series Saga. – Aaron Hatch8 years ago
Their certainly are possibilities here. Etrigan maybe? – Joseph Manduke IV8 years ago
I think Klarion the Witch Boy would be interesting. It would feature a kid antihero and we haven't seen much of that. Or Neil Gaiman's Sandman would be an excellent HBO adaptation, although it has plans to become film presently. I believe an Archie TV show was discussed at some point as well. – Cagney8 years ago
I think it's due time for a Blüdhaven/ Nightwing show for the CW.
Or a great Sin City-like film adaptation of Sandman. – G Anderson Lake8 years ago
Comics are a treasure trove of stories for potential adaptation. All of the above seem good suggestions, and Image Comics' Chew would make a great cop show. Absolutely bizarre, highly entertaining. – IRBurnett7 years ago
I feel like someone should be more specific here. – Kristian Wilson8 years ago
Construct a similarly ambitious socio-cultural examination with more consistent performances, production values, and dedication to realism. The show is visually uninteresting; too many of its performances feel amateurish -- I'm looking at you, McNulty and Snoop; and too often its plot feels forced or opportunistic -- yeah right, Hamsterdam. These inconsistencies are made worse by the great deal the show gets right. – robertmousseau8 years ago
You will have to be more specific as to what you will be talking about. Will you compare it to currently successful television shows? Shows of similar genre? Perhaps you can touch base on what made the show so revered and successful. – Nicole Wethington7 years ago
I’d like to see kids required to read "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America" by Barbara Ehrenreich. Not that it’s great literature, although the writing is solid and quite easy to read, but because it shows underachievers what life may have in store for them if they continue to coast. The payday that seems perfectly adequate to a 17-year-old still living at home, s/he will learn, is just barely enough to allow a life of despair and doing-without. I read it several years ago, but I vividly recall her descriptions of the places she could afford to rent, what it was like being on her feet all day in cheap shoes, how she could not afford to see a doctor or repair her beater of a car, and what groceries were in her small budget.
Other Fiction: Great Expectations, Pride and Prejudice, Frankenstein, The House of Mirth, any or all of the Sherlockian Canon, Northanger Abbey, New Grub Street.First Love.
And Non Fiction: Over the Edge of the World, In Cold Blood
Clearly this is a subjective topic, so you would have to explain why these books deserve to be part of school reading. – Ryan Errington8 years ago
I have always thought kids in compulsory schools should have a course in Ethics with required readings in Aristotle, Sartre, Hobbs, Nietzsche etc.. Ethics makes for good critical thinking.
Fiction: The Chronicles of Narnia. Unabridged Grim Fairy Tales.
Non-Fiction: The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quite School and Get a Real Life and Education by Grace Llewellyn – RJWolfe8 years ago
You could also show how many modern books have related themes to the classics. For example, if you read Lord of the Flies in school, why not read The Mazerunner? – Liz Watkins8 years ago
Because modern literature has lost the complexity of plot and nuanced ethics of Lord of the Flies, The Secret Garden, and many other classics. The issue here is to teach critical thinking and proper English via literature, and I know that Hunger Games does not suffice. Twilight is worse.
I suggest Roots. No one has suggested Dracula. I agree with In Cold Blood as well as Chronicles of Narnia. Keeping with the theme, Out of the Silent Planet, Starship Troopers. If you are going to have kids reading Catcher in the Rye there is no reason not to add The Alchemist. A Wrinkle in Time or Speaker for the Dead (not necessarily Ender's Game, so that might be an issue) are good choices.
Maybe Hobbes, but not Nietzsche. a) He talks of religion, which causes a problem. b) He is horribly racist at times. c) He is really, really racist. Seriously, it is as bad as having them read The Yellow Peril by London. – orenhammerquist8 years ago
A Wizard of Earthsea, The Tombs of Atuan, The Farthest Shore, American Gods, The King of Elfland's Daughter, Roman de Silence, The Left Hand of Darkness, Embassytown, Harry Potter books, Germanic Myths, Egyptian Myths, Mesopotamian Myths, Celtic Myths. These are all the things that I wish we read at High school. This is the literature of culture. – Travis Kane8 years ago
Many kids refuse to read the books imposed by teachers. This continued disregard for literature influences them to develop an negative view on reading in general. While all the books you mentioned are definitely important reads for young students, it might be important to mention how sometimes letting a kid pick their own book allows them to develop a sense of pride in learning and reading. – sapphiremac8 years ago
I would be interested to see this to be focused specifically on books that are very good and worthy of being taught in schools, but have been overlooked for arbitrary reasons. For example, schools have a tendency to pick the dry, old, dusty books known as "classic literature", and while there is of course significant value in these titles, if we prioritize them simply because they are "classic" then we might be overlooking modern literature that is at the same or higher levels. I think this would help stop the article from turning into "Books I Liked and Wish Were Taught in Schools". – OddballGentleman7 years ago
Forcing people to do things hasn't always been a good plan. – T. Palomino4 months ago