You know what one of my biggest pet peeves is? People who think they're being funny when they're really not. Especially when it's in regards to another person, such as when someone starts "teasing" another person in what they may think is just jovial fun, but in reality, is just plain rude.
Anyway, that's all I'm saying about that today. No, my focus is an entirely different topic, and one that I am very fond of.
Books.
I absolutely adore reading. It is my favorite thing to do. I love it because I love stories, and I especially love stories that allow to me to enter an entirely new world. I think it's the highest degree of talent to create your own world and your own people, and then make it so emotionally stirring that you are able to show that world and those people to real people who don't even know
you. This has also led to my love of writing, and I hope to write novels someday.
Of course, I do have a disclaimer: just because I love reading doesn't mean I love all books. I know, I know, it's shocking. But it's true. In fact, I'm not singular in this feeling. I've yet to meet a person who loves all books and all genres with no bias or preference whatsoever.
Often, people will sneer at that, or they'll tell me that the types of books I like to read are "too simple" or "don't challenge your brain enough."
That's the point.
When I read, I am not reading with the goal to challenge myself. I read to relax and to take a break from the world that already expects so much from me.
Of course, that's not saying I don't read things that aren't challenging. I'm not reading Dr. Seuss and the
Junie B. Jones books. And some of the books I read have some crazy concepts and vocabulary and stories, which engage my thinking and give me a different aspect on life.
I also don't like being forced to read books, even if I eventually end up liking the book. Being forced to read a book makes it seem more like another thing in this world that I'm expected to do instead of something that gets me out of the world. But I've also been forced to read some very good books. Granted, I haven't done much about them since reading them, but...I liked them.
"But Odessa, reading isn't always
meant to be fun." I never said it had to be fun. All I expect from a book is a good story that gets my mind going at a brisk pace while giving it a break from everything else that's going on. That's it. Do I prefer to have fun while reading? Of course. But as long as the story is halfway decent, I'll probably make it through just fine.
The problem is, we're always being given books that are considered "classics," which, let's face it, don't have the best stories. Are there good aspects of each one? Yep. But there are only a few books that I've been forced to read that I've thought, "Wow, that story was so engaging! I really feel like I've become a smarter and better person because of reading this! I might even read this again someday!"
You know how many of those books have come from this AP English Language class?

While
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald had interesting characters and an interesting look into the societal muck of the Roaring Twenties, the story was completely worthless. No one got what they wanted, except for the person who I felt deserved it the least, and three people died--one rather violently. What did I learn from that book? Um...............
Don't cheat on your spouse? Well, golly darn, that sure ruins my plans.
"But Odessa! All the symbolism!" Yeah, it's great, isn't it. 180 pages of an excess of the color yellow and glasses that symbolize God.
Yep. That made me smarter.
Then there's
The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger, which, again, had interesting characters and a look into the mind of a struggling teenager, but we could've done without the story--and the foul language.
Some of you may be rolling your eyes at that. "Oh,
Odessa, you're such a Mormon girl!" Yes, I am, but that has very little to do with the fact. The language in that book is
terrible. If anyone in class started talking like that, any normal teacher would reprimand them and get them into so much trouble. But if we're reading it in a book, it's fine, because it's a "classic" and "educational."
Educational about what? The different ways you can use swear words and talk about dirty things? 200 pages of
that? I'm sorry, but if you're going to go on and on about how we need to use more sophisticated words and then give us this novel that had little to no advanced language, how is that going to help us? We're constantly being told to not use the same words we used as seventh graders.
Hang on...
The Catcher in the Rye is at a seventh grade level, you say?
Hm.
Oh, and let's not forget
The Secret Sharer by Joseph Conrad. "Ooh, lookie here, there's a man in the water who looks an awful lot like me, so I'll invite him up and talk with him all night, and I don't care that he murdered someone last week because he's just like me, and I'll hide him since I don't want my crew to know I have a murderer on board, and wow, this man is a lot like me!"
Seventy-five pages of that. I wish I could have been the one murdered.
"Odessa, it's such an interesting book to talk about! Perhaps the man didn't actually exist, because the steward walked right into the bathroom and didn't see him! But he might exist because the other captain came looking for him!"
Yeah, because you can talk about that for ages.
There were hardly any "sophisticated" words used in the story, and certainly none that stuck with me. The hardest it made my brain work was challenging my mental ability to not tear it to shreds.
But, of course we should read it because it's a classic, and seeing as how we're in an AP English Language & Composition class, reading the classics will help us write the essays better.
Don't interrupt me, I'm not finished.
Then there was
The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway, which was the most boring, awful book I've ever read in my life. An old man goes fishing for nigh on 100 pages, finally gets the fish, and loses it within the next thirty pages.
Awful, awful, awful.
"Odessa, a book doesn't have to be fun." That's all well and good, but does a book need to be completely boring and pointless to be considered a classic? I mean, who read that book and exclaimed with a touched soul, "Oh, this book shall be read for generations to come!"
"Odessa, it's the
symbolism. It's the way it was
written." Fine. Why did it take 130 pages to do that? Why couldn't it have been half that length? But
no, we have to read about Santiago trying to catch this fish and the thoughts he has while the fish is dragging his boat out to sea.
And why do
we have to read it? Sure, this book changed my life--by giving me an eternal hatred for it. I can't hear the title without suddenly being filled with red-hot anger. Was the book long? No. But what it lacks in length, it makes up for in one single fish.
Then, there's our most recent one:
The Tempest by William Shakespeare, which was actually a fairly decent decision because it's not written in a way that's terribly simple to read. It can be tough to understand at points. Even as much as I like Shakespeare, I was confused sometimes. The thing that makes Shakespeare hard to understand--for me, at least--is the way the sentences are arranged, not the words themselves. This was no exception.
And now, we're reading
Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston, which is definitely not a book that's going to teach us sophisticated and advanced language.
"But Odessa, there have been books
you've gotten to choose with your Lexile score!" Oh, you mean the books that only have high reading levels because of the length of their sentences and the content matter? If you're going to judge a book by a reading level, rate it based on, I don't know, something like comprehension and the difficulty of the words themselves! The Lexile scores are as useless as the MyAccess essays we had to do in junior high (but that's a different rant entirely). And while we're "choosing" what book we read, we're choosing from a very small pool of books, which is often made even smaller when giving us such a requirement as it being a biography or written before the 20th century.
The real issue for many of us is not the lack of sleep, or that we're being forced to read these books. It's not the content or the time it takes out of our day.
As has been so eloquently pointed out, we are in an AP English
Language & Composition class.
Would you mind pointing out to me where it says "books" or "literature" or "classics" in there?
Oh, that's right! AP Literature is
next year! That's all about books, isn't it? And we know that because it's actually in the name of the class, you know, we signed up for AP English Language & Composition because we were under the impression that we would spend more time writing than reading (not because we thought there wouldn't be
any reading), but that was really dumb of us because excellent writing can't be done without reading, right?
I mean, how
can't you impress the AP board with your essays when you're reading a book that has such sentences as "'Dat's just de same as me 'cause mah tongue is in mah friend's mouf.'"
"Oh, Odessa, not every sentence is written like that." Fine. But that's how quite a bit of it is. And again, if one of us started talking like that, there would be quite the conversation with that student.
My point is, these books have a place in the world, and that place may even be at school. But we are learning more about the importance of reading a book than how to write an essay, which is really what this class is based on. And if we must read, then we must read. But is there no possible way for us to read something that sounds intelligent? We're not reading any of the classics that have language that fits the language we're expected to be writing in. If reading is so directly related to writing, why isn't there more evidence of that in the class?
There's always going to be complaints about book choices. Always, always, always. You just have to decide which complaints you want to pay attention to.
And if mine doesn't fit into that, then fine. This is more my way of putting all my complaints about these books where I can see them. But don't discount them, and certainly don't try to argue with me. Because whether you like it or not, I have made valid points. These books have good aspects to them, but assigning them in such an impactful way does not help us the way I think you're trying to.
I hope your day is as awesome as you.