Deconolisation of literature curriculum

Thank God I’m not the only one who found Austen boring! Northangar Abbey at 12 was a big turn off. Ditto David Copperfield at same age. Loved Great Expectations however. I think some books should be kept for later and I agree I can’t see boys enjoying Austen. Bit different at degree level, however, as we learn a lot about the style of writing at the time and social backgrounds. I read a lot of Russian authors which gave me a great insight into Russian society. So I would say there is room for Austen and Toni Morrison. Probably very interesting and informative to study and compare the two. Not sure how many students these days would pay (or not in Scotland) to study Austen on her own.

Not worth getting wound up about. But I question whether the study of literature at university is primarily for enjoyment. It's surely about developing critical skills applicable to all kinds of writing.

Jane Austen is a pillar of the literary canon. Her influence on the novel form is crucial and her style a major influence on many subsequent writers. No serious student of English Literature could omit her novels.

My favourite Edith W. book is Ethan Frome. There’s also a film of it, starring Liam Neeson. So sad.

I wouldn't read any of them out of choice.
I liked Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre when I was w teen, I think.
The rest leave me cold.

That’s a wonderful story about your grandfather Coastpath

I like Dickens. The names he gives his characters are excellent though i accept many find them irritating, Gradgrind is a favourite
Are his male characters any less drawn as caricatures than his females

Coastpath

My grandfather only ever read one novel in his life.

He was ill and confined to bed so asked my grandma to bring him a book. She brought him Wuthering Heights which he read from cover to cover. When he'd finished he put it down and said, "I will never read another novel as long as I live."

I'm not sure if he hated it or if he felt he'd peaked.

... I love this!

My grandfather only ever read one novel in his life.

He was ill and confined to bed so asked my grandma to bring him a book. She brought him Wuthering Heights which he read from cover to cover. When he'd finished he put it down and said, "I will never read another novel as long as I live."

I'm not sure if he hated it or if he felt he'd peaked.

As for Austen, I imagine her writing the more unsavoury parts of Mansfield Park with very pursed lips indeed.

I've been thinking about this..

I don't think that the author who could come up with a double entendre about 'Rears and Vices' in the Georgian navy could be altogether 'pursed lipped'...

I agree. I think it's the writing style. I prefer Wharton to Austen.



Have you ever tried reading Fanny Burney or Maria Edgeworth? I quite like them for their observations on the culture of their era, but they aren't half wordy! Austen can say it in a quarter of the time. But then, I'm a history freak. They did write lively letters and journals though.

IMO Trollope was good at female characters. Hardly any of the Dickens clichés or cardboard cut-outs there. Madame Max Goesler in the Palliser series is a prime example. Glencora was largely her own woman, too, and I have to say I adore the scheming little Lizzie Eustace. The Eustace Diamonds, one of the Palliser series, is IMO a v good stand-alone read.

IMO Trollope understood women a lot better than many of his era. One thing that’s always stuck with me is his description - in the delicate language required at the time - of the disgust a girl feels when been virtually forced to kiss a man she loathes but is being pressured into marrying - and wondering how she’s ever going to be able to ‘drink the cup to the very dregs.’
(That is Lucinda Roanoke in The Eustace Diamonds.)

MaizieD

^Oh I do get it, but if I've got to read about it, I'd rather read The Age of Mirth by Edith Wharton. All that drawing room gossip stuff does my head in.^

What 'drawing room gossip' would that be? Austen writes about people, relationships and the world they exist in. Isn't that what novels are about?

I like Wharton, too. I can't see that her themes are much different from Austen's.

I agree. I think it's the writing style. I prefer Wharton to Austen.

MaizieD

I can't abide Fanny, either, but Mansfield Park is still an interesting novel, if you can get past her...

Another vote for Dickens here, too. His social commentary is so good, his characters cover such a wide range and some of his writing is superb. We're just not used to long, long, novels these days, but he was writing for a different audience from us.

I do like 19th C novels, though, particularly the female authors.

Cranford makes me cry...

Confession time now.

I cannot abide Wuthering Heights. Not sure that I'm terribly keen on Jane Eyre, either...

^Another vote for Dickens here, too. His social commentary is so good, his characters cover such a wide range and some of his writing is superb. We're just not used to long, long, novels these days, but he was writing for a different audience from us."

Not just a different audience, he wrote in instalments which by their very nature, lengthened the novel. I doubt people would have the patience these days for the "To Be Continued..." style of writing.

Personally, I love it. That's why I've read just about all his novels twice - to catch what I missed the first time. And Bleak House, I've read three times.

... with you on Wuthering Heights, and I can't quite put my finger on why...

Oh I do get it, but if I've got to read about it, I'd rather read The Age of Mirth by Edith Wharton. All that drawing room gossip stuff does my head in.

What 'drawing room gossip' would that be? Austen writes about people, relationships and the world they exist in. Isn't that what novels are about?

I like Wharton, too. I can't see that her themes are much different from Austen's.

Witzend

Presumably Jane Austen’s ‘obsession’ with marriage, Gagajo, was down to the fact that, for the sort of girls she wrote about, unless they had money, a single future meant either being a very likely unwanted burden on relatives, or going out as a governess - probably an even bleaker prospect.

Poor old Charlotte (P&P) chose to marry the ghastly Mr Collins rather than end up a dependent old maid - a prospect even her brothers feared.

And Jane Fairfax (Emma) dreaded going out as a governess - IIRC she likened it (in not quite as many words) to the slave trade.

Oh I do get it, but if I've got to read about it, I'd rather read The Age of Mirth by Edith Wharton. All that drawing room gossip stuff does my head in.

Even better is The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, showing a bad marriage. Or The Scarlet Letter by Hawthorn about adultery.

MaizieD

Grandma70s

One of my sons had Pride and Prejudice as a GCSE set book. I don’t think he even read it.

Did he pass his GCSE?

He got a D for Eng Lit. Virtually all his other GCSEs were A (this was before A* existed). He says D was a pass, but I can’t say I agree. I do sympathise about Jane Austen, though - I can’t stand her myself, and I have a degree in English.

Parsley3

Dickens describes one of his characters as the remains of a fine woman and this is now a running joke between Mr P and me.
As for Austen, I imagine her writing the more unsavoury parts of Mansfield Park with very pursed lips indeed. I enjoy her work but I approve of universities updating the curriculum. Outlooks need to be widened.

You've not read her letters then?

The 18th C was quite robust, even though it might not have been expressed quite as explicitly as it is now.

Once again, the university is not 'updating the curriculum'. It is a one year course which studies one author at a time. The author is changed every year.

Maizie I completely agree with you on Wuthering Heights. I loathe it and call it Wittering Shites. It is very clever and probably one of the earliest forays into multi narrative novels. However all that dialogue from nursey leaves me cold. None of the characters are sympathetic. Phew. So glad I got that out. ?

Dickens describes one of his characters as the remains of a fine woman and this is now a running joke between Mr P and me.
As for Austen, I imagine her writing the more unsavoury parts of Mansfield Park with very pursed lips indeed. I enjoy her work but I approve of universities updating the curriculum. Outlooks need to be widened.

I can't abide Fanny, either, but Mansfield Park is still an interesting novel, if you can get past her...

Another vote for Dickens here, too. His social commentary is so good, his characters cover such a wide range and some of his writing is superb. We're just not used to long, long, novels these days, but he was writing for a different audience from us.

I do like 19th C novels, though, particularly the female authors.

Cranford makes me cry...

Confession time now.

I cannot abide Wuthering Heights. Not sure that I'm terribly keen on Jane Eyre, either...

Grandmabatty

It's just as well we are all different. I'm not a great fan of Jane Austen and cannot abide Fanny in Mansfield Park. I do like Dickens descriptive language but not keen on his view of women. As a social commentary, his novels are great. I love Jane Eyre but I am not keen on her other novels. The Toni Morrison instead of Austen tale isn't a new one. I think I commented on it before.

... I agree with you about Dickens' view of women. Plump and homely, keeping a good 'hearth', or poor and waif-like but with impeccable good nature (and morals). Stereotyped - but he did seem to understand Nancy - she was more realistic. And I suppose Mrs Gamp was a tad representative of those legions of untrained 'nurses' in early Victorian times.

Apparently, he shocked the more genteel people who had no idea of how the other half lived... which he discovered on his nightly walks around London.

... I can't abide Fanny either. In fact, Mansfield Park... meh!

It's just as well we are all different. I'm not a great fan of Jane Austen and cannot abide Fanny in Mansfield Park. I do like Dickens descriptive language but not keen on his view of women. As a social commentary, his novels are great. I love Jane Eyre but I am not keen on her other novels. The Toni Morrison instead of Austen tale isn't a new one. I think I commented on it before.

Presumably Jane Austen’s ‘obsession’ with marriage, Gagajo, was down to the fact that, for the sort of girls she wrote about, unless they had money, a single future meant either being a very likely unwanted burden on relatives, or going out as a governess - probably an even bleaker prospect.

Poor old Charlotte (P&P) chose to marry the ghastly Mr Collins rather than end up a dependent old maid - a prospect even her brothers feared.

And Jane Fairfax (Emma) dreaded going out as a governess - IIRC she likened it (in not quite as many words) to the slave trade.

We are just over the moors from Howarth and often called in to the Brontë museum with the children who were fascinated by the small clothes and tiny handwriting.
Good tea shoppes and ice cream if my memory serves.
Goes without saying I’m more of a Hebden Bridge kind of woman but - those moors are a wonder

GagaJo

I do happen to dislike Austen. I find her boring. Thank goodness I've never had to teach her. I've taught Dickens and I dislike him, too. Not that impressed with Macbeth either, although Lady M's ok.

I do like Anne Brontë, and love teaching The Merchant of Venice.

Personal taste I know, but Austen and the obsession with marriage ?. I know... social commentary, but still. Not for me.

I've taught Dickens and I dislike him, too.

<<< pops head up above the parapet >>>

In fact, I can understand why people don't like his writing. But I've been hooked for years. And read most of his work twice.

... and my late father was so fascinated with the Brontë family, he joined The Brontë Society, regularly attending ' Brontë events' in full costume whilst his wife (my stepmother) and I took weekend trips to Paris.