Skip to main content

Thoughts on Required Reading, Part 2

Last year, I did a post about my thoughts on required reading. This is a rough follow-up to that.

It's that time of year again - the start of a new semester! I know my school starts later than most, so if you're a student, you've probably already started. But I just started my classes a couple of days ago...which explains why my Friday post is going up on a day that's definitely not Friday. (Oh, well.) It also means that it's the perfect time to talk about required reading again.

Quick recap of the last post: I was required to reread PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, which I'd originally read on my own and loved, and hated it. Update: last semester, I was required to reread THE GREAT GATSBY, another book that I'd originally loved. But this time, the required reread made me love the book even more. But I can't put my finger on anything that made rereading the two books different, except for the fact that I already knew I wanted to reread Gatsby at some point. I guess it just goes to show that having something be required doesn't mean it's not fun to read.

After I finished rereading Gatsby, I was assigned THE PROFESSOR'S HOUSE by Willa Cather, a book that I'd never even heard of before the class. And I'll be frank: I wasn't liking it. It didn't seem to have a plot, I couldn't really distinguish the characters from each other, and it was incredibly boring.

Naturally, I went into class discussion with low expectations. I didn't like the book, so I didn't see why I'd like anything to do with the book. But then, something weird happened: as I listened to my professor's explanation of the book and heard ideas from my classmates, I actually liked the book more. I didn't love it, but it really made me appreciate the book more and understand why so many other people like it.

Which got me thinking about something that I know I'm not the first to discuss: what is the role of analysis in enjoying a book? I'm thinking specifically about a school setting, but I'm sure it can apply to leisure reading as well. I used to think that breaking a book down and analyzing it just made it really hard to get through and destroyed all hope of actually enjoying a book. Now, I'm not so sure.

I think that, depending on the circumstances, analysis can both help and hurt someone's enjoyment of a book. This is probably different for everyone, but for me, the kind of analysis that really helps me like something is mostly a matter of clarification. If the analysis is something that can help me understand the book better, then great, I want to know about it. When I start to have problems is when you dig through the book with a metaphorical magnifying glass, searching for subtle patterns and hidden meanings. I'm sure some people love things like that, but I'm perfectly happy leaving them alone.

What do you think about required reading? Has analyzing a book ever made you like it more? What are some of the books you've been required to read in school? Tell me in the comments!

Comments

  1. I agree that analysis can be either helpful or hurtful, depending on what's discussed! I've only ever done required readings (in terms of novels, that is) for a class called Genre Fiction. We read an Agatha Christie novel once, which I enjoyed, but analyzing it for an essay made me see different sides of it that makes me love it even more. I think I'm lucky in that I didn't have classics as required readings in school, so I'm free to like/dislike them on my own terms!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've never read any Agatha Christie! I really want to read some of her books, though. And I'm really glad that you liked analyzing it! Analysis has definitely helped me see parts of novels that I never would have gotten to otherwise - but sometimes, I just want to read something casually and can't bring myself to care about those things.

      Delete
  2. I think part of this, for me at least, has to do with age and experience. I HATED breaking down books in high school. But in college, I actually found it interesting (I also didn't do as much of it, so maybe I was less sick of it?) I LIKE looking for themes while I read, and I LIKE noticing parallels in writing (in POV, in early/later, etc). I don't enjoy breaking down things like imagery and symbolism. So I guess for me at least it depends on the book, and it depends on the discussion. If the analysis is centered more on the kinds of topics I enjoy thinking about --- the story crafting and development itself --- rather than the things that I DON'T enjoy, I'm all for it!

    (As I'm writing this, I'm noticing a terrible relationship between what I'm interested in analyzing and what I'm good/bad at writing. I hate discussing imagery and symbolism, and I gloss over character/setting descriptions when I write. I also skim those bits when I read. I think we may have discovered the problem there!)

    ~ Michelle @ FaerieFits

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've definitely had to break down a lot less literature in college, too! And we haven't spent as long on any individual book, which means that I can't get tired of them, either. I definitely agree that some kinds of analysis are more interesting than others! I don't like symbolism either. If it's something pretty obvious, then it can be fun to track it, but the more hidden it is the more I think that my teacher or professor is just making things up. I had a teacher who kept focusing on birds in Macbeth - loved the play, loved the teacher, but I was over that by the end of act 1.

      Those parallels with writing are really interesting! I don't write fiction, so I'd never have even thought about something like that!

      Delete
  3. I think that analysis makes me appreciate a book more. Sometimes a book that doesn't spark much interest in me can seem much better when I see what others appreciate about it---but there's no guarantee it will work that way!

    Nicole @ Feed Your Fiction Addiction

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's exactly what happened to me when I read The Professor's House! I'm glad that you've had books that you've ended up liking more through analysis. It's always nice when a book goes above your expectations for one reason or another!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Most Anticipated Reads: First Half of 2017

Top Ten Tuesday is a weekly feature at The Broke a nd the Bookish . This week's theme : most an ti cipated reads for the first half of 2017. Wow, it's been ages since I've done a most anticipated list! In case you were wondering, my excitement for upcoming books is a s high as ever. It was so hard narrowing this list down to just ten, but I think I figured out the ten books that I'm most excited for in the first half of next year! I have a good mix of sequels and standalones (but onl y one debut, so there won't b e a lo t of overlap wi th the de buts TTT in a few weeks). Here are some of the books that I just can't contain my excitement about : OUR OWN PRIVATE UNIVERSE by Robin Talley - January 31: I love Robin Talley, and this book sounds like it's going to be so good! And it's going to have so much intersectionality! And the colors on that cover are just so aesthetically pleasing. DREAMLAND BURNING by Jennifer Latham - February

Ten Books I Need More People to Love

Top Ten Tuesday is a weekly feature at The Broke and Bookish. This week's theme: Top Ten Underrated/Hidden Gem Books You've Read in the Past Year or So. One of my favorite things to do is get other people to read books I love. That way, I can discuss the boo ks with them, and if I know their tastes well enough, I know I'm givin g them something that they'll love! Unfortunately, I can't do this with the entire world. And that means that there are books that I've really enjoyed t hat just aren't widely loved. Why ? I don't know. And that's why I spend so much time trying to get other people to read them. Here are ten books I've read some what recently that I think really deserve some m ore lo ve. IRON CAST by Destiny Soria: I'll never get tired of diverse books, I 'll never get tired of historical fiction, and I'll never get tired of positive female friendships. When you pu t those all together, they ma ke a book tha

In Which I Consider My Ideal Post Length

I seem to be constantly going back and forth between having too many post ideas and not having enough. The thing is, though, that when I don't have a lot of ideas, it usually just means that I don't think I have enough to say about anything to actually make a post. Which poses an interesting question: how long do posts need to be? In particular, I'm thinking about discussion posts. I have a lot of bookish things I want to discuss, and discussion posts seem like one of the best ways to share my thoughts. But sometimes, my thoughts aren't fully-formed, or aren't that complex. I usually shy away from writing about those ideas because I don't think I have enough material to justify a post. But why don't I think I have enough? I've been a little behind on wr iting posts in advance, so it seem ed like I was running into th is question more and more often. And after a while of thinking about that, I had m y little breakthrough : I'm thinking a