English Literature
- Thread starter oppp7
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You learn it because someday you may be on Jeopardy... No, really its only useful if you want to become a writer or focus on the arts or history. If anything it will help you later in life when you will undoubtedly have to write. Unless you are flipping burgers or pouring drinks the rest of your life. In which case have fun not writing or reading anything.
When i applied to university i told them i had a Higher C in English (literature being taught in that course). The university then said that it doesn't matter because it is not an important subject for Mechanical Engineering. Then, low and behold, a few years later a lecturer turned around to us and said that if we wanted to get anywhere in life we HAD to have good english skills.
Without good english skills it can be very difficult to give public speeches or reports on new products or discoveries.
Having good english skills can be very useful in all forms of life. Writing is just one of them. Videogames are another.
Without good english skills it can be very difficult to give public speeches or reports on new products or discoveries.
Having good english skills can be very useful in all forms of life. Writing is just one of them. Videogames are another.
Because:
1) Some people will want to specialise in the subject at university. (I did.) By your same argument, why do their bother teaching useless algebra in mathematics (instead of how to balance your bank account or measure the proportions of a room), pointless chemistry in science (instead of how to fix a car or mix a good Vodka Martini) or idiotic travel and tourism in geography (instead of how to read a map or use a compass).
2) Books are a good study of social history. If I want to know what the Victorian era was like from a social perspective, there's a myriad of fictional novels that will tell me the attitudes and social expectations of the time whilst also being far more entertaining than your average historical tome.
3) Reading a lot of books expands your vocabulary and understanding of how language can manipulate you. This is essential to anybody who wants to be a writer, regardless of genre.
That being said, I do think the school curriculum (at least in England) could do with an overhaul in the Literature department. I studied Shakespeare and Hardy solidly until A-Level, and it was only discovering Oscar Wilde in my AS-Level classes that convinced me I could study Literature at degree level without wanting to stab my own eyes out from sheer boredom.
1) Some people will want to specialise in the subject at university. (I did.) By your same argument, why do their bother teaching useless algebra in mathematics (instead of how to balance your bank account or measure the proportions of a room), pointless chemistry in science (instead of how to fix a car or mix a good Vodka Martini) or idiotic travel and tourism in geography (instead of how to read a map or use a compass).
2) Books are a good study of social history. If I want to know what the Victorian era was like from a social perspective, there's a myriad of fictional novels that will tell me the attitudes and social expectations of the time whilst also being far more entertaining than your average historical tome.
3) Reading a lot of books expands your vocabulary and understanding of how language can manipulate you. This is essential to anybody who wants to be a writer, regardless of genre.
That being said, I do think the school curriculum (at least in England) could do with an overhaul in the Literature department. I studied Shakespeare and Hardy solidly until A-Level, and it was only discovering Oscar Wilde in my AS-Level classes that convinced me I could study Literature at degree level without wanting to stab my own eyes out from sheer boredom.
Because, in order to appear educated, you have to have read and watched [sub]And maybe one day have played[/sub] certain things. And it isn't useless. It introduces young readers to a number of excellent writers they may not have otherwise tried. The works tend to satirize something or take a interesting stance on an issue, giving students a whole new perspective. While they can be elitist (No one has given me a good reason why Watchmen shouldn't be in the curriculum.) schools have good intentions when giving you these works.
Also, Shakespeare is win. Period.
Also, Shakespeare is win. Period.
It's useful. It's interesting. It improves vocabulary. It expands your mindset. The same reason they teach philosophy. Unless you don't do that. Do you?
You only do English Literature? Try Russian. That's harder. In order to like it, try finding an author you enjoy.
You only do English Literature? Try Russian. That's harder. In order to like it, try finding an author you enjoy.
Because every job requires a deep analytical knowledge of Shakespeare, duh. God, don't you know anything!?
That should be in sarcasm pink, but I dunno how to do it.
Real answer...I dunno. Why do they teach Maths beyond the basics? Or science at all? What about R.E, Geography, History, P.E? Truth is...ALL school subjects are useless unless you want a job in that field. So they inbue kids with all the knowledge they can until they give them a choice...even then I dunno why English, Science, Maths and P.E are still forced.
The only subjects that are universally useless, as in they couldn't help anyone and are utterly pointless, are Religious Education and Physical Education. If you wanna be a priest...read the Bible. you don't need to study 5 years of every world religion. P.E is, I swear, only there to torture fat/weak children and make them feel inferior. And about needing the grades for a job? Yeah, P.E teachers are only hired by how much of an asshole/potential pedophile they can be...hence why all P.E teachers are assholes/potential pedophiles.
That should be in sarcasm pink, but I dunno how to do it.
Real answer...I dunno. Why do they teach Maths beyond the basics? Or science at all? What about R.E, Geography, History, P.E? Truth is...ALL school subjects are useless unless you want a job in that field. So they inbue kids with all the knowledge they can until they give them a choice...even then I dunno why English, Science, Maths and P.E are still forced.
The only subjects that are universally useless, as in they couldn't help anyone and are utterly pointless, are Religious Education and Physical Education. If you wanna be a priest...read the Bible. you don't need to study 5 years of every world religion. P.E is, I swear, only there to torture fat/weak children and make them feel inferior. And about needing the grades for a job? Yeah, P.E teachers are only hired by how much of an asshole/potential pedophile they can be...hence why all P.E teachers are assholes/potential pedophiles.
Because they want the nonstupid people to lead a happy and nonignorant life.
You are welcome to grap a broom and sweep the floors so we dont have to get dirty shoes at our important workplaces.
You could join in in the reading and improve your vocabulary your rethoric skills, your capability of analysing situations and reading people.
These are all indirectly taught by literature. A humanistic education is the greatest gift a somewhat civilized country can give you. You better be happy about it.
This is what makes the difference between that fat ass i call when my toilet is broken and an engineer in head of a huge project.
You are welcome to grap a broom and sweep the floors so we dont have to get dirty shoes at our important workplaces.
You could join in in the reading and improve your vocabulary your rethoric skills, your capability of analysing situations and reading people.
These are all indirectly taught by literature. A humanistic education is the greatest gift a somewhat civilized country can give you. You better be happy about it.
This is what makes the difference between that fat ass i call when my toilet is broken and an engineer in head of a huge project.
Because it's a really, really, really easy GCSE...oppp7 said:
Seriously. English Literature is the easiest subject to ace. State opinion, back up opinion, cite evidence for opinion. Rinse and repeat.
Also English is serious business. It's important to see how the English language has evolved and why we say the things we say. It helps to see past the words and into the various connotations of text.
Also some people enjoy it. I could easily say the same thing about mathematics.
Literature has indirect benefits. It allows you to string together a coherent sentence and not sound like a total idiot. It is something that just gets picked up the more you are exposed to it.
Welp, this experiment where I try to be brief has shown hilarious results. I guess I'm fated to writing much more than I need to, or else people miss important details. Such as how I'm talking about "Why do schools teach us English literature every year?" instead of "Why do schools teach English literature at all?"
2. This is true, but still, wouldn't require the 5 or more classes I've had to take over the years.
3. That stuff was easy enough to learn in 1 class and shouldn't require the many classes I've taken to get it.
OT: I know that, but what the hell kind of problem could knowing how imagery was used in A Thousand Splendid Suns help with?
For the most part, yes, it's English, although my most recent class could have been a different group. But the other choices were just different places, rather than different genres.
And the skills you mentioned? My year and a half on here has done more to develop them than 5 or more classes of English literature.
The rest of you guys (when this post was made I could see as far down as Azure) didn't say anything against what I said or said things I already answered a few times.
Doesn't really make it necessary for those that don't.Kasurami said:
That answer goes to "why go to school?" instead of "why does the system force us to learn the same irrelevent shit year after year?"LightspeedJack said:
Not really, but most of it is. And in college I did have a choice, but I don't see the problem going away even if they mixed it up.Meanmoose said:
So if we don't become writers we become fast food slaves?dsmops2003 said:
I'm talking about analyzing literature, not argument skills. Those I can understand, although any more than 2 classes seems excessive.SketchyFK said:
1. But not everyone does. And I didn't say that other things weren't pointless, but my point is that this keeps getting forced on us despite being mostly irrelevent. AKA, while chemistry gives you skills you probably won't use, English tells you how to enjoy things that you probably already made up your mind on.Blitzwarp said:
2. This is true, but still, wouldn't require the 5 or more classes I've had to take over the years.
3. That stuff was easy enough to learn in 1 class and shouldn't require the many classes I've taken to get it.
You pretty much put my best counter argument in that paragraph: when I was "introduced" to things I would "enjoy" reading, they left out entire GENRES that would actually get me into the subject. All they've done is leave a bitter taste in my mouth where most famous writers are.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
LIES AND SLANDER!RAKtheUndead said:
OT: I know that, but what the hell kind of problem could knowing how imagery was used in A Thousand Splendid Suns help with?
People have different tastes in books. And the fact that (as far as I can remember) I have NEVER read a single science fiction novel aside from the Giver shows that the first point doesn't apply. The second 2 I can understand, although as I said, doesn't require 5 or more classes to teach. And they never taught me how to write, just write aside from papers (which isn't really a literature skill aside from the subject matter).Akalabeth said:
A good bit of that was subjective in importance/truth, but I get what you're saying. And I am taking philosophy.darth.pixie said:
For the most part, yes, it's English, although my most recent class could have been a different group. But the other choices were just different places, rather than different genres.
The problem is that most of the things they taught me was stuff that is so obvious I spent half the time unsure what I was writing about until I realized that the blatantly obvious imagery was what we were writing about. Not hidden metaphors or symbolism, but the fact that the author used plants several times gave the story a nature theme.Fetzenfisch said:
And the skills you mentioned? My year and a half on here has done more to develop them than 5 or more classes of English literature.
The rest of you guys (when this post was made I could see as far down as Azure) didn't say anything against what I said or said things I already answered a few times.
The reason P.E. is compulsary is for the benefit of your health; I sincerely doubt that it has anything to do with seperating the strong/athletic from the weak/fat. Your description of a P.E. teacher sounds a bit stereotypical. Any flaws in Physical Education is because of the teacher and not the subject. I'm chubby and was during my years in Secondary School; still I had a P.E. teacher that understood how to balance teams and treat everyone fairly.ReservoirAngel said:
Bottom Line: P.E. is compulsary because keeping fit benefits your health.
Religious Education is a core subject (or at least was at my secondary school) because it's important. Why is it important? We live in a society with a great variety of colours and creeds. Religious Education informs us of the beliefs of other religions in the hope that we'll understand them and tolerate them.
This whole cultural intolerance to Muslims (and indeed anyone remotely Indian looking)is from a generation who are poorly education on religion.
Bottom Line: Intolerance to religion is a big problem. You've got intolerance not only towards Muslims; but also lots of Indian people regardless of their religious followings. Religion is employed to teach cultural tolerance.
So you having not very good teachers, or visiting low standart classes or schools makes literature useless , as stated above?oppp7 said:
Right now I can't think of any job that would require knowledge of English literature.LightspeedJack said:
Well, except for English teacher or literature professor, and both answers are pretty redundant. Like lawyers, they're what I call "self-sustaining professions".
On Topic:
Just survive. Maybe you'll get lucky, who knows? In our English class we had Frankenstein, Hamlet (which is actually really good once you got used to the language), and Cal (a youth novel about the IRA).
On the other hand, we got bored enough for two classes in our German course.
