Which Books Should Be Required Reading in Schools?

[lacktheknack]

CRIME AND PUNISMENT by Dostoevsky
WHITE FANG by Jack London
DEATH AND THE DERVISH by Me?a Selimović
THE USE OF MAN by Aleksandar Ti?ma
FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS by Ernest Hemingway
THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA by Ernest Hemingway
NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR by George Orwell

A bit heavy I know, but each one of these is a masterpiece. I choose these (there are many more authors and books I could have included) because I think they provide very important lessons about nature, war, morality and overall struggle for freedom and humanity.

This sounds like a fantastic way to make sure that the majority of your students learn absolutely nothing from you except to hate literature with an undying passion for the rest of their life.

This.

We had free-reading blocks when I was in school. And people actually read in these blocks, because they actually got to read stuff they wanted to read.

Half my class never actually finished "To Kill A Mockingbird" because they were required to. But some of those people who could not be assed to read that did read - and finish - books from Victor Hugo, Dante Aligheiri, and there was even a Leo Tolstoy in there, because teens will read anything as long as they WANT to.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Well that's a mouythful of a question. The idea of a required reading is to one have a single source material all students are reading that illustrate a concept or set of literary concepts you're trying to teach. Whether it be themes, narrative tools, tropes, character type or styles.

SO what would recommend. Well any book can be used... that's just it. I would however say Huck finn should be on the list since it also provides an interesting point of what it means to view a story set in an earlier time, written by someone from a later time. It's a great lesson that you sometimes have to discard some of your more modern notions and put yourself in the mindset and timespace of the writer and the intended audience.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

"Down and Out in London and Paris" By George Orwell
A Great look at the society of the early 20th Century and the perception of the homeless/how easy it can be to become homeless. Also I love his writing style.

Harry Potter for the younger classes - We read the first book in school and it was an easy, good read.

For older years I would say both 1984 and Brave New World, as they give great almost prophetic warnings of two completely different ways society at the time could turn into dystopias with the improvement of technology. Bizarrely we've kind of managed to both avoid, and become both those dystopias. - Although I'm quite hypocritical in saying this because I've never read Brave New World myself. That's something I should really get around to...

 

[beastro]

WOULD READ:
"All Quiet on the Western Front" by Erich Maria Remarque. A classic war novel that depicts how war can destroy a man. The book shows how the modern idea of nationalism and the wars that result from it leave the idealistic as disillusioned and numb.

Good condemnation of the idealistic.

Issue is that people focus too much on one angle of nationalism almost willfully ignoring the other side, like how it helped nations resist the Axis in WWII and their talk of unifying East Asia and Europe, and later, Communism.

 

[JustAnotherAardvark]

Other books? Ha, I'm tempted to say The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand... love it or hate it, people will have a reaction. It may kill them though... at least I'm not suggesting Atlas Shrugged...

"We the Living"; probably her best book.

Makes all her primary points without resorting to hundreds of pages of exposition, and is actually a very good read.

"The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" by Carl Sagan.

Definitely.

I would add Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" and Haldeman's rebuttal, "The Forever War".

 

[Buffoon1980]

Other books? Ha, I'm tempted to say The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand... love it or hate it, people will have a reaction. It may kill them though... at least I'm not suggesting Atlas Shrugged...

"We the Living"; probably her best book.

Makes all her primary points without resorting to hundreds of pages of exposition, and is actually a very good read.

Yeah, I've heard that. Haven't actually read it myself. But for me The Fountainhead is genuinely my favourite fiction book ever written, so in that case I can handle the hundreds of pages of exposition Atlas Shrugged, not so much.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

A worrying thing that happened was the vaccine that leaves a scar on your arm (can't remember what it is for off the top of my head) was done in 2 of the canteens ... Always struck me as little bit on the wrong side of health safety guidelines.

Ah, the BCG! Hell... I come from one of 2 counties that scrapped it, and so I had to have it at the ripe age of 25. Luckily for me technology had advanced by then and it no longer leaves a scar!

 

[Zen Bard]

"Hamlet" by William Shakespeare - For historical and literary significance. It IS part of the foundation of modern culture. And at least it would help people understand "Sons of Anarchy" better.

"1984" by George Orwell - Doublespeak and thoughtpolice are real. Recognize it and understand the significance.

"Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury - Contrary to popular belief, the book is not about censorship, but about the dumbing down and consumerization of modern culture. It's also incredibly prophetic (the main character's wife spends most of her time watching "her friends" (reality TV) on the "walls" (big screen TVs) and tunes out the world by putting "seashells" (headphones) in her ears.)

"Logan's Run" by William F Nolan and George Clayton Johnson - What would happen if a Youth Rebellion actually succeeded? Not necessarily what you might think.

"Neuromancer" by William Gibson - A great example of modern writing that deals with very 21st century concerns (even though it's slightly dated).

"The Dumbest Generation" by Mark Baurlein - Read it and aspire to NOT be this way.

 

[CeeBod]

I'd agree with others that a bad selection will actively put kids off reading even more than they already are!

Having said that, if we are going to have some required reading I'd add in one from every genre, including non-fiction. My schooldays completely turned me off period dramas for the rest of my life, because every damn book we had to read seemed to be about wealthy socialites set in the 17th and 18th century, doing the most mundane and boring things I could ever imagine! How was I ever supposed to be interested in that kind of literature? Variety of any kind would have been a big plus.

Non-Fiction: A short history of Nearly Everything, Bill Bryson - I'd recommend that to everyone actually, not just kids. It should be required reading for anyone wanting any form of public office, considering how lacking in knowledge of reality most of those people seem to be!

Fantasy: LOTR, Tolkien (obviously!)

War/Military/History: Catch 22, Joseph Heller

Sci-fi: Neuromancer, William Gibson

Comedy: Pretty much any by Terry Pratchett. Night Watch would probably be my favorite, but not necessarily a good place to start?

Oh and a collection of short stories wouldn't be a bad one to force kids to read - even in the days where school was doing its best to put me off reading completely, I would happily read through a sci-fi anthology of short stories in a single night - it's also likely to be a lot easier to set homework around a complete short story rather than on a chapter of a novel that feels to most of the class like it's been going on forever without going anywhere!

 

[Vicarious Reality]

Desperation by Stephen King
The Shadow Out of Time by Lovecraft
From the Earth to the Moon By Jules Verne

That is what i can recall reading in school, no mandatory books

 

[Ima Lemming]

The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents by Terry Pratchett.

Not just because I want something colorful in the curriculum and it's my favorite Discworld (so far), but I appreciate any story that delves into the evils of being hiveminded.

Hell, in my dream world that book would be required reading before people could go on the Internet.

 

[Dalisclock]

WOULD READ:
"All Quiet on the Western Front" by Erich Maria Remarque. A classic war novel that depicts how war can destroy a man. The book shows how the modern idea of nationalism and the wars that result from it leave the idealistic as disillusioned and numb.

I liked that book, but I can just imagine some angry parent complaining because they see it as "Disrespectful of the military" or "Defeatist". Same with Catch-22, though Catch-22 is kind of crazy non-linear anyway.

I'm a jerk and nominate Dune as mandatory. While it's one of sci-fi classics, it's incredibly dull to read through - Gibson can get there too at points on cyberpunk side of fence.

'Ulysses'. It's not going to be for everyone, but you'll be opening the eyes of a percentage in a way that few other works can.

Strangely enough, I was gonna be a Jackass and recommend Gravity's Rainbow by Pynchon. And then at the end, require an essay explaining what that book was about, just to be even more of a Jerk.

I liked Gravity's Rainbow, but it's pretty dense and bizarre. I'm pretty sure Pynchon doesn't know what it was about. I can only imagine he started writing, then eventually when he got tired of writing, put in a bunch of random stories and then topped it off with a bizarre non-ending before sending off to the publisher.

Thought the gratuitous sex would probably provoke more angry parents then anything else.

 

[Anti-American Eagle]

Ulysses, by James Joyce.
I am a Pole (And so can you!), by Stephen Colbert.

For maximum effectiveness they need to be presented as being of equal literary value. Beyond that, I would say the next two should be required reading.

Nineteen Eighty Four, by George Orwell.
Farenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury.

 

[theSovietConnection]

None. I would get rid of the idea of required reading entirely, and simply put in place required reading times. Kids would be allowed to read what they choose. Harry Potter? Sure. Vampire Academy? Why not. The Bible? Whatever lights your fire. It's not about handfeeding them philosophy. It's about establishing a general love of literacy to begin with. You'll never manage to teach kids through reading if they hate reading.

Nobody should be forced to read anything, and especially not children, since you'll instill a burning hatred of literature in them for a good while.

I have to go with these two points here. I don't think required reading is going to do anything to help make children, and by extension their adult selves, want to read. Forcing them to read something they don't like is just going to create problems, and just instill, as 09philj said, a hatred of literature.

What I propose instead is an idea I've seen posted online before. Take a collection of random books, wrap them up, and write a basic summary of what the book is about on the wrapping without including the title or author of the book. Have them pick a book based on what plot interests them while at the same time potentially introducing them to authors they may not have read otherwise.

I'd quite frankly rather see a kid enjoy reading because they want to read and enjoy it, not because they've been Stockholm Syndromed into it.

 

[Cryselle]

When I was in school there were three books I had to read that pretty much turned me off reading entirely for several years before I could find the joy in it again...

Lord of the Flies (a jaded and bitter take on humanity written by someone who just watched the horrors of WW2)
Animal Farm (heavy handed, uneducational, not even approaching his best work)
Great Expectations (most boring thing I've ever read, I think my Calculus textbook was wittier and more entertaining)

All considered to be 'important' and 'influential' books, but holy crow were they miserable reads. My teacher for Animal Farm admitted that he didn't even know why the book was considered great, but he gave me detention for not agreeing it was a masterpiece because the teaching manual said it was.

 

[Dalisclock]

If we're talking America, I'd say the constitution.

But regardless of place, I'd say the New Testament and the Quran. They're kind of influential.

Hey, if the New Testament is required, the Old Testament has to be as well. Though my tests on the OT would have questions like "Do you feel that God was justified in ruining Job's life? Explain your answer" or "Which version of the creation in genesis do you feel makes more sense? How do you reconcile the differences in the narrative?" and finally "What was the true sin of Sodom and do you feel it justified genocide? Explain your answer".

I'd pretty sure I'd be fired from teaching that pretty fast. Then again, if you're gonna teach religious texts as literature, don't be surprised when someone treats it as literature.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

the golden transcripts of mormon denial (they have released official images of the "stones" recently, if only to sooth the worries of those heathens who start learning stuff from the internet) Too soon? If we don't show the youth how insane we can be, they will be less prepared to avoid these allegedly enticing group meetings.

 

[Humdawg]

Young kids should be given a choice of what to read. A trip to the school library, and twenty or so minutes of reading in their classes after. If a book is to be read by all the class, let's focus more on what would be appealing to them rather than what's influential. When I was in the 5th grade, we read Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, The Twits by Roald Dahl, and a random mystery I can't remember. What I do remember is that the class enjoyed those books as a whole.
Teach kids to enjoy reading before having them read classics.

As for Shakespeare, I never had an issue with reading the plays. But yes, they need to be watched as well. Every English teacher I had made sure to put on a movie adaption of whatever play we studied. Which should be mandatory everywhere.

 

[Ima Lemming]

I also think schools should have kids read some straight-up terrible books. I've always felt like schools do a bad job teaching kids how to criticize stuff because they take a "You can only say nice things!" or "I don't care if you hate the book, write a ten page essay on which character in Great Gatsby best symbolizes the American dream!", which leads to adults who defend their opinions with circular reasoning like "I hate this movie because it sucks".

And for that, I nominate Dangerous Days of Daniel X, which still stands as the worst book I've read.

 

[trikos]

great question boss! if i would be a school teacher i recommend my students to read a book that teaches about character because character is a thing that can build a personality of politeness. and if i recommended any other book he/she can learn that easily but they didn't know about culture and politeness. so tell me what is the benefit to recommend this kind of book ? which is better.