Allusions and Archetypes in Stranger Than Fiction

I know I've posted earlier about using film as part of my existential study in CE Intro to College Literature, notably with the classic Bill Murray/Harold Ramis film Groundhog Day.  However, another excellent contemporary film that can serve the existential lesson plan - Stranger Than Fiction.  As Harold Crick slowly grows to understand how to live the life he has always wanted, or, in the words of Henry David Thoreau, "live the life he has imagined," his understanding of life, fate, choice, and meaning becomes increasingly clear.  Many quotable lines from the film reveal the existential dilemma.  However, repeated viewings unlock other gems for English instruction.  For one, it has the added benefit of a great explanation of literature that could be used in class for a brief introduction to archetypes and allusions.

The lesson is delivered by Professor Hilbert, an English prof and lifeguard, who is tasked with helping Harold Crick deal with his literary existential dilemma.  Harold seeks out an English professor after attempting to convince a psychiatrist he is not schizophrenic.  Thus, because he appears to be in a story being narrated, the doctor posits that his problem might be better solved by a literature teacher.  And, with that the film transitions to a great subplot of literary deconstruction in a role played perfectly by Dustin Hoffman.

In attempting to determine Harold's situation who is "playing the lead character in his own life," Professor Hilbert devises a series of questions from literature to determine which story Harold is living.  He rules out all the classic characters, including "the Gollum," and from there seeks to determine whether Harold is living in a comedy or a tragedy.  In a classic bit of summation, the professor notes, "In a tragedy, you die.  In a comedy, you get hitched."  It's a great bit of dialogue that would make any English teacher smile.  However, beyond that, it's a scene that could be used to engage students in the analysis of literature in a way they might not have fathomed before.

So, from a Mazenglish standpoint, Stranger Than Fiction is an excellent source for witty literature discussion.

Should Students "Read" Shakespeare?

There may be no worse sound in the world for an English teacher than to hear high school students struggle as they mangle, mishandle, and malign the words of the Bard after their teacher has asked them to "be the part of" Romeo or Hamlet or Macbeth or Brutus or any other of the brilliant characters brought to life by the greatest playwright of all time.  This sound is only worsened by the visual of a couple fifteen year old boys using their pens to "act out" the sword fight between Tybalt and Mercutio or Hamlet and Laertes.

Needless to say, I am opposed to students "studying" Shakespeare by reading it aloud and acting it out in class.

Having just finished a study of Hamlet with my AP juniors, I am pleased with their understanding of the play and their knowledge that they have experienced the language as it was meant to be heard - from classically trained actors.  Thus, in the study of Shakespeare I make regular class use of CD/sound recordings, and occasionally well-done movie versions, so my students can appreciate Shakespeare the way it was meant to be.  In Hamlet, for example, I call upon the Arkangel version of the play, as it is an excellent, well-acted, comprehensive edition of the text.  And of course, there is no finer version of the texts than the Folger Library version of the plays.

I do not ask that the students read the plays alone or ahead of time - other than perhaps the scene summaries - because the work was not meant to be read silently.  It's drama.  It's a play for goodness sakes.  It's meant to be performed - heard and/or seen.  Thus, while I will analyze the text in a variety of ways - including some recitation (Hamlet's soliloquies, for example) - I do not expect students to go home and read and understand Shakespeare on their own.  It must be experienced in order to be appreciated, and it must be appreciated in order to be studied effectively.

And it won't be studied or appreciated with a couple of untrained, ineffective, bored, or bumbling teenagers stumbling through the lines in front of class.

Sage of the Stage to Guide on the Side

While I am not generally a fan of "education-ese," I've reached the point in the year with my Honors English 9 freshman where I tell them it is time they leave the nest.  After being the "Sage on the Stage" through numerous novels and units this year, I will now turn the study of a the last novel over to them.  They are pretty much "on their own" as they work their way through Hemingway's classic The Old Man and the Sea.

After teaching them all year about heroes - tragic, epic, and how existential code - as well as allusions, allegory, symbolism, motifs, and all the other components of a general survey lit course, I expect them to apply their knowledge to a scholarly analysis of the novel.  They will work in groups, they will lead the discussion, they will interpret the text.  And, hopefully, I tell them, all the information they glean from their study will coincidentally be all the information that I put on the test.

It's always an exciting time - as they head off on this quest.  And it is always fruitful.  They never fail to disappoint me.  And by the end of the unit they are quite proud to be experts on this work of literature.  They are on their way to becoming "people on whom nothing is lost."

Tips on Writing

I am sharing my favorite tips for superb writing as a part of the Superb Writers’ Blogathon. In partnership with Grammarly grammar checker, this series is bringing helpful hints to aspiring superb writers all across the world wide web.  
 
“It’s about readin’. It’s about writin’. It’s about thinkin’.”

That’s the advice of an old-school professor of rhetoric when asked about the goal of AP Language and Composition and freshman writing classes. In an era of complicated state standards and debates about the Common Core, English teachers need to remind themselves of the basic mission. Of course, many English teachers love the literature side of the job because they love their books and the themes. That handles the reading and the thinking.

But what about the writing?

English teachers are tasked with teaching students how to write - and this is often the most neglected part of the job. In fact, many English instructors don’t consider themselves composition teachers. For one, it’s hard. The reason is obvious: to assess writing, teachers end up buried under mountains of essays. Secondly, teachers too often use writing as simply summative assessment. The kids write an essay to show what they know. And many teachers do not know how to teach the craft – for writing truly is a craft, an art form.

The key to effective writing instruction is the opportunity to write. Students must practice the craft, and they must do so in a variety of genres for a variety of purposes. And it’s OK for writing to simply be practice. A colleague once told me, “If you’re grading everything they’re writing, they are not writing enough.” Whether it’s journaling and free-writing or copying famous speeches and essays in the tradition of the Greeks and Romans, regular practice of writing is integral to success. Thus, students should occasionally just write. One of my favorite free response activities is to read the students a short essay to begin class – generally it’s from the works of Robert Fulghum, the author of All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. His essays are great conversation starters.

So, how do we move from assigning writing to teaching it?

We all want our students' writing to sing. Creating voice where there is little to none, however, is a challenge. Thus, as my AP Language students progress in their writing and ability to argue and deconstruct style, I reach a point where top students wonder if their scores will ever improve. The key to higher scores is often sophistication of language. It's diction, syntax, tone, style, voice, mood, attitude, and command of language. Top papers just sound better. And it's the way they command the language that makes the difference. Thus, breaking the task down into its various components is fundamental. It’s what many people call Six-trait.

To that end, I use an assignment writing op-ed commentary as a way to model effective style/voice, and as a way to help them find their own. We analyze numerous pieces of commentary during the year, as they are great pieces for style and opinion/argumentation. In crafting their own, students are then challenged with finding some topic on which they have something interesting to say. To begin, we do a few short journal entries entitled "Angry Talk," Happy Talk," and "Interesting Talk." They often share their ideas - and even a few choice sentences - as a way of generating ideas and discussion. Often, this assignment produces some of the best writing I see from them all year.

The issue of teaching and grading conventions – that is, grammar and mechanics – is also a tricky aspect of the job. While grammar is only one aspect of effective writing, a poorly edited paper is distracting and ultimately ineffective. Thus, teachers are remiss if they don’t hold students accountable. In a standard, holistic rubric, conventions are certainly considered, but they are not the predominant part of the grade.

Certain practices in writing instruction can improve grammatical fluency. For example, one of the most effective is the practice of sentence combining. Giving students a deconstructed and simplistic passage in single sentences and asking them to combine the sentences is a helpful tool for improving command of language. Sentence combining not only improves sentence fluency and sophistication of syntax, but it also dramatically impacts mechanics and punctuation.

Finally, the task of editing and revising is integral to developing the craft. In this area, the use of exemplar essays is foundational to good instruction. Showing students how it’s done well is a step beyond simply assigning and returning writing. Whenever I discuss exemplar papers, I always urge – even require – that students copy some of the sample sentences that I’ve highlighted. This work goes in their writing journal along with a reflection on their own paper. Students must always copy and take note of sentences I’ve edited. Revising and re-writing a troubling sentence effectively internalizes the improvement. Early in the year, I ask students to circle all the weak word choice – especially “be” verbs – in their sentences and revise the sentences with a stronger, action verb. Giving them a list of such verbs, analytical terms, and tone words is also helpful.

Ultimately, the craft of writing can – and actually must be – taught. Students learn through the opportunity to write and create, the freedom to make mistakes, the practice of peer and exemplar review, the act of editing and revision. While few of us wield the magical pen of Shakespeare or Mark Twain, all of us can – with effective instruction – become competent and effective writers.

Whole Language Still a Fraud and a Fools Game

Thanks to Darren at RotheLC for bringing to my awareness this story on a continuing problematic trend in education - that part of the problem in literacy education is that the whole language movement is still rearing its ugly and seemingly irrational head.

It's not worth rehashing the whole history here, but it's worth commenting on the continued use of this flawed model of literacy instruction. While in isolated cases, whole language is speculated to have a positive impact on certain struggling populations who might lack background in the basics, the foundational concept of literacy is and has always been phonics.

Sure, phonics isn't necessarily as fun or easy to teach as "whole word," but that's because it actually requires teaching. It requires knowledge of literacy and the ability to engage groups of young children in the instruction of reading.

High School Reading Levels

According to one group of public school critics, high school students are predominantly reading material at about a fifth grade level. If that is true, then the criticism of public education and failing literacy is certainly apt. However, the data reading appears at closer glance to be a considerable oversimplification.

Renaissance Learning has compiled an analysis of the reading lists for high schools across the nation, and the titles run from classics such as Of Mice and Men and To Kill a Mockingbird to contemporary young adult fiction such as the Hunger Games. From the list, Renaissance has declared the average reading level for high school choices to be 5.3, or fifth grade/third month. That is certainly disturbing. The analysis tool for these rankings is the ATOS Readability formula, and it focuses on line length, word length, vocabulary difficulty, and other "qualities" which, of course, provide no context for the literary value, rhetorical strategies, historical allusions, and other elements that basically define literature.

I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the study - appreciating comments in the intro from Dan Gutman about students reading what they want. However, when I began to work my way through some of the rankings and saw Mockingbird and Lord of the Flies ranked at a 5th-grade level, the study quickly plummeted in credibility. Anyone who has done style and literary analysis of these works knows they are of great complexity, to the point that they are still worthy of graduate level analysis. Just take Mockingbird off the shelf, ask a fifth-grader to read the first three pages, and then begin a discussion. If the fifth grader actually identifies the allusions to the Battle of Hastings and correctly interprets the significance then .... then you have a fifth grader who is reading at a high school level.

It's not simply about line length and complexity of vocabulary. And any study that rests on that conclusion has no real business making statements about education. Now, I will assert that the Hunger Games is a really low level book - and probably fifth grade. And, I certainly hope no college prep kids are reading that in high school. But to rank it as the same quality in rigor as Mockingbird or Flies is downright absurd.

Fear the Use of No-Fear Shakespeare

As a rule, our English department officially opposes the use of No-Fear Shakespeare, or any other aids that simplify the language in which literature is written. That doesn't mean, of course, that our students honorably and studiously avoid using such aids. But, as an official line, we do not support the use of such crutches, and we certainly don't condone using them in the classroom. No Fear Shakespeare and Book Rags and Grade Saver and all the other aids have no business in the English classroom.

It's not just about the plot and theme, teachers. If that were the case, we would teaching out of the graphic novel versions of all literature. It's about the language - it's about the text. The goal of education is to expose children to ideas and information they would not otherwise encounter or engage on their own. It's about challenge and struggle. It's not supposed to be easy, though it should certainly be engaging. And, no student I've found actually "enjoys" reading the study guides. They simply do so to find out what they don't understand, so they can pass the quizzes and tests. That is fundamentally the wrong model for the English classroom.

On the other hand, if we are working on the language in class - even if, especially if, we break it down into short passage analysis - students can truly "appreciate" the language. They will laugh and grimace and smile and feel if they learn why they're supposed to be feeling. And, it might mean that a class period covers a single speech or a few lines. And, that's fine. There's no schedule to finish the text - there's only a schedule to understand. Teachers have often underestimated their students ability to access such language and analyze style. However, for our more average level students, such short, focused passage analysis is actually quite accessible precisely because it's concrete and not overwhelming. For example, a single line or two from Julius Caesar can be analyzed for "how language is used to reflect Brutus' troubled mind?" What words reflect confusion or unease. Students can key in on single sentences or words far more easily than entire scenes and acts.

I strongly urge English teachers to avoid these aids - but have the discussion with your classes about why. The teacher is supposed to be the study-guide. We are No Fear Shakespeare, and it is our job to help students access information.