Yes, i almost agree-- Rubrick, about compulsory reading list..i think they are OK if 1) they are short (one book a grade perhaps) 2) if it is okay to open dislike the book.
"Little women" was compulsory in 6th grade for me. (age 11/12) i hated it. I mean, i didn't think myself too poor, and here were these girls, living in a big house, (we lived in an apartment), with servants, (they had a cook!) and piano lessons, and art lessons, and going to fancy dress dances, and worried about their kid gloves!.. and giving away lobsters, and all the while complaining about how hard their life was, how poor they were, sob, sob.
i know now, that many of the things alcott wrote about and how she described the lives, described one of upper class standards, with low income, now that is! then i was still one of the poor irish
when i was older i liked the book.. but what really upset me at the time, was i got in trouble for not liking. i not only had to read it, i had to like it! i don't think compulsory reading lists are the problem, i think the problem is as much the idea that this BOOK the one they has finally made the list, must be enjoyed! I can understand you might have hated "wuthering heights" (i loved it!) and i bet any negitive comments about the book were not appreciated.
I generaly hate Hardy-- my daughter thinks he is a wonderful writer, i love george eliot, she thinks eliot is drivle. Who's right? who cares!
i like the idea of a list of 20 books, and you must read 4 or 5 from the list. this was (and is) still a common ploy. i read a lot of books i might have not otherwise picked up, except they were on a reading list. and since i could exersize some choice, i never felt duty bound to read something i disliked.. i could just switch to an other book.
