“The only thing worse than ‘Macbeth’ is ‘The Crucible,’” complained Weber High senior Cole Anderson, glancing over his shoulder impishly at English teacher and Student Government advisor, Kaitlyn Kolilis, who laughed apologetically. “They’re good books for this time of year,” she says.
Kolilis isn’t wrong. The themes of both “Macbeth” and “The Crucible” echo the indifferent chill of autumn; in “Macbeth,” the reader watches a prideful thane succumb to the insidious murmurings of three witches. In “The Crucible,” it is the witches who ultimately confront their own pride. While these novels may not have a lot in common on the surface — the former was written by William Shakespeare in the early 1600s, and the latter by Arthur Miller in 1953 — they are both masterworks, and they are both a part of the required reading curriculum for English students at Weber High School.
Anderson is not the only student who seems to resent these classic novels and other novels like them. “[insert other student quotes.]” For decades, students have lamented reading books from before their time. According to Andrew Newman, a journalist at The Conversation, some of the most common titles in English classrooms since the 1960s have included “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “The Great Gatsby,” and “The Catcher in the Rye.” Readers of this article are likely familiar with at least a few of these titles, considering they are also taught at Weber High School. With student complaints becoming an increasingly common trend, some high schoolers have begun petitioning for a revised curriculum full of more “student choice” in-class reading. While this strategy may be the path of least resistance, educators — and avid readers — make an argument for classics in the classroom.
“Reading classic literature teaches us life lessons through human history. These books are like a mirror through which we can see the lives of others,” said Dongnia Xiao, a guest writer for the Los Angeles Times. “We can essentially shape our personality and inner self through classic literature.” Seeing as classic novels are a product of their era, they are essentially time capsules, transporting the reader to a different time and place than their own. In addition to the historical value of classic novels, science also argues for a less poetic advantage. A study from Michigan State University placed students in an MRI machine while they read works by Jane Austen. “What took us by surprise is how much the whole brain transformed in shifting from pleasure to close reading, and in regions far beyond those associated with attention and executive functions,” said Natalie Phillips, a professor associated with the study. “In one subject, for example, we saw literary analysis activating areas of the brain that we use to place ourselves spatially in the world and areas dedicated to physical activity.”
We can essentially shape our personality and inner self through classic literature.
While the study from Michigan State University was intended to show off the relevance of studying the humanities, it also proves that reading a classic novel in any context — even if it is challenging or ‘dull’ — physically transforms the reader’s brain. This groundbreaking research is particularly relevant to a teenage audience. The high school brain is at a critical stage of development, and the mental exercise of reading the classics teaches students to think better, literally and metaphorically.
A decrease in the popularity of classics also reflects a troubling trend in reading habits in general. “Researchers have found a sharp decline in reading enjoyment after the age of eight,” reported a recent article from The Guardian. “Sixty-two percent of children between six and eight say they either love or like reading books for fun, but this percentage drops to just 46% for children between the ages of nine to 11, with the figure at 49% for 12-14-year-olds, and 46% again for 15-17-year-olds.” So-called ‘screenagers’ — lingo for a teenager who spends a lot of time on their phone — are not the only readers affected. Recent statistics show that 23% of adults have not read a book in any form over the past year.
How does any individual — let alone a high school English teacher — attempt to fix a reading epidemic? The answer may lie in the way people think about reading. “There is no ‘bad reading,’” says Mackenzie Kilano with the Michigan Daily. “It often feels like reading must be only educational, but it can simply be for fun! Don’t think of reading as a punishment — think of reading as an escape, a way to wind down after a long day or even just something to make you laugh.” This same principle can also apply to the classics.
If Weber students are interested in picking up a classic off the shelf, there are a few places to start that are a bit more beginner-friendly than others — the writer of this piece does not recommend jumping into “Crime and Punishment” without a bit of warming up. A few teen-and-tween-friendly classic recommendations include but are not limited to: “Animal Farm,” “The Giver,” “Little Women,” “Lord of the Flies,” “Jane Eyre,” and “Flowers for Algernon.”
The world of classic novels can seem erudite and mysterious, but it is not as complicated as it may seem. Clearly, there is still a place for the classics in the modern classroom. Although some teenagers roll their eyes at the idea of reading a classic novel “for fun,” they also don’t know how many dirty jokes they’re missing out on in “Romeo and Juliet” if they don’t even try.