# Teaching > General Teaching >  teaching classic british lit to 9th graders

## lavendar1

I just started teaching ninth grade English, and the district's curriculum for that level includes primarily classic British literature. Frankly, most high school freshmen are neither awed nor amused by _Ivanhoe_ and _David_  _Copperfield_. I've already plodded through several of the Sherlock Holmes stories and _Romeo and Juliet_  and it hasn't been pretty. I'm considering using the Classic Comics version of _Ivanhoe_ to teach my developmental English students. I guess I'm just looking for ideas or suggestions on how to convince the students that "classic" doesn't mean "stuff" (to coin a favorite ninth grade word) that old people read.

----------


## Basil

Yeah. Stuff sucks.

Are you allowed to set your own curriculum? I'm guessing probably not, so there's no way to sneak _Frankenstein_ or _Dracula_ in there. But what about poetry? "To His Coy Mistress" seems like it might capture a 9th grader's imagination--and plus it contains so many intertextual points of reference used by future texts that it's a good springboard to other works . . .

Or you could just torture them and make them read the entire George Eliot collection  :Smile:  (I actually like Eliot, but I doubt I would have at the age of fourteen).

----------


## trismegistus

> I just started teaching ninth grade English, and the district's curriculum for that level includes primarily classic British literature. Frankly, most high school freshmen are neither awed nor amused by _Ivanhoe_ and _David_  _Copperfield_. I've already plodded through several of the Sherlock Holmes stories and _Romeo and Juliet_  and it hasn't been pretty. I'm considering using the Classic Comics version of _Ivanhoe_ to teach my developmental English students. I guess I'm just looking for ideas or suggestions on how to convince the students that "classic" doesn't mean "stuff" (to coin a favorite ninth grade word) that old people read.


That's a miserable curriculum. Looks like texts that were chosen in 1950 and never reconsidered. You need an overhaul:
1. _Beowulf_ - excellent adventure story that you might even connect to Gardner's _Grendel_ since Gardner was also a Brit. (As an outside reading you can give them Crichton's _Eaters of the Dead_ which is his rendition of _Beowulf_ written on a challenge.
2. A couple of Canterbury Tales (no 9th grade boy could resist the fart and sex jokes in stuff like the Miller's Tale)
3. Lots of the Cavalier poets as Basil suggests. Short, punchy, and generally witty poetry.
4. _Paradise Lost_ (just kidding) You might actually try segments of _Pilgrim's Progress._ It's not a bad story, and the allegory of it is so obvious that kids can accomplish a lot and feel good about themselves.
5. Dump the Dickens; he's good when you're older. If you've got to do the Victorians or Edwardians, go with Tennyson's poetry and HG Wells. Oh yeah, and Kipling's "The White Man's Burden." The kids will have a great time being outraged and feeling morally superior.
6. Shakespeare is wasted on the great majority of 14 year olds. In fact it's making them slog their way through it that often makes them HATE it when they're old enough to actually begin appreciating it. (Say, junior or senior year.) Still, I doubt you'll be allowed to ditch the Bard. If I had to do one and had a choice, I'd go with a comedy or history over a tragedy.
7. "Ryme of the Ancient Mariner" might hook some. The "ghost story" aspect of the poem can be useful in grabbing attention.
8. Robert Burns's poetry is accessible, funny, and an interesting language study. You can use it to do all kinds of things with dialect and their own speech.
9. Drop some Thomas Gray on them. The Goths among them will love it; the rest will think Gray was stealing from Poe.
10. What about Graham Greene from the 20th century?

----------


## Basil

As usual, Trismegistus shows me up with an infinitely more useful post than my own (although [ahem] _mine_ contains a Simpsons quote).

re Shakespeare: why _don't_ they teach any of the history plays in high school? I don't believe we did a single one . . .

----------


## Scheherazade

History and stuff r not like kewl... u no...

----------


## Snukes

> re Shakespeare: why _don't_ they teach any of the history plays in high school? I don't believe we did a single one . . .


We did Henry V and Richard III in high school, but neither one in an English class. (Drama class and History class, respectively). But why slog through a boring history play (and I must say, even for being some of his better histories, those two are both dreadfully boring until you start to understand the yummy historical connections, and even those aren't so great if you don't give a hoot about history...) if you can read the 17th century equivalent of a trashy romance novel?  :Wink:  

We read Midsummer Night's Dream in 9th grade (and 10th grade and 11th grade...) and had it not been required reading for so many classes, it might still be my favorite. As it is, I much prefer Much Ado About Nothing. 

As for real helpful suggestions, I defer to the more obvious authorities who have already posted.  :Wink:

----------


## mono

Well, lavendar1, you have quite a course to teach; I commend you for bravery, really (he-he).
Dickens may seem somewhat too dry for average teenagers having a short attention span to Dickensian verbosity. I would try shorter, more . . . energetic works, such as short stories by Edgar Allan Poe, Ambrose Bierce, Guy de Maupassant, Flannery O'Connor, O. Henry, and the like.
I entirely agree with trimegistus's idea of reading a few of the "Canterbury Tales," as those prove entertaining for any age, along with those of Aesop, Homer, Virgil, and Giovanni Boccaccio.
Good luck!

----------


## trismegistus

> I would try shorter, more . . . energetic works, such as short stories by Edgar Allan Poe, Ambrose Bierce, Guy de Maupassant, Flannery O'Connor, O. Henry, and the like .... along with those of Aesop, Homer, Virgil, and Giovanni Boccaccio.


Yeah but the problewm is that (s)he's teaching British Lit.

----------


## mono

> Yeah but the problewm is that (s)he's teaching British Lit.


Oops, my eyes entirely skipped past that word, 'British;' I apologize. In that case, I would also recommend George Eliot along with Virginia Woolf. An enormous subject lies additionally with the three Brontë sisters, for they, I think, especially Emily Brontë, enlightened 19th century British literature, along with, indirectly, the early feminist movement.
Good luck, again!

----------


## amuse

in the ninth grade, we studied _A Midsummer's Night Dream_; additionally, we acted out the play within the play _&_ saw it live in san francisco - needless to say, this worked well to capture our interest. any two of these approaches would probably work well.

not of course that one needs to travel to the bay area to appreciate it live! lol

----------


## EAP

the attentional span of the young-adult of today isn't enough to sustain George Elliot, specially in the ninth grade. 

Personally, I think you can only change the mind of your students concerning classics by recommending them actually intresting books outside ciriculum like maybe something by Oscar Wilde and Jane Austen. Something short, witty and relatively less dense. If they like them, or bother to read them then maybe they can be brought around to read folks like Elliot, Thackery, Scott and Dickens. If not then probably there's no hope.

----------


## subterranean

Leave The Brontes, they're boring (IMO)  :Wink:

----------


## Jack_Aubrey

For someone who just completed ninth grade (me) there are a few demographics of students that I observed. There is a group that will do anything assigned just to get that A to keep the ol' GPA at its current zenith. These are the ones who neither appreciat nor disappreciate what is being taught, ever. There is also a group of kids who couldnt care less about literature, who are bad readers and have never even read a book outside of school. And finally there are kids who are going to appreciate it because they have, in fact, read books outside of school. When my class read Shakespeare last year I was absolutely astonished at every single part of the play we read (Much Ado About Nothing). Before this I had disregarded Shakspeare as a Renaissance fluff writer but I was forever turned on to him. 

So remember you have the opportunity to turn kids on to the greats. And be optimistic!

----------


## Zooey

Tough call. I'm having a hard time trying to think back now at what I read in 9th grade, and I had a great teacher _and_ was interested in what we were reading! And this was only about six years ago! I remember reading large sections of _A Tale of Two Cities_ and _Romeo and Juliet_- neither which I particularly enjoyed. 

I'm sure you still have staples- but I recommend doing as many short stories as possible, as due to the nature of the length the action and conflict begins quickly, and its probably more likely to hold a young reader's attention more than trying to slog through long characterizations found in a novel. 

*I'd recommend:*

Doris Lessing. _To Room 19_ is my favorite, but don't know if it could be fully appreciated it so early in life. I can't remember the name of it, but she wrote a terrific story about a boy who trains himself to hold his breath and risks his life swimming through an underground cave one summer. It's pretty short, and gripping stuff.

I'm a Virginia Woolf fanatic, but I _highly_ doubt high schoolers are ready for her fiction (it's hard enough for most college students). However, excerpts from _A Room of One's Own_ is easy to read, and very thought-provoking (I'd recommend the section about Shakespeare's (fictional) brilliant sister.)

Oscar Wilde. I've only read _Importance of Being_ earnest which may be a tad too abstract, but his writing is a witty delight that is easy enough to read. 

As someone mentioned, I'm sure you have to teach Shakespeare, and I don't think _R&J_ is necessarily a bad choice, though if I was teaching and had carte blanche I'd go with _Much Ado About Nothing_. You could show clips or have an extra credit assignment or something with Brannagh's film version, which would probably help a lot. Whatever you do, I'd recommend providing some kind of visual representation along with whatever your students read- I was lucky enough to take a Shakespeare class in London this last fall, and it helped so much to see it performed and/or see a film version along with what he read. Shakespeare was writing his plays to be seen, and that's the way I think they should be presented.

_Beowulf_ isn't a bad suggestion. I was surprised how much fun it is to read. Likewise, many of Chaucer's _Canterbury Tales_ are quite delightful (and quite racy, which I remember was a revelation when I read them in high school). 

Some of John Donne's poetry- very rich and vivid imagery, especially the love poems. Could provoke some interesting discussion on the meaning. 

Dickens is horrible in my opinion- couldn't stand it then, and still can't. Have no opinion on Austen or the Bronte Sisters.

Anyway, I'll keep thinking and report back if I can think of anything else. Best of luck to you- you're in a tough position, having a (most likely) resentful captive audience. The best thing I can say is to always try to find ways to make it apply to each student's own lives. No matter what your age that is what gives Literature its richness and meaning- and the earlier one figures that out, the quicker a love for Lit will be developed.

----------


## Basil

> . . . though if I was teaching and had carte blanche I'd go with _Much Ado About Nothing_. You could show clips or have an extra credit assignment or something with Brannagh's film version, which would probably help a lot.


As one of the most gifted thespians of his generation, Keanu Reeves has had the opportunity to deliver some pretty memorable lines. I have to say, though, for my money, NOTHING tops Keanu's first line as Don John in _Much Ado About Nothing_: "I am a man of few words." Uttered with such villainous intent, seething with malevolence . . . oh, I get woozy just thinking about it.

Keanu may lack the range of a Duvall or the intensity of a Pacino, but golly, he's just got that certain _something_, that ineffable quality that separates him from the rest . . .

I'd KILL to see him do Hamlet!

----------


## trismegistus

> As one of the most gifted thespians of his generation, Keanu Reeves has had the opportunity to deliver some pretty memorable lines. I have to say, though, for my money, NOTHING tops Keanu's first line as Don John in _Much Ado About Nothing_: "I am a man of few words." Uttered with such villainous intent, seething with malevolence . . . oh, I get woozy just thinking about it.
> 
> Keanu may lack the range of a Duvall or the intensity of a Pacino, but golly, he's just got that certain _something_, that ineffable quality that separates him from the rest . . .
> 
> I'd KILL to see him do Hamlet!


I smell a new thread!

http://www.online-literature.com/for...0112#post50112

----------


## lavendar1

Thanks for your thoughts. Unfortunately, I've little to no room to "sneak in" anything, so I've got to devise creative strategies to reach (and hopefully catch!) as many students as possible. Until I devise such a strategy to teach Ivanhoe, I plan to tach a unit on grammar and composition (something I'm sure the students will enjoy about as much as the literature I've taught so far. My only salvation may be that the curriculum is up for review this year -- perhaps I'll take a few of the wonderful ideas I've received to the first planning meeting!

----------


## Jack_Aubrey

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Optimism!! Know that even though you cant see the students who love literature they are in the classroom either too embarassed to say that Shakespeare interests them or they just dont know it yet.

----------


## mono

True, Jack_Aubrey, optimism seems a key ingredient to reaching other students. For British literature, some students may enjoy Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, and the Brontë sisters, while others may enjoy D.H. Lawrence, T.S. Eliot, George Eliot, and Virginia Woolf. A teacher, or I highly doubt, could never reach ALL of the students, but only have that hope, and make each piece of literature more of an experience than a responsibility.

----------


## Zooey

> As one of the most gifted thespians of his generation, Keanu Reeves has had the opportunity to deliver some pretty memorable lines. I have to say, though, for my money, NOTHING tops Keanu's first line as Don John in _Much Ado About Nothing_: "I am a man of few words." Uttered with such villainous intent, seething with malevolence . . . oh, I get woozy just thinking about it.
> 
> Keanu may lack the range of a Duvall or the intensity of a Pacino, but golly, he's just got that certain _something_, that ineffable quality that separates him from the rest . . .
> 
> I'd KILL to see him do Hamlet!


 This has to be a joke. The only fascinating aspect of Keanu's Don John is his stunning ineptitude at delivering Shakespeare's lines. You kind of watch transfixed wondering what exactly he thinks he's doing. 

Heh... this is the first time I've ever heard his juvenile sneer equated with "villainous intent" and "seething malevolence." He should stick to THE MATRIX films, as they're able to use his painful inadequacies as an actor to his advantage.

He's a good looking dude I suppose, but that's the only reason I can see to explain his popularity, because he certainly can't act.

----------


## Isagel

When I studied english we read Oscar Wilde - The Picture of Dorian Gary, and some of his fairy tales. I also remember half the class falling in love with the poem " I wandered lonely as a cloud" by Wordsworth. We also read the speech from John Donne where he wrote about "so ask not for whom the bell tolls". Some of his more teasing poems about ladies was also much admired like - "Go and catch a falling star". 

Try and find things that Tarantino would quote.

.. edit - I forgot -

Augeries of innocence by Blake - Lara Croft quotes it in Tome rader.
In Steinbeck considered classic literature? We read the Pearl.

----------


## shortysweetp

i would leave out great expectations. i had to read it in 9th grade I hated and didnt understand it well. as for shakespeare we read aloud in class and if we wanted we acted it out. i really enjoyed it. save austen, dickens, and beowulf until later like senior year when they might actually enjoy it. you might even have them write a journal that goes along with the character of the story. anyway thats my 2 cents  :Smile:

----------


## avid reader

my recomendation is to NOT do Bronte...we had to read Jane Eyre in 10th grade, and i swear that there was not a single person who got through the entire book. and we were the honors class. Personally i got about halfway through before i had to go to sparknotes, but i know many others went straight there. 

I would suggest The Canterbury Tales. We read a small section of them recently and several students actually went out and read the whole thing on their own (well worth it). 

And if you are ever able to get a new cirriculum i would highly suggest including Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury. That should keep pretty much everyone's intrest, and it is not to hard to follow. Plus there is alot you could do with it as a teacher essaywise.

----------


## suzanne73

Lavendar 1: I haven't taught Ivanhoe or David Copperfield. So I can't give you specific help there. But R & J is a fantastic story for 9th graders. Of course, it's always hard to do stuff the first time, you're just getting started. But you can do it! For next year. . . Try some of the lessons suggested in "Shakespeare Set Free" (available at bookstores). I did not follow exactly, but adapted to taste. Lessons 1-4 were excellent. Also, Lessons 7, 14. This was a great resource in getting me started, and the success of beginning lessons gives you the confidence to go your own way and try out your own, fun stuff. Be confident. 

Search for the Folger Library online and you will find all kinds of posters, etc., that you can decorate the room with and go crazy. Get the kids up and acting out scenes, creating masks to wear to the party in Act I, Sc. 5, visualizing and interacting w/ text. 

Have them watch excerpts of Baz Luhrmann's "Leo diCaprio" version and compare to same scene in Zeffirelli's version and compare/contrast directorial styles and choices and how they contribute to understanding. (Watch Luhrmann's version yourself, first, it's pretty violent). Just one or two scenes for 15 minutes at a time (this drives them crazy because they want to watch the whole thing at once, but you want them to create their own pics in their head). Have them do a series of love letters between Romeo and Juliet and decorate them, or do a fancy diary as Juliet, w/ Juliet making entries after key scenes. Get plastic swords at the toy store and have them stage the fight scenes. Follow up by having students write their own versions of key scenes in their own vernacular and act them out for the final (w/ music, props, etc).

Suggest they read the YA novel "Julio and Romiette" on their own. 

My students are not college prep students by any means , and we do the complete, unabridged version of R&J and they eat it up. Your enthusiasm will be contagious. If you don't like it or are confused, they won't get it either. 

Jim Burke's The English Teacher's Companion is a good resource for different ways to teach whatever text you are teaching. Kids won't like things when it's going over their heads and they can't visualize what's really going on, same as us (at least me). Whatever you are doing, look for the key scenes of murder, fights, betrayal, revenge, passionate love, dire images of poverty, pathos, etc. Then figure out ways to get the kids to bring that to life on their own. So with whatever it is, I would get them to make their own cartoon versions and storyboards of texts that you can post all over the classroom. Diorama versions made out of Homies. Have them write scenes and act them out, have them burn their own CDs with "soundtracks" for the most significant parts of the novel (that they then have to explain), draw maps of the characters journey. Whatever you can think of. Have them cut out magazine pictures of who they think characters would look like today. Have them work in groups alot. Play music from the era and compare to today's music. All kinds of little and big activities. Get them excited, so they can really see what's going on. Use those fun activities to scaffold them to the essay or whatever your big serious essay is. And don't worry- you'll be great!

----------


## byquist

Lavandar1,

You are a teacher and are in a dynamic 9th grade situation. It all starts with you and not the materials you are required to teach. I had to teach "Ethan Frome" to 10th graders and although I think that is a tremendous story, they likewise didn't get it. They did get, and I caught their funny-bone, when we got to "Catcher in the Rye" so, I guess the material is crucial also. But, you have to invest Ivanhoe and Copperfield with such value, shockingness, energy, zeal and freshness, that they get somewhat onboard, else you will experience living hell.

You have to pretend to them that Ivanhoe answers all the questions about life, will turn them into successful romantics, -- to the point that, if they don't get it (Ivanhoe) there is something wrong with them. You have to shock them to get onboard. You have to keep the energy on the nth level of intensity. You basically have to "trick" them into belief in the material.

Also, study how the material relates to their lives. I'd do some studying of chivalry for Ivanhoe; study knives, and armour and horses and swordfighting. There's a great movie of a couple years ago, it's about whatever-you-call-it, when the horses and riders run at each other with the long poles -- jousting. Hopefully, you can be allowed showing that movie so they get into the "history", "historic times" of the story. Forget the name of the movie, some friend of yours will know it.

I've taught not just developmental, but special ed, and these kids (albeit you may have wild ones as I did) are adorable at times. You are practicing the teaching principles you learned in college. Teaching is a process; go to workshops, etc. You are embarked on a great calling. If you pump yourself up to be excited about the nonsense you have to teach, and care about them, they will feel it and you will win. You will go home at the end of the day and feel good, and not cry! Teaching is a tough profession!

----------


## lavendar1

Thanks for putting things into perspective for me. I've gotten some valuable information from all who have responded to my 'dilemma.' The fact is, as a first year teacher, I'm juggling many conflicting priorities, and the curriculum is only one of them.

My salvation is that no matter how bad things may go on any given day, there always seems to be _one_ event or dialogue between me and a student that sets things right --like today, for example, when two students sought me out for help in writing an introduction for a paper required as part of a project for another class. After the fact, the students promised to bring me some of the spaghetti they're "serving up" for the same project as a thank-you. I can't wait...

Teaching is a dymanic profession, and I may struggle with _Great Expectations_ when I teach it for the first time beginning next week, but all will be well, I'm sure.

Thanks for the insights.

----------


## hellodolly

Brontes...boring? *swoons in shock*

----------


## kao218

Hi Lavendar---I feel your pain. I also have a very strict British Literature course curriculum that I had to teach for the first time this past year. Although at least I was teaching 11th graders. The works can be very dense and the students have a lot of difficulty relating to it--so as another poster stated you need to find a way to connect this work in some way to their own lives. Bring energy and comedy to the work as much as possible--especially with 9th graders. Now, I taught 9th graders last year and with my low levels I started them off reading the opening act aloud. Then I allowed them to rip it apart. Why is this sooooo boring? Why it is hard to understand? Then I have them the No Fear Shakespeare version of the same scene, which is actually pretty funny. They loved this version and they got a lot of the inappropriate jokes. We then ripped apart this version. Why is it easier to understand? What is contemporary about this scene? How do we visualize it be enacted? Is it really thay different than the original? Then I brought out the props...9th graders love props...and they had to rewrite/enact the scene for different scenarios. This was fun,educational and complety broke the ice for Shakespeare. We did a lot of other great things with this unit including making their own movies. It takes a lot of work...and I have not perfected all of my unit yet-- but making it contemporary works. 

So what other works are on your syllabus? Maybe we can brainstorm together?

----------


## mheile

> That's a miserable curriculum. Looks like texts that were chosen in 1950 and never reconsidered. You need an overhaul:
> 1. _Beowulf_ - excellent adventure story that you might even connect to Gardner's _Grendel_ since Gardner was also a Brit. (As an outside reading you can give them Crichton's _Eaters of the Dead_ which is his rendition of _Beowulf_ written on a challenge.
> 2. A couple of Canterbury Tales (no 9th grade boy could resist the fart and sex jokes in stuff like the Miller's Tale)
> 3. Lots of the Cavalier poets as Basil suggests. Short, punchy, and generally witty poetry.
> 4. _Paradise Lost_ (just kidding) You might actually try segments of _Pilgrim's Progress._ It's not a bad story, and the allegory of it is so obvious that kids can accomplish a lot and feel good about themselves.
> 5. Dump the Dickens; he's good when you're older. If you've got to do the Victorians or Edwardians, go with Tennyson's poetry and HG Wells. Oh yeah, and Kipling's "The White Man's Burden." The kids will have a great time being outraged and feeling morally superior.
> 6. Shakespeare is wasted on the great majority of 14 year olds. In fact it's making them slog their way through it that often makes them HATE it when they're old enough to actually begin appreciating it. (Say, junior or senior year.) Still, I doubt you'll be allowed to ditch the Bard. If I had to do one and had a choice, I'd go with a comedy or history over a tragedy.
> 7. "Ryme of the Ancient Mariner" might hook some. The "ghost story" aspect of the poem can be useful in grabbing attention.
> 8. Robert Burns's poetry is accessible, funny, and an interesting language study. You can use it to do all kinds of things with dialect and their own speech.
> ...


Sorry- John Gardner-author of GRENDEL was not a British author-- He was an American. Just wanted to keep the facts correct.

----------


## Jolly McJollyso

I find Sherlock Holmes stories, to be honest, best left to Critical Theory courses... They're incredibly applicable.

It's hard to get 14 and 15-year-olds interested in things like "Ivanhoe" and Shakespeare... If they were seniors I'd say teach them Joyce's Portrait, but as it is I'm wondering why so few of the Romantics or the Victorians have sprung to mind? Surely King Solomon's Mines or Alice in Wonderland could hold their interest if not Ryme of the Ancient Mariner!

If you don't want them to think "classic" = "stuff" old people read, throw Ulysses at them and talk about Bloom's obsessions with anal sex. That oughta pop some eyeballs.

----------


## chasestalling

try t.s. eliot's the love song of j. alfred prufrock and henry jame's the american.

----------


## ennison

What age is 9th grade? Pardon my foreign ignorance.

----------


## Niamh

Ennison you got there before me. was about to ask same question!

----------


## Jolly McJollyso

> try t.s. eliot's the love song of j. alfred prufrock and henry jame's the american.


T.S. Eliot?

Expatriates count then?

9th graders are around 14 or 15 years old.

How about Waiting for Godot? That play can be fantastic assuming one teaches from the proper "mind/body," linguistic perspective rather than the over-simplified, dullard's "Waiting for God" version.

----------


## ennison

Unless these are 14 year-old-bookworms with tremendous powers of self-discipline then 'Ivanhoe' is not suitable material. Are you punishing them? Nearly all writers put together hack work and second-rate stuff (By their own standards if no one else's). 'Ivanhoe' not one of his best and even his best is heavy-going for all but the most exceptional of 14-year-olds.

----------


## Niamh

Well that says everything. I was starting to think 9th graders were about 16/17. 
No dont go for waiting for godot. Besides that Irish not British. Do the hobbit! They would enjoy that. I'm sure most of them saw Lotr and might enjoy reading it.

----------


## Jolly McJollyso

> Well that says everything. I was starting to think 9th graders were about 16/17. 
> No dont go for waiting for godot. Besides that Irish not British. Do the hobbit! They would enjoy that. I'm sure most of them saw Lotr and might enjoy reading it.


Ireland is part of Britain, and included in Brit-Lit. courses.

----------


## Niamh

Ireland is not apart of britain and hasnt been since 1948 when we got our independence for the first time in 800 years.  :Smile:

----------


## Jolly McJollyso

> Ireland is not apart of britain and hasnt been since 1948 when we got our independence for the first time in 800 years.


Sorry, sorry, I was actually about to go back and edit. Because Samuel Beckett was born before Ireland gained independence, he is of British origins and therefore a British author.

----------


## Niamh

No hes classed as an Irish Author even though he was born during english reign. But he started writing when ireland was a free state and only a member of the common wealth. 1948 was when ireland was officially recognised as an independant country but we had been indepentant in the twenties and had stayed neutral during the second world war. (am i right Ennison?)
Samuel; Beckett also won the nobel prize for literature for ireland.
Even to the british Ireland was always Ireland. a pain in there side!  :Smile:  any writers born in Ireland pre Irish literary revival are classed as British, and Irish. Northern ireland on the other hand is still apart of britain.

----------


## lavendar1

> Unless these are 14 year-old-bookworms with tremendous powers of self-discipline then 'Ivanhoe' is not suitable material. Are you punishing them? Nearly all writers put together hack work and second-rate stuff (By their own standards if no one else's). 'Ivanhoe' not one of his best and even his best is heavy-going for all but the most exceptional of 14-year-olds.


I'm compelled to get in on this discussion since I'm required to teach _Ivanhoe_. And while I'm not familiar enough with Sir Walter Scott's 'other' writing to judge whether it's second-rate or not, I can attest to the fact that 9th graders indeed struggle with the book. Even if I can get them stirred up a bit with the notion of chivalry and the excitement of the tournament, they get buried in the language. I've taken to teaching only the Tournament at Ashby segment to my lower-level students, and I teach it in conjunction with viewing a film version. Still, it's a "slow-go"...yet it's a curriculum requirement.

----------


## Niamh

> Ireland is part of Britain, and included in Brit-Lit. courses.


I dont understand why irish Lit is being included as brit Lit. I mean you wouldn't say belgian lit was french or french was spanish would you? no because you would class them as european.

----------


## ennison

It's because Ireland is part of the British Isles (though not part of the modern UK) and also because Irish literature abroad is simply seen (naturally enough) as an extension of English literature. We wont get upset about that you and I.

----------


## Niamh

i get very defensive. dont know why though.

i saw something on the news or in a news paper recently that they are going to stop using the term British isles because it is now seen as policically incorrect as ireland is no longer a part of britain. cant remember for the life of me were i heard it though.

----------


## ennison

Well unless it all sinks below the Atlantic we are here!! I'm glad you are.

----------

