Spin off of Katia's more/fewer deeper books - What is deep?

[Nan in Mass]

I always wonder what people mean by this.

[kathleen]

I'm sure there will be different answers to this question, but mine would be doing a close reading of a work, and delving into the author's technique, layers of meaning, use of literary devices, allusions, structural elements, and then drawing conclusions based on this. It would include trying to figure out what the author was trying to convey with his work. It could also include understanding the author's culture and biases, and evaluating his "worldview" (a much overused word!).

 

I know someone who tackles works down to the individual word level! She has her kids do imitation and analysis on paragraphs and sentences. Why did the author choose this word and not another? Why does he use this particular rhetorical technique? How effective is it? Etc. Doing things her way, you could limit yourself to just a handful of works per year! But you'd sure know them well.

[LisaNY]

I'm sure there will be different answers to this question, but mine would be doing a close reading of a work, and delving into the author's technique, layers of meaning, use of literary devices, allusions, structural elements, and then drawing conclusions based on this. It would include trying to figure out what the author was trying to convey with his work. It could also include understanding the author's culture and biases, and evaluating his "worldview" (a much overused word!).

 

I know someone who tackles works down to the individual word level! She has her kids do imitation and analysis on paragraphs and sentences. Why did the author choose this word and not another? Why does he use this particular rhetorical technique? How effective is it? Etc. Doing things her way, you could limit yourself to just a handful of works per year! But you'd sure know them well.

 

I just got back from hearing SWB at our hs conference, and she cautioned us against over-analyzing. She feels that while analysis is good, doing this with every book will kill the love for reading. Some books should just be read, and that's all.

[pmegan]

I know someone who tackles works down to the individual word level! She has her kids do imitation and analysis on paragraphs and sentences. Why did the author choose this word and not another? Why does he use this particular rhetorical technique? How effective is it? Etc. Doing things her way, you could limit yourself to just a handful of works per year! But you'd sure know them well.

 

This is what my high school literature classes were like, and it was awful. So boring, and it really killed the book. We spent longer reading some of those books than the author probably spent writing them!

 

To me, this is what "deeper reading" means. Of course, like most things in life I think a happy medium is the way to go. The student should be able to identify themes, analyze the text, that sort of thing. But at the same time there's no need to wring the life out of it by concentrating on every single individual word. That's just my personal opinion.

[kathleen]

I definitely don't advocate doing "deep analysis" with every book! Goodness no. But the friend who digs really deep with her kids has a blast, and the kids enjoy it, too. Plus, it's not just to understand the book better--it's also a way for them to understand how to write better, use rhetorical techniques, and the like. It's not something I've done, but I can see the value in it (and both of my kids would have liked it).

[Michelle in MO]

I also think that learning about the various types of literary techniques, studying an author's style in-depth, and even going so far as to discuss a selection of passages, why an author chose a certain word, is of great value.

 

I would agree that for every book that would get old; sometimes we simply want to read and enjoy a book. But, that in-depth analysis does help to teach a student to think deeply about what they read.

 

Let me give an example most of us are probably familiar with: reading The Lord of the Rings, I find some things that Tolkien did with the work extremely interesting. For example, according to the Humphrey Carter biography of Tolkien (you can find it here: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/JRR-Tolkien/Humphrey-Carpenter/e/9780618057023/?itm=1 )

 

Tolkien had a real distaste for the French language (sorry, Francophiles---not my words!) and really loved Latin. Yet, I always found it very odd that in The Return of the King he chose the French word puissant (powerful, strong) to describe Aragorn. Why did he choose that word? Notice also that Aragorn starts out as "Strider" in The Fellowship of the Ring and progresses to the name "Aragorn" as the books continue. Also, one thing I've noticed is that the language used in sections of the book in which Aragorn appears seems more "elevated" as Aragorn prepares to step into his role as king of Gondor.

 

Why also did Tolkien insist, in the final editing of his book, to include Tom Bombadil? Is Tom Bombadil an "Adam" figure or a figure of "Father Nature"?

 

Anyway, when a student has had a chance to study a few selected works in-depth, he/she develops the skills for his/her own further analysis of the books that he/she reads.

 

However, I would agree that often I simply want to read a book for enjoyment and go into that "other world" of the book!

[Nan in Mass]

This is good to know, although I don't think we'll ever be in any danger of over analysing something because the more we like something, the less we talk about it LOL. Thank you.

[Nan in Mass]

Not in an organized way; just when we notice something. The children did some of this in Writing Strands, too, which is why I liked the program. It didn't teach style (which I liked) and it did teach the choices that authors make when they write, which we all enjoyed. Whenever a new one appeared, I got out the Beatrix Potter books (short enough to deal with a whole lot of books from beginning to end in an hour, and so well read that everyone had them more or less memorized and found it easy to locate examples) and we practised the idea a bit. Maybe we aren't ignoring literary analysis as much as I feel like we are. I always found the stuff my English class pointed out painfully obvious and irrelevent, so I've been reluctant to do much of it formally. I think it is more fun to learn backwards, through writing.

-Nan

[Michelle in MO]

a more relaxed attitude about reading, discussing the material, etc. I think over time, for example, I've noticed some of those things in The Lord of the Rings. Certainly not on my first reading!

 

I think some people get burned out on literary analysis because the discussions re: symbolism or metaphors get too deep, convoluted, or obscure---sometimes to the point of being ridiculous! You don't want to suck all the life out of your readings!

 

However, I think picking a few good books and taking time to delve into them, without getting too "weird" about it (if you've ever sat in some college classes like this, you'll know what I mean!), is of great benefit.