Alerts
 
< >

The ‘academising’ of literature

Published: June 14, 2012

The writer recently graduated with bachelor’s degree from LUMS

In the past, the men of earth made a ritual of gathering around a lively fire every night. They brought out their books on poetry and dawdled upon every verse, lingered upon the imagery, marvelled upon the poet’s genius, while having a splendid time together. As time passed, they eventually created what is now known as a university and decided to introduce a five-month elective in poetry. The dawdling, lingering and marvelling stopped. Cramming, breezing and regurgitating began.

Indeed, turning literature into an academic discipline taxes the wholeness of a literary experience. It certainly does one happy to see that teaching literature is now given due importance in most O/A Level schools across the country. However, relegating the great works of drama, prose, and poetry to the mundane rules of the classroom prevents a reader from gaining the maximum out of the great works.

When reading great works, ones grasp on language strengthens. One begins to use correct language instinctively without soliciting the wisdom of Google, and besides, the careful reading of descriptions adds new adjectives to the vocabulary. Thus, overall communication abilities improve.

Secondly, the reading of literature can instill a remarkable sensitivity in a person. With regular reading, one becomes accustomed to the constant engagement of all these senses. In real life, this practice enables one to pierce the surface of different situations and grasp the timid underplays of words, tones and facial expressions.

Though the focus on literature is certainly heartening to observe within schools and universities, this field of study is dealt with most distastefully. At both the school and university levels, students are taught literature just as they are taught a course in economics or mathematics: volumes of poetry are assigned to be read within days, short stories are to be written and submitted by a certain date and in-class creative writing is to be completed within an assigned time. The typical conduct of the classroom makes light of dense works of Shakespeare or Eliot. There is little time to stop and savour a single author’s creativity since there is an overwhelming list of texts to be covered. The reading of great works thus turns into a ponderous chore instead of a delightful diversion. It actually begins to work the other way round by making students detest literature. As Vladimir Nabakov, the creator of the marvellous Lolita, beautifully puts it: “Literature, real literature, must not be gulped down like some potion … Literature must be taken and broken to bits, pulled apart, squashed … And only then, its rare flavour will be appreciated at its true worth.”

Stories and poems are to be enjoyed, not ‘academised’. Students must be schooled in literature not through competitive examinations, but by impassioned readers and writers who allow interest to develop naturally and for inspiration to fuel and unleash on its own.

Published In The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2012. 

on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook

Reader Comments (14)

  • TightChuddi
    Jun 14, 2012 - 10:39PM

    So what do you suggest – ready Hardy boys and Nancy Drew? What has literature and reading Lolita got to do with problems Pakistan is facing?

    Recommend

  • Cynical
    Jun 14, 2012 - 10:46PM

    Very good observation.Literature can not be taught.

    Recommend

  • BlackJack
    Jun 14, 2012 - 10:59PM

    Noble thoughts, but possibly not realistic. There will always be exceptions who read the entire book on the first day of school, but most students have no base in literature (even less than either mathematics or economics), and are hence unlikely to be able to enjoy course material for its own worth; increasingly teachers are lucky if their students have even read Harry Potter. Further, apart from the fact that there is unlikely to be any major upside in higher education admission or employment from a more nuanced appreciation of the classics, a huge syllabus and antiquated teaching methods (as you have indicated) also contribute to this neglect.

    Recommend

  • faraz
    Jun 15, 2012 - 12:00AM

    You think literature is important, but it should be removed from formal education so that people could appreciate its real beauty. But how could people develop interest in literature if it isn’t introduced to them at school or college level. How would people know that there is a dude named Elliot? What a weird argument.

    Recommend

  • waqas
    Jun 15, 2012 - 12:32AM

    teachers with an eager passion to teach literature, learners with an equal passion to learn literature can appriciate lterature, irrespective of it being part of an academic programm, and optimistically speaking its rather a better way to appreciate it, as criticism actually gives value to literature and with practical,academic understanding, criticism becomes easier, better and valid.

    Recommend

  • academic
    Jun 15, 2012 - 12:51AM

    im sorry but this is stupid. yes, literature is taught and most students consider is a chore to read shakespere and the like. but then people like me learn to appreciate its beauty even when in my career i took a very technical route involving heavy math/stats. i dare say, if my HS didnt require me to read urdu poetry to pass my urdu o level exams, i would have been unable to know the beauty of iqbal and others.
    some people would never be exposed to literature and would be lesser civilized if there was no compulsory literature in our schools.

    Recommend

  • Billy Pilgrim
    Jun 15, 2012 - 1:55AM

    Yaar,

    Listen:

    I like your write up and I’mma let you finish but this should be posted in the blogs section if at all.

    Recommend

  • GS@Y
    Jun 15, 2012 - 2:03AM

    Faiza, I think you are making an incomplete argument. You clearly believe that studying literature is important, but lament the “[c]ramming, breezing and regurgitating” which have replaced true appreciation of these works. So are you suggesting the pedagogy of literature needs to be reinvented? How and in what way? How might this new pedagogy differ from the teaching of “economics or mathematics”? (which, by the way, are no less fascinating in their own right. The philosophical beauty and symmetry of mathematics, or the intuition of economics are not to be deprecated).

    Your article in its current form reads more like the self-involved musings of a humanities major. Up your game please!

    Recommend

  • Nabeeha
    Jun 15, 2012 - 3:02AM

    Well said

    Recommend

  • Zalim Singh
    Jun 15, 2012 - 7:22AM

    cool

    Recommend

  • Sane
    Jun 15, 2012 - 9:29AM

    Agreed with thoughts. Definitely literature should not be taken as an assignment. This is rather a passion leads to vision and enlightenment. But, I think studying literature as subject (if compulsory) paves the way to read more by non-readers. This may create interest in those who would never had a chance to come across with beauty of literature.

    Anyways a nice and thought provoking article.

    Recommend

  • Daniyal Khan
    Jun 15, 2012 - 10:23AM

    This is rather banal. You cannot simply say that reading literature on your own is what classroom teaching of it is not. More insight needs to be created.

    Recommend

  • qomi
    Jun 15, 2012 - 3:40PM

    dear literature is to feel,,to sence but how would a student get it without being introduced??

    Recommend

  • waqar qomi
    Jun 15, 2012 - 3:45PM

    dear literature is to feel,,to sence but how would a student get it without being introduced??

    Recommend

More in Opinion