You could have got away with claiming genius instead.

---

Stoopid iPhone. yeah, it was supposed to be "quite".

---

I think all other drama is undertaught.

amych is my hero!

I love that I get to expose my students to so many different kinds of theatre. The school just keeps trying to force me into a box that I'm not comfortable with.

Here we are getting into a discussion that is perfect for me and I have to go do some things with DH. Sigh...such is my life.

---

That's right. Blame the iPhone.

---

What blew my mind was seeing Fishburne in Apocalypse Now and realizing it was him.

---

"Elements of Persuasion" would make a good Regency romance title. Someone should use it.

I'd read that.

And, I will add, my students get the chance to read Moliere (I teach him to my Intro to Drama babies) as well as Lorca, Churchill, Ibsen, and more. Last year some of my students wanted to give Torvald a "smack down" when we read the final scene of "Dolls House".

Now I have to run. Stupid errands.

---

In an ideal world, high school would teach the foundations of Western thought that inform so much literature. There were many years when the only books a family would have would be Shakespeare and the King James Bible, and they were reliable touchstones for writers who could feel confident people would understand their allusions. It would be a great basis for later study if students started with a good grounding in the Bible as literature, Shakespeare, mythology, the Odyssey, the Iliad and the staples of a classical education. Certainly students should get more exposure to other playwrights, but Shakespeare is bedrock in terms of understanding literature.

---

The Family Sox just left my house! Yay for travelling Buffistas, and the most articulate and best behaved three year old I've seen in a long time. Plus, lemon tart.

---

OMG love the theater disussion. hello! What about Triumph Of Love from Marivaux? What we can't study French plays?

EARTHQUAKE!

Sure, one hits AFTER I leave!

In many ways he was pop culture for his time. In context, being a groundling at a theatre was cheap entertainment. Most people couldn't read, and TV didn't exist, so it was church or theatre.

I hear Eddie Izzard doing "Cake or death" for that last bit.

In the class I would be teaching (if I get the job) it'll be all stuff outta a Glecoe text plus Elie Weisel's Night, which is fine, and Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, which kinda bores the fuck out of me. At least it's not The Pearl

I loved "Night", very heavy. We learned it in 8th grade. M&M, very boring. But Pearl? bad? C'mon. I liked that one.

OK, gotta go. Silly 1st day rehearsal. Making me work.

:: mutters, can't believe I missed an earthquake ::

---

So it would be helpful to have read Shakespeare, the Bible, many other cultures mythologies and The Odyssey before embarking on literature study, I doubt most high school students will do so, enjoy it or get much out of it.

I've had the opposite experience, but I also haven't taught in a school where I was forbidden to talk about anything controversial...no doubt that would have made it a much less rewarding experience for me and the students. The freshmen English class I've taught at my current school the past couple of years is a classical foundations course (though I throw in a fair amount of modern lit with complementary themes in order to give them a break from the more difficult language). I teach Catcher in the Rye, a variety of origin myths along with the Bible as literature, Lord of the Flies, Medea, the entire Odyssey (we do an overview of the Iliad before we begin), The Penelopiad (nothing like a little modern feminist perspective to shake them up after reading that tome), a bunch of poetry, and Macbeth. It's a tough year, but the kids consistently tell me that they learn a lot and enjoy the themes even if they don't always love each text. They also claim the class makes a huge difference for them in history and English classes from that point on. Makes me feel pretty good, to tell you the truth.

---