This article in the New York Times both encourages me and scares me at the same time.

It is about some experimentation going on in certain classrooms regarding how classic literature is taught.  Or in some cases, not taught.

There is a budding trend in certain educational circles that advocates students being able to pick their own works of literature to study instead of adhering to a prescribed list of stories.

On one hand, I agree with the thinking that allowing students to choose the literature that interests them most is more helpful in promoting reading as a whole.  It stands to reason that if you like what you are reading, you will continue to read and not consider it some sort of punishment.  Writing about it and exploring its themes are more enjoyable because of the connection to the story.

On the other hand, according to the article, that means studying the, uh, literary merits of “Captain Underpants.”

My fear is that not many kids will be willing to pick truly challenging literature, instead going for the easy route.  Because yeah, teens are so well known for wanting to do more work.  Right?

I think there is a lot to be said for studying classic literature because it is usually considered classic for a reason.  Usually the works involve universal themes that appeal to a broad section of people.  Don’t get me wrong, not all classics resonate with everyone.  I, for instance, hated James Joyce’s Ulysses with every fiber of my being.  But a masterwork is a masterwork, and there is something to be learned from all of them.  Yes, even Ulysses.

What I think would work best would be a compromise wherein the class could choose from an approved list, rather than venturing into the dubious territory that constitutes “Captain Underpants“.