|
Philip Spiess
Friends and Colleagues:
In the interstices of time that existed while you were all attending the Reunion and I was just existing, I have been reading the Essays of E. B. White. Tonight I have been reading the essay, "A Slight Sound at Evening" (1954), which discusses Henry David Thoreau and his masterpiece, Walden (1854). White describes Walden as "an oddity in American letters." He goes on to state that many literary figures and academics who deal with literature find Walden irrelevant or boring. But White also states "I think it of some advantage to encounter the book at a period in one's life when the normal anxieties and enthusiasms and rebellions of youth closely resemble those of Thoreau. . . . If our colleges and universities were alert, they would present a cheap pocket edition of the book to every senior upon graduating. . . ."
I have not re-read Walden in many years, specifically, not since I was required to read it in one of my APP English classes (Miss Ross's?) at Walnut Hills. I do remember enjoying it -- even to making jokes about it being preserved for posterity by now being a "Walled-In Pond" -- but, as I say, I have not taken the time to re-read it. I have followed Thoreau, not quite Thoroughly enough, through my son's high school production of Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee's play, The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail (1971) -- there was that famous actual dialogue between Ralph Waldo Emerson, "What are you doing in there, Henry David?" and Thoreau, "What are you doing out there, Ralph Waldo?" -- and through my surprise at learning that Henry David Thoreau and his family were intimately involved in the early creation and production of wood pencils. Who knew? [Cf. Henry Petroski, The Pencil: A History of Design and Circumstance (1989), chap. 9.]
Why do I bring this up, especially to all of you? Because I was struck by E. B. White's comment that Thoreau's book was appropriate (as I take it) to teenaged youth (even though he suggests giving it to graduating college students -- but that was in a somewhat earlier time). The teachers at Walnut Hills High School recognized the significance of this book to students of our age -- and assigned it. I'm impressed with that. I could name any number of other books we were required to study that I was taken with -- stunned by, really (but then I ended up an English major in college). What I'm saying here is that the Walnut Hills curriculum was calculated to be right for us, and I think they, the faculty, succeeeded in that. Bravo!
I'm sorry to say that recent high school English reading lists I have seen do not impress me. Call me an "old fogey," but the accepted English Literature canon has been thrown out, not only by high schools, but, even worse, by colleges. As Dale Gieringer told me recently, "No kid today wants to read Victorian-length novels." I'm sure he's right, but what a treasure-trove of language and writing, in my view -- to say nothing of insight into psychology and sociology (maybe even history) -- they are missing! A bust of Charles Dickens reigns over his entire works in my library, and I re-read him constantly (I also have his drink recipes in a book personally inscribed to me by his great-grandson, Cedric Dickens).
I did not intend to go on so long, but the gist of my missive is: "What teachers we had, what learning!"
|