Canid Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 There are flaws in any system - you can't make them perfect. Especially not ones that have to fit everyone. There are differences in opinion, in method, in style.... And I sit in the classroom of my grade 11 English class and during spare moments vent my irritation about some of them. English, being the most open to interpretation is the key offender class-wise.... and here and there I find a problem that is, in my mind at least, unquestionably wrong. The grade 11 English course, through all of Ontario for all I know, is themed. The theme is the progression of a person from childhood to adult, and so literary themes regarding this are used in abundance, the most stressed of which is innocence to experience. In a sense, the theme can work. Innocence is a lack of guilt - yes, children are innocent. When a child, in a fit of rage, does something they never thought possible of themselves, realising suddenly what they have done - that they are guilty of something it is a loss of innocence. I am known to those who know me as an almost obsessively honest person. I don't lie. But I remember having lied for the first time - feeling horrified at what I had done and turning around a few seconds later to correct my mistake. That is an example of what is meant by the phrase innocence to experience. I am still an honest person - but from that day on I could not claim I had never lied. Now in class - we are covering poetry and short stories at the moment. Day after day of meaningless analysation of text about, in some form or another, childhood, to make sure we know how to find tone and metaphors and alliteration and themes and allusions, etc. Thus is used that idea of innocence to experience - except that it is MIS-used. No matter what the story or poem is about, someone says that one of the themes is innocence to experience - and according to the teacher, they are right! It is ludicrous! There is one piece after another where guilt is NEVER dealt with in any size, shape or form and simply because the poem deals with growing up (supposedly), the theme suddenly becomes innocence to experience. A poem on a child being taken into a gas chamber during the holocaust. The child is forced to realise it is going to die. Never does an angry or hateful thought cross it's mind in the poem. How has it lost it's innocence? It has lost IGNORANCE, yes. It has learned a cold fact about the world, but it is not guilty of hatred. It is never implied in the poem that there is ANY loss of innocence and yet this is supposed to be a theme? Today - poetry presentations. There is a poem about the magical world of imaginative games that children play in and how they lose the ability to do so when they are older. The poem says they are wiser now and no longer have the ability to do that. Four themes are put on the board by the students presenting - the very FIRST is innocence to experience. It isn't even EXPLAINED in a way that supports the term. The children have lost the ability to do that because they have lost their innocence? The poem never mentions it, the poem never implies it. I can compare that to taking a poem about the beauty of birds and saying it is about their contrast to what they EAT. The concept was never there to start with. I tried talking to the teacher about this one; she nods and discusses and as with many cases agrees with me - but then she turns around and says something that tells me she never even understood what I had been saying! Is my explanation unclear to you? Innocence to experience is used again and again in the school system in a COMPLETELY incorrect way. It HAS it's use - but it is mistaken for IGNORANCE to experience in SO many cases.... and the 'teaching' reinforces the error and they don't even realise they are doing it. It has been incredibly infuriating to me to bear this - especially when I must sit there and watch it reinforced every day. I've made one of my mottos innocence is not ignorance. I believe that on a level separate from this debate entirely, but it is relevant none-the-less. Two very different concepts have been mixed up and never corrected - please give your feedback and help me vent lest I go insane. Thank-you for reading. *Canid takes a bow. * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasslehoff Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 Canid, I would love to help you out here, but I am quite lost. I understand the topic and what you are saying, but dont know where to go with it.. I just wanted you to know I did read it, and If I understand I will post something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaneus Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 Well, I agree with you completely on what you're saying, but I'm with Tasslehoff here. I really can't say much more. You're right though schools are stupid. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopperWolf Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 (edited) well, I'll say something. Innocence is perhaps linked in some way to ignorance. The suggestion is that experience forces an awareness upon people and the real world strips them of their innocence; it permeates through them and once they know they horrors of the world they cannot go back. Indeed, those adults who we view as innocent we also assume to be ignorant of the facts of life. [Don't know if anyone reading this is a Discworld fan but the basic original idea of Carrot's character was that he retained his innocence by closing his mind to the "obvious" truths of the world of crime, much to vimes' dismay.] I tend to disagree with this idea anyway, at least for the most part. I believe one can experience life and learn from it and still retain innocence, but people are often tainted. there is always some innocence lost, but a large proportion of what we would view as innocence in a person: Honesty, belief in true love, belief that there is good in everyone, well, that's something a LOT of people retain, and even find strengthened by what they experience. A lot is to do with perspective, how they think affects the way they see an experience. A lot of it is to do with the integral "character" of that person. Innocence can't be stripped completely through loss of ignorance. But there's a part of innocence that IS linked with ignorance (the innocence of a child who thinks he was delivered by a Stalk loses that innocence when he discovers what really happened between mummy and daddy) but most I think is not. the makings of a class discussion if you can get past the braiwashed attitude which you might not be able to... Edited February 21, 2003 by HopperWolf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyyark Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 (edited) scholastic method: Clear lot, pave ground, start building. The processing unit comes after the building, so that the structure will always fit the blue print. When applying this learning technique to life, ignorance is the same as innocence. Most schools that I have experenced operate off of the principal that children must become functioning adults, and they cannot do that on their own. Thus they fix you up to take everything they say and consume it, weeding out opinion and personality later, so that you haven't a chance of going wrong. If they brought up the idea that ignorance and innocence are not the same, the general student body may realise that unquestioning acceptance of enviromental influence is not necessarily the best way all the time. That then would lead to much more difficulty than the school system is equiped and qualified to deal with. I'm not saying its a big conspiracy, as most teachers probably don't realise it. I have noticed, however, that this does hold true for plenty of topics. My solution has always been: look at what they give you, take the useful part, discard the rest. It's how I stay sane. I did and still do have trouble in school though, as my opinions sometimes get me in trouble. I tend to think the best place to voice them is in papers. Although... when they are well enough written no one seems to mind. Edited February 21, 2003 by Peredhil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Portrait of Zool Posted February 21, 2003 Report Share Posted February 21, 2003 Wonderful post Canid. I commend you. From m-w.com; Main Entry: in·no·cence Pronunciation: 'i-n&-s&n(t)s Function: noun Date: 14th century 1 a : freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil Key here is the concept of evil. I personally believe that once one reaches the sophistication to redefine evil, then it becomes possible to reclaim innocence. For example, Christianity is famous for expousing that all is according to 'God's plan', then ducking responsibility for suffering by chucking it all up as the work of the devil. So, which is it? Either all is for good, or it is not. When one can commit to everything being 'for good', wether in faith or for any other reason, then it follows to forgive the universe. Of course, that is just an example - but the point then becomes innocence through experience. What you have experienced is disillusionment of the aparent idea that teachers, adults, and the entire education system in general actually know what they are doing. Heh. I actually think having a 'theme' and putting the functioning of the grown child in society as a goal is fine, but listening to the way they do it gives me the willies. Comprehension can be a very slippery thing. Most people think that if they can understand the words to something, then they feel comfortable in saying they understand the concept. This obviously does not automatically follow - but try telling them that. Listen to Nyyark - his is a very responsible and aware attitude. To some extent one must play the game, but if you let them they will readily consume your soul and spit you out at the end of your productive life. Simply becoming aware that you have to watch out for yourself, and can never take what society hands you at face value is half the battle. This does not necessarily make everything in society bad, but you have to think for yourself. Take what they teach you of value in school, as Nyyark says, and use it to serve YOU. As for wisdom and imagination, that is pure and utter nonsense. Imagination is one end of manifestation, the other end being the discipline and skill to make it real. This is how people innovate, invent, enlarge mankind's horizons, write books. Many people in the worldare very skilled and disciplined, but only encouraged to use their imagination to the extent it serves their employers aims. I suppose that's fine, if you are satisfied being a 9 to 5er for someone else the rest of your life... Imagination will atrophy with disuse, just like any capability. This is one way the world encourages us to expand. To have a dream - to be a writer, an astronaut, a movie star, whatever - we must then grow enough to not only maintain that vision, but also develop the discipline and the skill to make it real. Then we become a force in the world. An artist does not become an artist by painting pictures - many people do that. An artist becomes an Artist by capturing the intangible - by using his imagination to intuitively conceptualize a form with meaning, and then uses his skill and discipline to manifest his creation. That is true personal power - and knowledgable people can readily recognize the value of that, as well as sense it's complete lack. And so, it seems, can you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamaranis Posted February 24, 2003 Report Share Posted February 24, 2003 School sucks. It really does. I graduated highschool nearly two years ago, and despite everyone's predictions to the contrary, my opinion of it hasn't changed much. There's a poem I vaguely remember that this brought to mind, it went something like I woke up one Tuesday morning To the sound of a Chainsaw Cutting off my left Leg Why did I choose Tuesday, or my left leg I don't know But some one will probably analyize this and come up with a reason That's not exactly right... I actually encountered that poem in school, and I liked it because I felt it supported my argument that I shouldn't be being forced to analyize poetry against my will. Anyway, its not really surprising that you should be taught something that's outright wrong at school, but be careful where you say things like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts