The Educated Imagination ch 5 by Northrop Frye

Chapter 5 - Verticals of Adam

The last chapters outlined Frye's theory. Now he'll examine how his theory works in the practical world of teaching literature.

The general principle is that literature follows after a mythology in a sequence that parallels history. (I think that's what he's saying.) Myths are man's first step in trying to find his place in the world. Myths begin as stories about the deity and then become the form with which to pass on oral stories. It forms the foundation on which the rest of literature rests. The Bible might be considered a form of literature that falls into this category. So, then, scripture should be the child's earliest exposure to literature so that it forms the foundation for all later books. Frye isn't speaking as a Christian, but as a literary scholar. The Bible is often quoted and alluded to, and a student of literature won't get far without some familiarity with those references. And he's not talking about the spiritual truths, but the storyline from a literary perspective--the history and fate of the world as an epic tale.

On top of the Biblical framework should come classical mythology, its familiar characters and its cycles of life and rebirth, seasons, trials and victories. Patterns should be noted: the same patterns and plots from the Bible are repeated in mythology (and again in classics like Paradise Lost.) It's not easy to understand later literature if you miss the parallels between the Bible and myths. Early Bible developed into Psalms and Job as surely as mythology developed into Homer and the Greek dramas. Then came comedy, heroic romance, tragedy and irony. Comedy and heroic romance should be taught next. Tragedy and irony should be saved for older (middle school) students.

A student will get more out of Lorna Doone if he's seen the pattern of heroism and love from mythology, and if he can see the same pattern in a recent movie imitating Shakespeare. It doesn't matter if the student can't make value judgments and understand why Shakespeare is better than the movie. That will come with time and experience. Trying to rush him to value classics will just turn him off.

Stories should be read for what they are: just stories, whether they're myths, or classics, or modern romances. It doesn't help to try to find cryptic meaning where there is none.

Reading in other languages can teach students to value precise wording and using the correct phrase to convey exact meaning. It can be easy for students to become verbose unnecessarily just because they like wordiness. Language should convey thought and ideas, although it's not the only way. Music, art, architecture can also convey thought.

As students get older, they will begin to see that literature doesn't just relate to language, but to subjects like philosophy and science (because literature isn't just a bunch of words, but vital ideas. Sounds like CM!)

Most subjects are taught from the center and then move outward. But literature is often taught backwards, by trying to teach language application first, and then move into prose, and then poetry. But literature needs to start at the center--poetry--and then work outward. Nursery rhymes, and word rhythym, and the 'surge and sweep of Homer' shouldn't have to wait until techniques of language are mastered.

One reason some works are classics is because they capture a certain culture in time, such as Robinson Crusoe, or Tom Sawyer, or the Gettysburg Address, or the Victorian emphasis on manners to absurd lengths in Alice in Wonderland.

The purpose in teaching literature isn't so much to make writers of all students, but to transfer some of the imaginative element to him so he can taste heaven and hell and think beyond the narrow confines of his immediate surroundings.