New-York tribune., 1875-02-18
READING IN SCHOOLS.

READING ~ SCHOOLS.
We sometimes wish it were possible for the
statisticians who compile our census reports
to go little deeper and tabuate the intel
ligence of the country as indicated by some
more suggestive signs than are vOuchsated to
us. Thus after having given the exact num-
Der of those who can read and write in any
community, it would help us if they would
proceed to tell us what is read and how many
can read aloud piece Of good English litera
ture. We suppose we must rest content with
the reports of public library officials, and with
such observation, scanty or extensive. as we
may be able to give to the matter. But the
fact remains and will hardly be questioned that
in our public schools, the main object, so
far as reading is concerned, is TO supply the
scholar with the power to read print ut sight,
to pronounce accurately the several words
that meet his eye, and to know the time
value of the several marks of punctuation.
All this has little or nothing to do with teach
ing child what to read, or educating the
power given him to discriminate between
what is worth reading and what is worthless.
We believe that higher views of education
are beginning to prevail, and that the wisdom
which calls emphatically for living teachers
calls also for the use in education of the liv-
ing waters OF literature. Let any one exam
inc the reading books which constitute the
whole body of literature upon which chill
dren in our public schools are fed,
and ask if this feast of scraps is
really the best we can offer for their,
intellectual and spiritual nOurshment. Here
and there one finds fncshort poem or prose
selection from a master, which has quicken
ing power, but the great mass is drawn from
writer's who are entitled to all proper respect,
but are not the nearest to the fountain of pure
literature. Moreover the very fragmentary
character of the reading books is prejudicial
to full and free development of chiId's
capacity for approaching good literature.
Even to an older reader an anthology offers but
a meagcr feast, and Il good deal OF the pleasure
drawn from it is in the association of the
fragments with their writer. and with other
parts of the same work.
The difficulty with the reading which we
set before children in our public schools is
that it leads to nothing. 1t is little in itself
and it contains no inspiration for something
beyond. 1t partakes of much of the character
of the books provided for children's enter
tainment, which seem eternaliy to suggest
that the readers are barred out from any
common field or play ground with their elders.
1t is literature which stunts growth. 1t is
given to children with minds open to receive
lasting impressions and tells them to be salts
fed with petty and ignoble things This
reading is so much exercise; by an instructive
fitness the selections are sometimes called ex-
Al httt Il h
bells and pulling weights when the child
ought to be in the free air OF the higher
literature, breathing it and learning to lOathe
the mephitic vapors of the swamps of litera-
ture. This distinction between books for
children and books for their elders, so purely
creation of the last hundred years,
ought to be abolished in our schools, and the
better lesson taught of the common inherit
ance held by children with their parents in
the great literature of the nation and parent
country. If it be objected that this is impos
sible, that children cannot understand classic
English literature, we reply-try them and
see The power which has made certain
works classic is tho power of genius within
them, which is Independent of commentators
and archaeological lumber. Where could one
find the girl or boy in our schools whose
blood would not be quickened by the
Hunting of the Cheviot" and dozen other
of the great balladsf The possession Of these
ballads, learned by heart, would in itself be a
liberal education. The snatches OF MarmiOn
which school-boys declaim point out the
power which the whole poem would have
on their Imagination. Whatever there
is in the whole range of English
and American literature which lives by virtue
of its common acceptance may safely be made
part of the school curriculum. We have no
fault to find with the arithmetics which en-
gage the young student in the fascinating
occupation of disposing on his slate of great
variety of merchandise, but the arithmetic is
not the cornerstone of human freedom and
obedience. The higher demands of the human
soul should be answered in our schools as
well, and we advise pure literature as direct
and effective agent