Shakespeare would have wanted the kids at Kingsmead school to study the Simpsons

Posted by :
Alec Patton

by Alec Patton The BBC reported today that over 400 parents at Kingsmead Community School in Somerset have signed a petition demanding that the school's Media module stop using class and homework time to analyse The Simpsons, and devote the newly freed-up time to studying Shakespeare. On BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning, parent Joseph Reynolds particularly recommended A Midsummer Night's Dream. 'There's a time and a place for The Simpsons,' Reynolds said, 'but it doesn't belong in the classroom.' Reynolds appears to have a particular understanding of pedagogy, based on two commonly-held but erroneous premises: that the main function of education is to expose students to new things, and that education that prepares students to negotiate the day-to-day world they'll be living in is not 'real' education. I'll look at these assumptions in turn:

Exposure is not the same as understanding

People who don't understand education often think that a teacher's job is to introduce students to unfamiliar things. Actually, the best teachers help their students to look at familiar things with new eyes - so physics teaches students to look at suspension bridges in a new way, biology completely alters their understanding of saliva, and learning about the Holocaust completely transforms what they think when someone calls somebody else 'queer' on the playground. It's wonderful when a teacher introduces you to something that you've never encountered before, but it's just as wonderful when teachers turn the everyday into something rich and strange. To their great credit, Kingsmead are standing behind their Media teachers. Assistant Head Andy Dunnett told the BBC that 'Students are encouraged to look at the text in a critical way. Initially it's about building up their skills as critical thinkers. They also learn about different aspects of the media; audience, visual narrative, presentation and stereotypes, and some quite high level thinking ideas like satire, irony and parody.' This brings me to my response to Reynolds' second assumption...

Education should prepare students for living in the world

You might think everyone feels this way, but the curriculum suggests otherwise. To give one example, most schools take it for granted that 'there's a time and a place for economics, but it's not the mathematics classroom'. So, students graduate able to measure a triangle within an inch of its life, but not to compare interest rates on mortgage offers. And they graduate able to identify a sly reference to Spanish succession in an Elizabethan play, but not to critically engage with popular media - that is to say, the billboards, posters, magazines, TV programmes, and advertisements that tell them they should buy more, lose weight, plug their sweat glands, indulge in snack foods, despise those who come to this country looking for protection from tyranny, and get angrier at benefits cheats than at tax cheats.

There's some pretty dodgy stuff in a Midsummer Night's Dream (the play's first scene explicitly argues that if a woman falls in love with the man who kidnapped her, it's a good thing), but kids aren't going to be encountering it every day for the rest of their lives. William Shakespeare himself suffered the slings and arrows of the dreary snobbery that animates Reynolds' petition - Ben Jonson alluded to this when he interrupted his memorial poem to Shakespeare to point out that his subject 'hadst small Latin and less Greek.' Shakespeare got his own back most effectively in Love's Labour Lost, with the latin-spouting buffoon Holofernes, who analyses a contemporary love poem as follows:

You find not the apostraphas, and so miss the accent: let me supervise the canzonet. Here are only numbers ratified; but, for the elegancy, facility, and golden cadence of poesy, caret. Ovidius Naso was the man: and why, indeed, Naso, but for smelling out the odouriferous flowers of fancy, the jerks of invention? Imitari is nothing: so doth the hound his master, the ape his keeper, the tired horse his rider. But, damosella virgin, was this directed to you? (IV,2,1268)

It's easy to imagine a real-life Elizabethan Holofernes petitioning a school to stop teaching Shakespeare, and teach more Ovidius Naso. Shakespeare, who in his time was a contemporary writer (a fact often-forgotten by crusaders like Reynolds) vividly understood how education calficies when it neglects what is happening NOW.

Comments

[...] This post was mentioned

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Innovation_Unit, Alec Patton. Alec Patton said: Shakespeare would have wanted the kids at Kingsmead school to study the Simpsons: http://wp.me/pwY1p-n4 [...]

All well said. There is

All well said. There is another implicit assumption that underpins Reynolds' criticism: that education is to prepare students to fit in with existing culture, values and identities: to conform, in other words. This is troubling in that of course the assumption that 'life', or 'work' or cultural and political shapes, issues and challenges are going to be the same in the future as they are now makes no sense. But it is the current assumption behind most compulsory education. Encouraging challenge, questioning, analysis, framing, testing of ideas, dialogue, stretching ideas and accepting multiple perspectives is at the core of another kind of education, which could take as its central function that of examining and challenging current culture and ideas. In my opinion, both Shakespeare and the Simpsons can provide a context for that. what would happen if you asked a class of, say, 12-year-olds to choose between a lesson on Shakespeare and a lesson on the Simpsons?

I agree, a marvellous essay.

I agree, a marvellous essay. One correction (I think) - the 400 signatures were gathered in the town centre, I don't think they were all parents. This makes it worse of course. Personally I think it comes down to snobbery. I bet if David Cameron and Prince Charles said they liked The Simpsons and thought it should be used as a teaching aid the 400 signatories would take their names off the petition.

Theagingfanboy - that's

Theagingfanboy - that's interesting, and actually, I hope you're right. If it was in the town centre, then the signatories probably wouldn't have had access to the full story - they would have had someone with a clipboard asking 'do you think it's right that the Simpsons are replacing Shakespeare at our local school?' or words to that effect. This throws the whole question of how much parental support Joseph Reynolds' campaign acually has wide open. I'd love to know more about this, if anyone has more information.

Nice one Alec. I did a degree

Nice one Alec. I did a degree in comparative religion at SOAS and did an independent study project on new religious movements in the media. The Simpsons have an excellent episode when Marge gets 'brainwashed' by a 'cult'. The episode was absolutely spot on with the academic thinking at the time regarding stereotypes and religious discrimination. It really brought the topic alive and could be used with any class of undergrads to introduce the subject. And it was funny as hell, which helps.

The article on the Daily Mail

The article on the Daily Mail website [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1295062/Angry-parents-accuse-school-dumbing-English-showing-The-Simpsons-class.html] looks like the Town Cetre in Taunton to me, and the BBC News website says that "Mr Reynolds collected signatures for his petition in the local community". Is there a published survey of the actual parents?

Thank you for this fantastic

Thank you for this fantastic article. Not only were the signatures collected in the town centre, but he approached only older people, regardless of any connection that they may have had with the school. When younger parents tried to talk to him about the petition, he walked away.

Local

Local Paper: http://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/8271556.Head_teacher_backs_B...

Well said all the above and a

Well said all the above and a great article. A* all around. My full support goes to the Head along with the staff of Kingsmead Community School. They are only doing what any teaching professionals do: engaging their students using well known characters. This often brings in humour (of which I am a big advocate!) and enhances their knowledge and understanding of various subjects by using familiar subjects. What a rediculous silly man! All schools in our country need ALL the help and support they can get, especially from parents. Constructive critisism is always good and welcomed however I can't possibly believe that he has any real idea of what is required in the school curriculum. The hardest thing to open is a closed mind...Students minds need to be opened in order for them to learn and enjoy their learning. Is he doing his child any favours? Probably just being an embarrassment! Quite frankly his pompous out of date attitude 'totally sucks dude!!'!

As a novelist, former

As a novelist, former educator and fan of both the Simpsons and Shakespeare (I have only formally studied the latter) I applaud your article and the common sense of the other commenters. What so few people realize is just how much of the humor in the Simpsons depends on the viewer's cultural literacy. My favorite example is the episode in which Marge is playing Blanche Dubois in a musical version of a Streetcar Named Desire (Streetcar!) and Maggie spends time in a daycare called "the Ayn Rand School for Tots" where they take all the children's pacifiers and stuffed animals away. Bonus culture points for film references to "The Great Escape" and "the Birds", in that episode. And don't even get me started on the Gilbert and Sullivan stuff in the Cape Fear episode. One really has to wonder if these protesters have ever actually watched the show? Or...are they just unable to recognize all these references? It's probably the most literate show on television.

[...] This post was Twitted

[...] This post was Twitted by lollerskating [...]

[...] This post was Twitted

[...] This post was Twitted by dbltrue [...]

surely there's room for all

surely there's room for all of this in any school...expose kids to a diverse, rich curriculum where Shakespeare can be studied alongside The Simpsons. It's only the purists who will complain and who wants to be that narrow minded.

My kids have been watching

My kids have been watching the Simpsons since they were toddlers. They now have a keen understanding of all the things you mentioned — irony, satire and parody. They've also learned a lot about the fallacies inherent in religion and politics and have learned to question their own prejudices. And the cultural references? This show can't be beat for references to classic films, television programs, sports, popular music and even Shakespeare. What other show does all that? I'm glad this school is backing its teachers. Here in the U.S., the administration would have caved in immediately.

You can bet that Matt

You can bet that Matt Groening (Simpson creator) knows his Sheakespeare, mythology and epic poetry inside & out. That's how his references are spot on so much of the time.

I hope that you write can be

I hope that you write can be useful for the people and always to your success

Seems a little redundant

Seems a little redundant given existing comments, but I'd like to add my thanks and complete agreement with your well-delivered argument.

I think children should be

I think children should be exposed to more Shakespeare - they don't see enough murder, regicide, suicide and patricide on TV and Shakespeare is replete with all of the above. I think that The Simpsons is very clever and has many references to literature, theatre, film, art and science. I think that Shakespeare is not accessible to many children until their senior school years unless 'dumbed down' or in film form such as Baz Luhrmann's Romeo & Juliet. I do think that contemporary sources are valid and think it essential for teachers to show the familiar in new light and introduce the new and occasionally shocking. (Such as the holocaust.)

Well said and I

Well said and I wholeheartedly agree

That's the difference between

That's the difference between a sample and a petition though. Somebody who's petitioning has a perfect right to select the constituency to suit the purpose. You can't reasonably complain about that.

Why is it always

Why is it always "Shakespeare". It's a media class for crying out loud. So instead of watching a long running show, that has lots of context, of which changes depending on your age/awareness (you know, something from the media of TV), they should do exactly what their parents did (in English). - I think these "Parents" need to be taught what a media course is.

The quality of the earlier

The quality of the earlier Simpsons episodes, before they became afraid of R Murdoch is absolutely superb. The plot intricacies, literary references and use of language cannot be beaten. This is because some of the finest writers of their time have worked on that show as a team and the output is at least as good as the sum of their talents. Sometimes it's even better.

[...] RT @stephenfry: Well

[...] RT @stephenfry: Well exactly. http://bit.ly/dwF0ET [...]

well put!!! :) please do

well put!!! :) please do check out my blog www.afuzzyrants.wordpress.com. your feedback will be appreciated. call this "shameless self-promotion" :P

Great points! I love the

Great points! I love the Simpsons and Shakespeare so I'd have had no problems

Fantastic argument. AA Gill

Fantastic argument. AA Gill once sat down to a dinner party next to a mature lady. When she asked him what he did, he informed her that he was an artist. Repulsed, she asked "not one of those modern artists, I hope?" He replied "no no. I'm a grand master from the Renaissance. Born in the 15th fucking century, I was."

[...] 400 parents have

[...] 400 parents have demanded that a school stop using The Simpsons in its media modules instead of Shakespeare. Here’s a post from Innovation Unit about why Shakespeare himself might well have been in favo.... [...]

You can complain about that

You can complain about that if the petition is subsequently claimed to represent the (unbiased) sentiment of the affected families. I'm not saying Mr. Reynolds has done that, but there is certainly a risk of it being so misinterpreted. The scale of the protest is also telling. You could probably get 300 signatures on a petition to ban Shakespeare from the classroom if you targeted your audience appropriately. Heck, in this country (US) you can apparently get major fractions of the population to disparage gays and blacks and to vote against their own self-interest. I wouldn't be surprised if you could get 300 signatures to ban oxygen from the atmosphere if you worked at it. But I expect better things from the UK.

[...] Shakespeare would have

[...] Shakespeare would have wanted the kids at Kingsmead school to study the Simpsons by Alec Patton The BBC reported today that over 400 parents at Kingsmead Community School in Somerset have signed a [...] [...]

While I could see a lot of

While I could see a lot of good coming from studying the Simpson (likely a better attention keeper than Shakespeare, while still having some actual content), I would also warn of the risk of a good theory not working in praxis. I wanted to quote something from ``Buffy'' (keeping with the spirit), but seeing that I did not find the quote on the web, I have to make very rough paraphrase with the right gist: Professor of popular culture on the first lecture of an introductory course: This course is not about making fun of popular culture, it is not about earning easy credits, and it is not about watching videos during class. With that premise, a study of (or with the help of) popular culture can be quite legitimate, but the question is: Did his students agree? (For that matter, would all other teachers agree?) If not, the class could easily degenerate from study to entertainment---and with school-childen, rather than college students, the risk is far higher.

[...] and that I need to have

[...] and that I need to have one totally frivolous celebrity add. And because he tweets cool stuff like this, [...]

A couple of comments. 1. My

A couple of comments. 1. My daughter was required to read one book all year. One. 2. I did not target 'old people' as splodge reports. 3. 400 community people is stronger than just parents. Society is saying 'enough of your edutainment', not just parents. 4. I garnered 400 signatures in 25 hours of standing in The Square. What will it take Kingsmead to back away from this weak course? 1000? 2000? 25, 000? I have no doubt I could get them. 5. Received my first 'hate mail'. Written in Latin. Ironic, given that schools are abandoning that language. 6. My father was an English teacher for over thirty years. I know what education is. The Simpsons is not it.

Your knowledge of education

Your knowledge of education seems to omit that of the nature of sample sets. You can't use a sample characterising one group (parents) and claim that the same size sample is of a bigger group (community) without *weakening* the sample's statistical weight - the exact opposite of what you seem to think. You'll need rather more than 400 to justify that somewhat grander claim. You have no doubt you could get 25000? Go on then. Let's see you do it.

The sample includes parents

The sample includes parents and community members. If my sample is now 'weaker', then you must admit that the school governors, who are made up of parents and community members is a weaker organization than a body only made up of parents. Of course, this is not the case the governors would make, is it?

If schools are supposed to

If schools are supposed to start teaching us such skills as figuring out interest rates and understanding advertising, why don't they teach the children other important skills like negotiating traffic, driving a car, and wiping their bottoms. Surely, these skills are more essential than analyzing the back of a box of cereal. But schools don't usually do that. This idea that the children will walk around like zombies in a fugue state because we don't teach them the skills to analyze and understand The Simpsons or The Teletubbies is ridiculous. I don't know why all of you are in such a state. You think you are 'sticking it to the man' by insisting on this edutainment. But the man is gone. You have won. This is the education we have. You are the man, and now I'm sticking it to you.

BTW, I know what a 'media

BTW, I know what a 'media course' is. This is not a 'media course'. This is Year 8 English. If you want to debate the merits of whether we should teach the media, fine. My opinion is we shouldn't do any 'media studies' at all. Do it at university if you are so interested.

Your response tells me that

Your response tells me that either I've not explained very well, or you don't understand. I might infer from asking a suitably large sample of dog-owners if dogs are adorable, where 90% of the sample answers yes, that about 90% of all dog owners think dogs adorable. I can't then claim that because dog-owners are part of the community, 90% of the community thinks dogs adorable. I'm sure you'd agree that'd be silly. But it appears to be what you're saying in your (3) and (4).

Paul, soon you will be

Paul, soon you will be telling me that my sample can only be taken from teachers. Or maybe from one-legged dog owners. Or, in reality, you think the sample should only be a sample of one, you. There are only about 1500 people living in this area. A significant proportion are under age, or should I include them as well? I stood in The Square and asked anyone I could. I did not interfere with people working, or people shopping. I asked mothers, grandmothers, fathers, grandfathers, people with no children, dog owners, old people, young people. Only about 6 were actually in complete disagreement with me. Only another ten or so just disagreed, but more sympathetically. Then there is always the matter of teachers and staff, wary to put their names down, but some sympathetic, others not. This is not a Gallup poll. I am one guy standing in the street. I think that takes a little guts. No matter what my sample is, you will try to distract with these red herrings. The facts are simple, the community wants it out, and you don't. You should actually see the size of this place. It is not Times Square. Take a look on Google Earth. I just had the pleasure of also gaining the signature of the local councillor, Eddie Gaines.

Nicola, I assure you I am no

Nicola, I assure you I am no purist. My father was an English teacher and head of department for thirty years. There is a place for The Simpsons, as I've mentioned. If a teacher wants to use it as a hook to bring students closer to stronger material, I'm all for it. But for a stand alone class of instruction for six weeks? No. This was, I will remind you, the SOLE content for six weeks. Wilfred Owen got one lesson. My daughter was required to read one book the entire year. Am I reallly being unreasonable in asking for some more books, plays, literature?

Maybe you should have just

Maybe you should have just home-schooled the kids on Simpsons? I learned irony and satire from Mark Twain and George Orwell, then I appreciated it on Blackadder. Is there no room for more books. Is this it, one book the entire year? Does that really seem right?

You give me no credit, d. Of

You give me no credit, d. Of course we've watched the show. And you are actually making an argument for me, if you didn't realize it. The cultural and literary references in The Simpsons are only going to be realized by someone with a classic academic background like yourself. I read Tennessee Williams in school. What kid is going to read Tennessee Williams now? The tail of media studies is now wagging the dog of English Literature. Maybe, in fifteen years, there will be a parody of The Simpsons, and the kids can just study that to know about The Glass Menagerie. Is this really what you want? My daughter was required to read one book this year. One. No short stories, no plays. Is it too much to ask for a little more literature?

I originally commented here

I originally commented here in defence of your right to gather the support you wanted - that's what a petition is. But let's not pretend that what you're doing is a properly conducted scientific survey of the views of the population on this matter. When you get your 25000 supporters - your claim, not mine - we'll have a better idea. I'd've accepted a much smaller number, but if you want to make rash promises who'm I to argue? And by the way, you have no idea what I think about the matter. I have offered no opinion. You aren't entitled to say "the community wants it out, and you don't". Either half.

I hardly think George Orwell

I hardly think George Orwell was a conformist. Nor Mark Twain. Nor Hemingway or F Scott Fitzgerald. My daughter was required to read one book this year. One. No plays. No short stories. One book by Michael Morpurgo. There is no balance here.

You think we're all stupid

You think we're all stupid and you're the only smart guy. Who is the snob?

Wrong. Time to put away your

Wrong. Time to put away your Sherlock Holmes cap, fanboy. You've failed Detection 101. Not Taunton. Wiveliscombe.

You are a real enigma, Paul.

You are a real enigma, Paul. What is it you want, a scientific survey, conducted by 'expert survey takers' from Gallup. Or maybe a survey or petition isn't good enough and you want to start a double blind random trial. Or hey, let's cut the crap. I'm a merchant seaman and I am going to sea, so your 25, 000 won't be listed in the next ten minutes. Perhaps, I'll grant you, that was rash. But you should plant your flag for The Simpsons as a worthy six week course of study or not, instead of worrying about the scientific polling conditions in Wiveliscombe Square. Honestly. Your scientific polling conditions blarney is just a red herring. Let's talk about The Simpsons.

Nice, Mr. Patton. Congrats on

Nice, Mr. Patton. Congrats on reprimanding me as not being able to 'understand' what is going on. You are the one who does not understand. It's just like how the Brits all laugh like drains when a woman dresses up like a man. I GET the joke. It's just not funny. I GET the purpose of the curriculum. I just disagree with your philosophy entirely. It is not through any lack of understanding. Here's what I read in Year 8 English: Animal Farm, Orwell Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare Inherit the Wind, play about the Tennessee monkey trial April Morning, Howard Fast Moonfleet, J Meade Faulkner The Most Dangerous Game, short story The Necklace, du Mauppasant, short story The Gift of the Magi, short story The Rocking Horse Winner, short story The Hollow Men, TS Eliot, poem The Cask of Amontillado, Poe, short story The Tell-tale Heart, Poe, short story. Here is what my daughter read: Private Peaceful, Morpurgo I think that says it all. So don't give me your blarney about how I dont' understand. My father was an English teacher for thirty years. Head of department for ten. High school English. So. Give me a break.

Alec, I'm damned if I do, I'm

Alec, I'm damned if I do, I'm damned if I don't. I looked into this and decided that a 'parents only' petition would be judged as turning the parent/teacher relationship into a customer/client relationship. This advice from my father who was an English teacher for thirty years. A community based petition would be much stronger. Mind you, there are many, many parents on the petition.

I'm afraid it's a tad late to

I'm afraid it's a tad late to characterise 'your support' (or lack of it) as a red herring. You've been responding to my observations long enough for anyone to reasonably infer you were interested in them. What you have is a petition, not a survey. And that's fine. And there's an end to it. Bon voyage. - and I do hope that, to a seaman, that's not the equivalent of naming the Scottish Play.

I'm sorry, I didn't notice

I'm sorry, I didn't notice Cormac McCarthy, Ian McEwan, Sarah Waters, Roth, Updike and Carey listed in The Simpsons credits. You are overplaying 'the finest writers of their time'. The Simpsons is a 22 minute show full of great gags. Just because they have applied some cultural or social references does not give them some profound iconic status.