Positive responses to Teachnology posts
Posted September 9, 2006
I'm interested in further ideas regarding Z for Zachariah. I enjoyed reading Steve's take on the book and it gives me some great questions to ask my students.
Posted August 2, 2007
Hi. I'm a first year out teacher desperately trying to engage myself (let alone my year 8s) with this novel. All I can say is THANK YOU 'STEVE' (whoever you are) for giving me an interpretation that is far beyond anything that anyone else has. All the resources I have are sooooo simplistic and I have hated this book.
Unfortunately I was an advanced reader when I was my students' age (father is a literature teacher) and find it hard to engage with teen fiction at all. As a side note, my students in general are tolerating the novel, but are not particularly engaged - even the top readers in the class.
Hi. I'm a first year out teacher desperately trying to engage myself (let alone my year 8s) with this novel. All I can say is THANK YOU 'STEVE' (whoever you are) for giving me an interpretation that is far beyond anything that anyone else has. All the resources I have are sooooo simplistic and I have hated this book.
Unfortunately I was an advanced reader when I was my students' age (father is a literature teacher) and find it hard to engage with teen fiction at all. As a side note, my students in general are tolerating the novel, but are not particularly engaged - even the top readers in the class.
Posted February 12, 2008 by AussieJim
Mate
I feel like I've had my head up a certain other orifice for all these years. If you don't mind I'm going to copy all your ideas and use them as teaching aids in future. It's not a nice realisation, but Loomis is the more reasonable of the two at the end. You are completely right. Politically incorrect (or at least unfashionable) but right. Thanks for making me realise that I've been taking Ann's perspective as the only one.
Jim
Mate
I feel like I've had my head up a certain other orifice for all these years. If you don't mind I'm going to copy all your ideas and use them as teaching aids in future. It's not a nice realisation, but Loomis is the more reasonable of the two at the end. You are completely right. Politically incorrect (or at least unfashionable) but right. Thanks for making me realise that I've been taking Ann's perspective as the only one.
Jim
Posted September 6, 2008
All of the discussion that this book has generated has confirmed my thoughts that it is still worthwhile and interesting. If adults will take the time to defend positions, sometimes at length, on this work of fiction, then it's a good read....
Steve--you are brilliant. Even though I don't agree with you, I find your comments extremely interesting and entertaining as well as thought-provoking. Thanks for taking the time to write your posts.
Steve--you are brilliant. Even though I don't agree with you, I find your comments extremely interesting and entertaining as well as thought-provoking. Thanks for taking the time to write your posts.
Posted March 10, 2009 by Shlesha
Steve, I agree 100% with you. Loomis is definitely not as much in fault as Ann. They needed to just put their thoughts aside and talk.
Posted April 26, 2010
(A response to someone who viewed the unreliable narrator interpretation as a justification of rape.)
It's obvious that you don't understand anything that Steve has very helpfully tried to tell you. He is not trying to justify rape, he is trying to tell you that this book is an excellent example of the Unreliable Narrator: what Ann says cannot be taken completely at face value. The narrator has the opportunity to embellish, editorialise and otherwise colour the account of what has taken place. Please, if only to make me feel less bad that Steve has taken so much time to explain something and none of you people (some of you are educators!!) have taken the time to read what is presented and think critically about the material.
It's obvious that you don't understand anything that Steve has very helpfully tried to tell you. He is not trying to justify rape, he is trying to tell you that this book is an excellent example of the Unreliable Narrator: what Ann says cannot be taken completely at face value. The narrator has the opportunity to embellish, editorialise and otherwise colour the account of what has taken place. Please, if only to make me feel less bad that Steve has taken so much time to explain something and none of you people (some of you are educators!!) have taken the time to read what is presented and think critically about the material.
Posted July 3, 2010
I must admit that my first impressions of this book were not good. The main character seemed so dated and uninteresting, the book was heavy handed with the religious imagery, and the story so slow. I did get into it after a while, but I had serious fears of how to engage a group of year 8 students in urban Australia in a story that was so far removed from their own lives? And why had such an outdated text been chosen? The Tomorrow When the War Began series seems such a better choice of text. BUT after reading these (numerous) posts, I have found my interest has been aroused, with some really worthwhile suggestions for teaching activities! So thank you! I might just have to go and read the book again...