Question

You’ve probably heard such reports. The number of college students majoring in the humanities (人文学科) is decreasing quickly. The news has caused a flood of high-minded essays criticizing the development as a symbol of American decline.

The bright side is this: The destruction of the humanities by the humanities is, finally, coming to an end. No more will literature, as part of an academic curriculum, put out the light of literature. No longer will the reading of, say, “King Lear” or D.H. Lawrence’s “Women in Love” result in the annoying stuff of multiple-choice quizzes, exam essays and homework assignments.

The discouraging fact is that for every college professor who made Shakespeare or Lawrence come alive for the lucky few, there were countless others who made the reading of literary masterpieces seem like two hours in the dentist’s chair.

The remarkably insignificant fact that, a half-century ago, 14% of the undergraduate population majored in the humanities (mostly in literature, but also in art, philosophy, history, classics and religion) as opposed to 7% today has given rise to serious reflections on the nature and purpose of an education in the liberal arts.

Such reflections always come to the same conclusion: We are told that the lack of a formal education, mostly in literature, leads to numerous harmful personal conditions, such as the inability to think critically, to write clearly, to be curious about other people and places, to engage with great literature after graduation, to recognize truth, beauty and goodness.

These serious anxieties are grand, admirably virtuous and virtuously admirable. They are also a mere fantasy.

The college teaching of literature is a relatively recent phenomenon. Literature did not even become part of the university curriculum until the end of the 19th century. Before that, what came to be called the humanities consisted of learning Greek and Latin, while the Bible was studied in church as the necessary other half of a full education. No one ever thought of teaching novels, stories, poems or plays in a formal course of study. They were part of the leisure of everyday life.

It was only after World War II that the study of literature as a type of wisdom, relevant to actual, contemporary life, put down widespread institutional roots. Soldiers returning home in 1945 longed to make sense of their lives after what they had witnessed and survived. The abundant economy afforded them the opportunity and the time to do so. Majoring in English hit its peak, yet it was this very popularity of literature in the university that spelled its doom, as the academicization of literary art was accelerated.

Literature changed my life long before I began to study it in college. Books took me far from myself into experiences that had nothing to do with my life, yet spoke to my life. But once in the college classroom, this precious, alternate life inside me got thrown back into that dimension of my existence that bored me. Homer, Chekhov and Yeats were reduced to right and wrong answers, clear-cut themes and clever interpretations. If there is anything to worry about, it should be the disappearance of what used to be an important part of every high-school education: the literature survey course, where books were not academically taught but thoroughly introduced—an experience unaffected by stupid commentary and useless testing.

The literary classics are places of quiet, useless stillness in a world that despises (鄙视) any activity that is not profitable or productive. Literature is too sacred to be taught. It needs only to be read.

Soon, if all goes well and literature at last disappears from the undergraduate curriculum—my fingers are crossed—increasing numbers of people will be able to say that reading the literary masterworks of the past outside the college classroom, simply in the course of living, was, in fact, their college classroom.

1.The author mentions “two hours in the dentist’s chair” in Paragraph 3 to indicate that _______.

A. the average literature class in college is two hours long

B. reading literary works is made unbearable by professors

C. it actually does not take long to read the classics of literature

D. college students don’t spend much time on literary masterworks

2.The sharp drop in the number of majors in the humanities _______.

A. has given rise to quite a shock in the intellectual world

B. promises the remarkable destruction of the humanities

C. shows more people read literature outside the classroom

D. has caused the author to reflect on the nature of literary creation

3.Which of the following opinions may the author hold?

A. The disappearance of literature should be strongly applauded.

B. Literature teaching can improve our critical thinking ability.

C. Reading literature doesn’t require specialized knowledge and skills.

D. Literature should be taught through analyzing different writing styles.

4.What is the author’s purpose in writing the passage?

A. To urge college students to read more literary classics.

B. To introduce the present situation of literature teaching.

C. To voice his opinion on the shrinkage of literature teaching.

D. To show his serious concern for college literature teaching.

Answer 1