Comparing texts - How to teach non-fiction

How to teach: English - Chris Curtis 2019

Comparing texts
How to teach non-fiction

There is a danger that we choose binary opposites when we select non-fiction texts for comparison. This is something we’d rarely consider doing with poetry, because we are so clear that poetry is a heavily nuanced and subtle form of writing. We’d happily compare a poem about a garden and a poem about a similar garden from a different poet. We know that no two poets see a garden in the same way. But, when it comes to non-fiction, we go for clear opposites. If a text is talking about how the pay gap between men and women should be reduced then the second text should be from some idiot who thinks it’s great as it is, right? By doing that, we reduce complex issues into a simple case of ’for’ or ’against’ — stark opposites. Ideas are malleable and abstract, so students need to understand that issues, and texts, are not solely one thing or another. They are fully understood in relation to others. To develop students’ understanding of perspective, we need to provide them with more points of view and look at the relationship between them. Something we freely do with poetry, yet often shun with non-fiction.

Let’s take the topical, or historical depending on when you read this, issue of Britain leaving the European Union. The world would have you think that the issue is a simple case of ’for’ or ’against’. Yet on the issue of Brexit there are several different views on the why and why nots. There’s the perspective of:

✵ People who lived in Britain before it joined the European Union.

✵ People who have only lived in Britain as part of the European Union.

✵ People who have a family member living in another country within the European Union.

✵ People whose jobs depend on commerce with countries inside the European Union.

I could go on forever because there are always so many viewpoints on any issue. Through this example we can see historical, conservative, international and local perspectives. Then, you might find a further layer of pessimism, optimism, romanticism, anger, bitterness or resentment under the surface. Each one would have a different, arguably valid, opinion on what should or shouldn’t happen. Narrow the exploration to ’for’ and ’against’ and you cut out points in between. In doing this, you miss the subtle nuances between each line of thought and you narrow your understanding of a complex issue.

The root cause of the problem is our desire to be impartial and show both sides. A common style — which I personally loathe — is discursive writing: turning the world simply into ’for’ and ’against’. So, how do we address complexity without this reductionism?

I tend to use a comparative approach:

1 What is your opinion on this topic?

2 What is text A’s opinion on this topic?

3 What is text B’s opinion on this topic?

4 What is text C’s opinion on this topic?

5 What do other people think about this topic?

I build understanding using different opinions on an issue, starting with the students’ own. Then, I introduce one text at a time and tease out the connections between them. At the same time, I will see how it links to the students’ opinions. Place two texts next to each other and you get a simple spot the difference, but add a third and you start to see the subtle links. You see text A places more emphasis on an aspect which text B is less bothered about, and which text C hasn’t even considered worthy of mention. Non-fiction texts are incredibly consumable and we forget that. They are easily digestible and disposable. That’s why we shouldn’t shy away from using them. Poetry and novels need room to breathe, but non-fiction is tomorrow’s chip paper.

English lessons should be about asking the difficult questions. We should be pushing all manner of different perspectives and viewpoints to allow students to form their own. We shouldn’t be enforcing a world view of binary opposites but helping them to see the complexity, and to make informed decisions. We need a range of voices in the classroom and it should reflect our democratic principles: everyone has a voice and a vote.

1 See https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100603153307/ http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/secondary/secondaryframeworks.

2 J. London, The People of the Abyss (Project Gutenberg ebook edition, 2005 [Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1903]), ch 23. Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1688/1688-h/1688-h.htm.

3 The Guardian, The Titanic is sunk, with great loss of life (16 April 1912). Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/news/1912/apr/16/leadersandreply.mainsection.

4 This fact is from the Institute of Fake Facts.

5 This fact is from the Department of Misinformation.

6 R. L. Stevenson, The old pacific capital, in Across the Plains with Other Memories and Essays (Project Gutenberg ebook edition, 2013 [London: Chatto & Windus, 1915]), pp. 51—71 at p. 51. Available at: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/614/614-h/614-h.htm#page51.