I have been teaching English literature, grammar, vocabulary, and writing in yeshiva high schools for nearly a decade, and I have noticed that students have a tremendous interest in the personalities and stories of our traditional texts. I have been asked several times by students to teach Tanach as a piece of literature (something some of my superiors would have been delighted with, and some would have been provoked to violence). While I have been unwilling to transform my English class into a Tanach-as-literature class, I do not shy away from flaunting my (in my opinion) very thorough education, comparing characteristics and stories and literary techniques across every piece of sacred literature I know. Shylock quotes lines about Yaakov and Lavan all over 1.3 of The Merchant of Venice - how does his interpretation differ from Chazal's? And what does that mean about the difference between Shylock's goal in the conversation and Chazal's goal for us in their commentary? Machiavelli mentions Moses, David, and Saul in The Prince - how do we view the leadership qualities Machiavelli describes? The list of appropriate connected ideas and texts could go on and on.
The students seem to want a sense of how their tradition ties into other areas of knowledge; every attempt I have seen to separate them entirely only leads to students attempting to blend them themselves (and perhaps falling into theological traps without some guidance). All this is by way of saying that we might investigate what we hope students will get out of such a diverse and varied curriculum - what do we think they will learn? If we can't quantify how all of these various topics might connect - to each other, as well as to the graduated, accomplished student - then what are the schools for?
If anyone knows of any research or other writing in this area, please let me know.
- Moshe Glasser
