Verticals Of Adam

In “Verticals of Adam”, Frye argues that the most effective way to educate people in terms of literature is to start with poetry as the foundation; to work outwards to other forms of literary works; then to go further by making connections with subjects other than art. In literature, he states that there are both theory and practice: the latter derives from the types of literary works produced, and the former comes from the criticism of these specific works. It is the act of literary criticism, he states, that produces students who are not only able to appreciate literature, but also are able to make a transference from literature to their own imaginations.
 Frye applies his theory of literature to various historical works, and draws similarities from the types of stories and their structures present between different civilizations.
He states that “literature follows after a mythology” (65), by which he means that conventional stories, such as the ones present in the Christian Bible, are shaped by myths.
The value of mythology in literature, Frye argues, comes from the fact that myths are simply created by the imagination in an attempt to “identify the human with the non-human world” (65), by which he means that myths are textual representations of the mind and its ability to associate. Myths function as a structural component of story-telling, and are important literary devices in not only the English language, but in all languages. In order to have a substantial understanding of English literature, Frye claims that a student must be able to compare literature in different contexts: this could include the context of art forms other than literature, languages other than English, and subjects other than art. These comparisons allow for proper comprehension of literature that encompasses different aspects of education and varying concepts that may be specific to a certain
culture. Frye goes on to say that in order for literature to be taught properly, one must start at the centre with poetry, and work outwards to prose — similar to the way other subjects like mathematics or sciences are taught. He states that “prose is a much less natural way of speaking than poetry is” (74), by which he means that it is more difficult to teach than poetry, which at its most basic level is a form of rhythmic and repetitive expression. He claims that since students are taught to spend more time appreciating literature than criticizing it, “in these days we’re in a hare-and-tortoise-race between mob rule and education: to avoid collapsing into mob rule we have to try to educate a minority that will stand out against it” (79). What he means by this is that the majority of students are taught to appreciate literature but not to properly criticize it, while a mere minority of students are educated and equipped to thoroughly analyze literary works. In order to ensure a generation of students that are well educated in literature, pupils must be taught the value of reading slowly and steadily instead of rushing through a text; similar to the moral of “the tortoise and the hare” parable.