At the outset the author reminds that the evolution of modern didactics objects to give ready information to pupils and tends towards problem methods, whereas literature textbooks are written traditionally. They are characterized by: ; 1) Excessive growth of information with details and accuracy beyond measure and with encyclopedic mention of names, dates and titles of the works of third-class writers. This is a subordination of memory didactics to an university history of literature. ; 2) Contempt for the literary text is visible in the composition of textbocks which print verses included in chapters of historical literature or summarize reading. ; 3) Monism of textbooks or one-sided, simplified, discussionless interpretation of literary works. ; 4) Sham integration. Contents of painting, sculpture, architecture or music are commented upon in separated chapters without any relation to literature. Textbooks also boycott theatre and film, in spite of the fact, that literature is extended and propagated in our every-day culture by those very artistic forms. ; In the last chapter of this sketch the author names the premises which a modern from of textbook is conditioned on. In the author's opinion comments in textbooks ought to be reduced to a minimum. ; Instead of ready-made statements by historians of literature the pupil would be provided with a rich anthology of literary texts, with substance from the epoch and with opinions and reviews of the work or its well-known stagings and adaptations. Textbooks ought to be completed with reproductions of paintings and even with a recorded text. A texbook might also contain cues for exercises, control tests for the pupil about his knowledge, check-questions printed on a separate insertion. Such a textbook would cultivate inquiring, operative and self-educational functions and would not restrict itself to informations only.