From: dmpowell@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Darin M. Powell)
Subject: Re: The Literary Canon
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 12:30:24 EDT

 I wrote: (abbreviated somewhat)
>>	
>>	Quite right. The canon will grow to include black and women
>>	and other traditional "minorities" over time.  It took hundreds
>>	of years for the current canon to be created, so it is silly
>>	to expect that it will change overnight.
>>	I don't think it's wise to demand that currently popular writers
>>	(minority, woman, or otherwise) be placed in the canon *now*.
>>	Immediate reactions are not necessarily an indication of literary
>>	value -- many of the popular writers of years gone by, who were
>>	believed to be "the greatest writers of their time," are not
>>	read at all today. Conversely, many writers in the canon now
>>	were not known/respected/read in their time.
>>	Minorities and women will come into the canon as 1) more minorities
>>	and women write, and 2) as people study them. It may seem futile
>>	to some to study a writer who is now not considered canon, or
>>	regarded as "lesser."  

Terrence replies:

>	This is all well and good, and if this is the approach we are
>to take then there must be something to do in the meantime. There are,
>I think, valid reasons for encouraging the study of noncanonical
>authors. I believe that, to a certain extent, literature helps define
>culture, and culture defines individual identity. At least those two
>factors have an influence upon the formation of individual identity,
>though the degree of that influence cannot be effectively measured.

	Agreed. The canon is not "law."
	
>	Currently, the canon is homogeneous both in demographics and
>world view. And while Mr. Powell may be sensible in urging patience
>until the canon becomes, following its own natural course, more
>inclusive, I believe the homogeneous nature of the canon is damaging
>both cultural and individual identity.  As someone else stated, the
>canon is currently presented AS literature, the-only-real-literature,
>the foundation of culture, the ideal. And the authors included in the
>canon are seen more as godlike founders of cultures from whom's pens
>issued pure truth, unadultared by the cultural outlook, worldview and
>bias of times. I know from personal experience that this can impede
>the growth of a student, particularly those whose cultural identity is
>not identical to that established by the canon as "Truth"

	I think it's important that we *do not* view the canon as
	a collection of "godlike founders," but as a collection
	of writing that has been important over time but is not
	in any way holy or permanent.  I don't think the white
	male nature of the current canon is damaging in itself,
	but the way that it is presented: as "pure truth."
	The presentation of the canon as some rigid thing that
	we should bow down to is ridiculous. That's what leads
	to the alienation of people from it. And it has to stop.
	
>	My own solution was to establish my own personal canon, and to
>seek out those books which defined for me my culture as it belongs to
>me and justified my view of it and place in it as the person I am,
>rather than establishing a cultural ideal which is not truly mine.
>However, some students are unable to do this. I suggest that the study
>of noncanonical authors be legitimized (as is happening now with
>different areas of noncanonical studies are opening up), and not
>simply treated as lesser studies or "lesser canons", in order to
>balance the homogeneity of the current canon, and that the canon
>itself be treated as a peacefully sleeping child, who will awaken in
>due time.
	
	This is the solution. We can't just sit on our asses and
	wait for the canon to change. We must push for it, through
	scholarship.  This doesn't mean rushing to include writers
	in the canon just for the sake of including, but continuing
	to debate its content and study writers we feel should be
	included. _We_ must make the change. A canon that is
	regarded as stiff, immutable is useless. Literature is
	a living art.  It shouldn't be supported by a dead (I mean
	that metaphorically) canon.  A canon should live, change,
	grow, spur debated, be debated.  Not just exist and dictate.

>>	It will happen.

>	I certainly hope so. In the meantime, there is still much of
>worth to be studied and understood outside of the canon.

>Terrance Heath 

	True. Anyone who just reads and studys the canon and nothing
	else is intellectually dead.

	Darin Powell
	Syracuse University

	
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books