Expanding the Canon without Ditching Shakespeare
The First Shall Be Last…Greetings fellow readers, writers, and (hopefully) duct tape lovers. Pardon the aside—it’s for those of you who perhaps aren’t aware of my little addiction. But I digress. Our lens of focus should be book-related. So as the final Word blogger of the week, I join the lively conversation with much enthusiasm. As for my stats, I love literature, but then you already knew that from my dandy little bio. Beyond that, I am dismayed because I have no photo-editing software on this computer and can't create a crafty photo like my fellow bloggers. C’est la vie.
Other Things that Matter…
To sum up my literary outlook in 20 words or less, I’m lately thinking about the topic of how the canon can be expanded while still acknowledging the literary giants that provided the platform to do just that.
Collision of Old and New in the Canon
We’ve all heard the familiar rant about only dead white males being allowed into the canon. And I understand the concept behind that. In fact, my personal take is that that we should look to literature across multiple cultures. This has been a popular argument for years, and rightly so. We need to hear new voices and recognize the validity of literature from all communities.
At the same time, there is a reason we revere Tolstoy, Dante, and Shakespeare. In addition to the quality of their works, they opened the door for other writers to follow. For example, imagine William Faulkner without James Joyce (as a model for stream of consciousness) and Sherwood Anderson (to point him in the direction of regional writing)? (Think about the intertexuality idea that all writers influence one another.) That's not to say that being the first writer to experiment with a form guarantees a spot in the canon. But being inventive and exceptionally good is a start.
Why the Canon?
First of all, let’s think about the canon. It’s in our nature to classify everything. We “sum it up” and “boil it down” all in an effort to process information. The canon is our way of classifying the “greatest hits” of literature in an intangible nutshell.
What is “Great” Literature?
Kent convinced us (me, anyway) that writers can push beyond mediocrity, and Marjorie alluded to “quality literature” and the fact that that there are distinctions. Let’s take that a step further. What makes literature great? What makes art great? We could spout a textbook answer, but perhaps beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you can get something meaningful out of the latest Dean Koontz or John Grisham, who am I to question your authority as a reader?
Yet there are some criteria to evaluate literature. And we can all agree that there are contemporary writers who have certainly earned their place in the canon, such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez, etc.
So…
How do we balance appreciation for classic works and recognition of newer, less conventional works?
Just skimmed/read: Great Short Stories: Fiction from the Masters of World Literature edited by Charles Neider (research)
Currently reading excerpts from: The World of the Short Story edited by Clifton Fadiman (more research)
posted by Lee Ann at
7/07/2007 01:21:00 AM
1 Comments:
First, I want to commend you on an excellent and cogent post! I am in 100% agreement that the "canon" is not the end all, be all. Especially, since we typically reference a Western canon only even though an Eastern canon also exists. At the same time, what does define "great" literature? For me, I tend to default to a question of time: Can this work survive the test of time? Will it become dated at some point? Also, in terms of multi-cultural works: Can this book at once embrace (speak in the authentic voice of the culture in which it's written) and transcend its own culture? This seems to be my criteria for "great" with one further addendum that a great book answers or responds to a geat question (Who am I? Why am I here? etc.). However, there is the subsection of "great to me" or "great to you" in which the Dean Koontz's or John Grisham's fall (I personally love Grisham as books on tape for long car rides). Definitely, read these books. There are times I just want to be entertained, but this doesn't remove my responsibility to read the great books which have shaped my culture, time, and place and with which I unwittingly engage on a daily basis anyway. Anyway, I feel like I may be just reiterating a lot of the things you say, but I like that you carefully define your terms and ask questions within that defined arena.
Post a Comment
<< Home