Does the Canon Need an Overhaul?
Introduction
“The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you’ll go.” - Dr. Seuss
Reading is one of the great pleasures in life. Seuss, concisely and in rhyme, summarized its importance, reading opens your mind beyond yourself, broadens your knowledge and your understanding of the world. Educators are often tasked with selecting literature to use in their classrooms which meet state guidelines, while engaging students in meaningful ways. Many do this by selecting works from a commonly accepted list known as a literary canon.
Generations of students have read literary canon works as part of their required curriculum. Jordan Bates defines literary canon as “a body of books, narratives and other texts considered to be the most important and influential of a particular time, period, or place”. The subject of the literary canon is a polarizing topic among literature educators and scholars. Conservative canon supporters tout it as being critical for student development, cultural cohesion and a source of historical preservation. Progressives feel that the literary canon has “serious problems surrounding literary inclusivity and representation” (Pope). The feeling is that the canon is heavily ladened with out of date, out of touch literature; predominately written by old dead white men (Cawley). Perhaps there is a place where these two camps can meet, bringing together the best of both.
In this paper, I will define the current literary canon and its origins, as well as both sides of the argument and possible ways to mitigate. As I began my research, I found myself questioning the use of the canon from a very pro-canon frame of mind. Through my continued research, I began to understand and appreciate the concerns of the anti-canon camp. I will share my final thoughts regarding the canon later in this paper.
The Canon
“The man who does not read good books is no better than the man who can’t.”
- Mark Twain
The canon, also known as the Western literary canon and the American literary canon, is a group of literary works, which experts have considered to be the most important of a particular time or place. It’s origins dates to the early church as a way used to “decide which of its texts were sacred scripture and which were not” (Jenkyns). Jordan Bates explains this use further, “[In fact] in the earliest years, many of these professional educators were religious, that is, either clergy or clergy-related, which inevitably brought in also a perceivable ‘moral’ focus or ‘moral compass’ in terms of what works were approved and sanctioned, and for what reasons”.
Now, the canon is “typically defined as a list of highly regarded texts in American literature that are often taught in classrooms” (Gallego). Who defines this list? What criteria is engaged? The answer to these questions is not clear. It appears that there are not strict requirements for which works will be canonized and which won’t, the decision process appears to be continually evolving in relation to opinions from literary critics, educators, and other literary professionals whose opinions are highly regarded in the field. As there does not seem to be a specific process set in place for governing which works will be canonized and which will not, one might wonder if there is only one canon? Are students around the world all subject to reading the same grouping of literary works? The answer to that is twofold.
There is an accepted list of “great works” which classical scholars have all agreed as being the best of the best. Harold Bloom, American literary critic and Sterling Professor of Humanities at Yale was regarded as, “the prodigious literary critic who championed and defended the Western canon” (Smith). In his book The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages, Bloom discusses and details these great classic works. He challenged a common argument regarding the canon being politically and culturally outdated; instead, suggesting it should be valued for the aesthetic pleasure it offers readers. Bloom thought the canon should answer the question: “What, in the little time we have, shall we read?” (Smith). His core list consists of twenty-six works ranging from Shakespeare to Emily Dickenson; however, he also published a more extensive list including hundreds of authors and works, citing that “in each era, some genres are regarded as more canonical than others” (Bloom 20).
Aside from the accepted canon, it is important to note that there are also de facto canons, most often products of national or local curriculum standards (Fleming). These lists usually include works from the commonly accepted canon supplemented with literature deemed important by schools, districts, or state education departments. The understanding that there is both a traditional canon, as well as de facto canons reflecting local practices, might make the argument regarding following a prescribed canon invalid – as the canon is already reflecting our ever-evolving culture (Gallego).
While there is not a truly dedicated list, the canon generally found in most public-school curriculum includes works by: Homer, Sophocles, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, John Milton, Geoffrey Chaucer, William Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, Mark Twain, Ernest Hemingway, and F. Scott Fitzgerald (Cawley). Female authors, generally found on canonical lists include Jane Austen, Flannery O’Connor, and Emily Dickenson, and Louisa Mae Alcott. Many American students have read The Great Gatsby, The Lord of the Flies, Of Mice and Men, and Little Women in school, as they are generally thought to be an important part of our literary and cultural history (Gallego).
Pro Canon
“The reading of all good books is like conversation with the finest (people) of the past centuries.” – Descartes
The arguments supporting the canon, are solidly entrenched in history, culture, morality, and virtue. Classical education scholars believe that students should be exposed to works which are good, true, and beautiful. Those which have proven themselves overtime by their aesthetic beauty, wisdom, and moral influence (Perrin 28). Many believe that schools have a duty to introduce students to works which have historically been considered worthy of study (Fleming). Those who argue for the value of canon literature, suggest students gain a global view and insight into the human experience by being exposed to literature more firmly ensconced with lessons of morality and virtue of the past (Crow).
The loss of cultural connection among each other and our past is often an argument in the forefront of the debate over the canon. Philosopher and theologian Rabbi Jonathan Sacks explained the importance of a canon: “Until recently, national cultures were predicated on the idea of a canon, a set of texts that everyone knew…The existence of a canon is essential to a culture. It means that people share a set of references and resonances, a public vocabulary of narratives and discourse” (Jenkyns). Without the shared experience of reading and studying canonical works, we no longer have an avenue to pass down shared cultural narrative and references. In this way the canon preserves a cultural memory between generations and provides a basis for shared cultural values (Fleming). C.S. Lewis furthered this argument suggesting that canon works preserved the outlook of a particular time in history, its great successes, and failures too. From old books we learn from those who have come before us, both their mistakes and their achievements (Lewis). Bloom summarized this cultural connection: “Cognition cannot proceed without memory, and the canon is the true art of memory, the authentic foundation for cultural thinking” (Bloom 34).
Hand in hand with shared cultural identity, is the opportunity canon works provide us to learn from the past – both its mistakes and its success. Reading works from past generations, not only connects us culturally to each other and our history, it also allows us to understand outdated political and social mores. Studying literature of past generations allows students to gain a sense of life in other periods of history, morally and socially, and to critically examine societal customs and structure of those times, even when they grossly counter those of today. Canon works allow readers to gain an understanding of present history in the light of the experience (Parker 23). Reading canonical literature encourages discussion of ethical complexities of other times, how they relate to the present, and why they are, or are no longer, valid points of view.
The benefits of reading are inarguably well documented and studied, and include increased vocabulary, understanding and empathy for others, understanding of other cultures, among others. Benefits of reading canon literature also include opening the readers mind to historical viewpoints, exploration of cultural and social practices of the time, enhanced understanding of historical language use, grammar, and structure (Lisa). Not only does reading literature from generations past expand your social, political and history viewpoints, but it also improves your ability to communicate.
A final argument for keeping classic literature in the canon is the mere fact that by reading the works, students are keeping them alive for future generations. These works have stood the test of time and provide readers with an educated viewpoint of past generations. Bloom succinctly summarizes this: “Shakespeare will not make us better, and he will not make us worse, but he may teach us how to overhear ourselves when we talk to ourselves. Subsequently he may teach us how to accept change, in ourselves as in others” (Bloom 30).
Anti-Canon
“Whether one is aware of it, literary canons permeate society on many levels and have undoubtedly shaped everyone’s world view” - Jordan Bates
Anti-canon scholars are just as passionate about abolishing the list, as pro-canon scholars are about keeping it. The arguments against the canon are valid, topical, and somewhat political. Opponents of the canon are concerned that the canon is antiquated and creating a generation of aliterate students – students who can read but choose not to (Williams 588). Arguments focus primarily on the works not being relevant to students today, being hard to read and understand, having little to no diversity, and highlighting social and ethical situations which are no longer acceptable.
The strongest argument against canon literature is the idea that students cannot connect to the material, creating a generation of aliterate graduates – students who can read, but leave school without the desire to read (Williams 588). Many educators feel that by offering literature students literature they can relate to, they are encouraging successful, life-long readers (Avoli-Miller 17). Educators consider how required readings fit in with and shape the collective memories and history of the students (Anonymous). They also worry that traditional canon works are hard to read and understand, are not representative of the diverseness of the contemporary world, and do not leave room for professional judgement of educators to choose literature for their classroom (Fleming 8).
The argument that the canon is filled with books about, and written by, old white men, is not completely invalid (Cowley). The majority of the books do fit one or more of those caveats, however the canon has evolved over years to include works by women and diverse authors. This evolution is welcome, however is not entirely representational of the multi-faceted, multi-cultural, multi-ethnic world today (Johnson 216).
Solutions
“A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies . . . The man who never reads lives only one.”
- George R. R. Martin
Ultimately, it might prove impossible to bring the stalwart pro-canon advocates and the equally as steadfast anti-canon supporters together in resolution of the divide; however, there are middle of the road solutions that are worth exploration. Austin Gallego suggests, “An expansion of the canon would not only benefit students whose young minds are being nurtured throughout their courses, but also help to further cement other, more progressive and culturally diverse outlooks that could help cement an entire worldview” (4). Ultimately, students must learn that there is an inherent danger of in the single-story society of the past, and that there are great lessons to be learned from embracing the perspectives of individuals traditionally underrepresented in literature including black, Latino, AAPI, indigenous, and LGBTAQIA+ (Torres 3).
A common agreement among all educators is the importance of encouraging students to become lifelong readers. Lifelong readers become lifelong learners. Reading encourages empathy and kindles curiosity (Kittle 78). Lois Bridges details the snowball effect reading has on students: “…and all those extra hours inside books they love gives them a leg up in everything that leads to a happy, productive life: deep conceptual understanding about a wide range of topics, expanded vocabulary, strategic reading ability, critical literacy skills, and engagement with the world that’s more likely to make them dynamic citizens drawn into full civic participation” (as cited in Kittle 78). It’s suggested that students should read or be read to at least 60 minutes a day at every grade level (Kittle 79).
Is dissolving the canon (or really all canons) the answer? Probably not, doing away with one list, only makes way for another, equally narrow in scope (Bates). The loss of cultural identity, and historical context, would be detrimental in general to society. Perhaps enlarging the current canons scope to include traditional unrepresented genres and authors is the answer. Canon expansion would allow students a more global political and cultural view, while feeling more engaged to the works of the canon. Gallego suggests: “One can have a new, much more progressive and ethnically diverse canon, without taking away what gave it its historical importance in the first place” (Gallego).
The fact of the matter is, there are great, modern works of non-canon literature, written from non-white and historically undervalued perspectives. These are strong examples of literature, and fantastic reads, and should be part of any standard curriculum (Torres 6).
A report by the International Literary Association supports the expansion of literature beyond the canon: “Extending our reach for literature beyond the classics does not weaken the quality of literature instruction; doing so can amplify and enrich students’ literary experiences while both affirming students’ own lives and engaging them in worlds very different from theirs” (Anonymous).
Classroom Practices
With the end goal of students becoming life-long readers, educators are finding ways to continue using classic canon literature while infusing their lesson plans with more modern and diverse works too. In fact, some popular, modern, and diverse young adult and adult literature is already positioned for such pairings.
Educators can use scaffolding and pairing of new literature with classic canon works as ways to engage students. Teacher can hook young readers with a popular adolescent novel which has intertext reference to classic literature then using that piece as a scaffold to the more advanced referenced text (Gallagher). Allusions and intertext references are more than just a passing mention, they are “integral to the text and [have] the potential to better prepare middle school readers to encounter classical texts in high school, and to eventually engage with the canon as pleasure reading” (Bright).
Conclusion
As stated in the introduction, I began this research firmly ensconced in the pro-canon camp, with little interest in learning why canonical literature might need to be refreshed for future generations. While I still find myself a stalwart supporter of the classic works of the canon, I do concede that there are many ways to introduce students to these great works, and that there is a need and room to include more modern, inclusive works too. Ultimately, getting students to love reading is the goal; exposing them to great literature, while also important, should not preclude them from developing a lifelong love for reading.
Works Cited
Anonymous. “Expanding the Canon: How Diverse Literature Can Transform Literacy Learning.” International Literacy Association - Legacy Leadership Brief. 2008. https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-expanding-the-canon.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Avoli-Miller, Katy. “Young Adult Literature in the 21st Century Classroom.” Library Media
Connection, vol. 32, no. 3, 2013, pp. 16-18.
Bates, J (2013). “Literary canons exclude works no matter how selective canon markers are.” The Daily Nebraskan. http://www.dailynebraskan.com/culture/literary-canons-exclude-works- no-matter-how-selective-canon-makers/article_da83def2-ad43-11e2-b07a- 0019bb30f31a.html. Accessed 2 Aug 2022
Bright, Amy. “Writing Homer, Reading Riordan: Intertextual Study in Contemporary Adolescent Literature.” Journal of Children’s Literature, vol. 37, no. 1, Spring 2011, pp. 38–47. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.se.edu/login?auth=shib&url=https://https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=ehh&AN=60864589&site=ehost-live. Accessed 1 Aug 2022.
Bloom, H. (1994). The western canon: The books and school of the ages. New York, NY; Harcourt Brace & Company.
Cawley, Michael J. “Required reading and the Literary Canon: An Introduction.” Education Reform. https://sites.psu.edu/educationreform/2015/03/16/required-reading-and-the-literary-canon-an-introduction/
Crowe, C. (2001). “Young adult literature: The problem with YA literature.” The English Journal, 90(3), 146-150.
Dolinger, Julia. “Is the Literary Canon Still Relevant?” The Key Reporter. https://www.keyreporter.org/articles/2016/is-the-literary-canon-still-relevant/
Fleming, Mike. “The Literary Canon: Implications for the Teaching of Language as Subject”. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016805a2aec. Accessed 2 Aug 22.
Gallagher, Janice Mori. “Pairing Adolescent Fiction with Books from the Canon.” Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 39, no. 1, September 1995, pp. 8-14. JSTOR,https://www.jstor.org/stable/40016716. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Gallego, Austin. “The Importance of Expanding the Canon.” Medium. https://medium.com/@gall2070/the-importance-of-expanding-the-canon-7706641f6500. Accessed 2 Aug 2022
Johnson, Angela Beumer. “Multiple Selves and Multiple Sites of Influence: Perceptions of Young Adult Literature in the Classroom.” Theory Into Practice. 50:215–222, 2011. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23020785. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Kraby, Clayton. “C.S. Lewis on The Reading of Old Books.” Reasonable Theology. https://reasonabletheology.org/cs-lewis-on-reading-old-books/.
Lisa. “How Reading Canonical Literature can Benefit your Writing.” Owlcation. 18 Jul 2022. https://owlcation.com/humanities/Writing-Benefits-of-Reading-Canon-Literature. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Jenkyns, Richard. “Do we need a literary canon?” Prospect Magazine. 22 Dec 2007. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/doweneedaliterarycanon. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Kittle, Penny. “Let them Read Please.” ASCD. Vol. 77, No. 5. 1 Feb 2020.
https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/let-them-read-please.
Parker, Hershel. “The Price of Diversity: An Ambivalent Minority Report on the American Literary Canon.” College Literature - Teaching Minority Literatures, Oct. 1991, Vol. 18, No. 3. pp. 15-29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25111915. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Smith, Dinieta. “Harold Bloom, Critic Who Championed Western Canon, Dies at 89.” The New York Times. October 14, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/books/harold-bloom-dead.html. Accessed 14 Aug 2022.
Pryor, Devon. “What is a Literary Canon?” Language Humanities. 10 Jul 22 https://www.languagehumanities.org/what-is-a-literary-canon.htm. Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
Torres, Christina. “The Power of Words: On Classics and Canon.” Ed Week. 16 Apr 2019. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-the-power-of-words-on-classics-and-canon/2019/04.
Williams, Molly. “Making Connections: A Workshop for Adolescents Who Struggle with Reading.” Journal of Adolescent & Literacy. Vol. 44, No. 7, April 2021.
Comments
Post a Comment