Common Sense, Practicality, and the Literary Canon

Common Sense, Practicality, and the Literary Canon

In keeping with my more-or-less conservative views, it seems obvious that what is most lacking in the English culture-war debates is a little common sense and practicality. Take, for example, the question of the literary canon (by which I mean the canon of imaginative literature: fiction, poetry, and drama). In his preface to Falling Into Theory, David H. Richter articulates three basic positions on the issue of the standard or traditional canon: defend the canon, expand it to include works by women and minorities, or eliminate it altogether (vii- viii). The obvious answer to the conundrum of the canon is, I believe, to use some common sense and chart a middle course: the traditional canon should continue to be expanded to include works by women and minorities, for several reasons. 1.) It is impossible to teach literature without having some sort of a canon -- a common or core reading list of "acknowledged classics." Likewise, the notion of abolishing the canon (which no one seems to seriously suggest) is impractical; to do so would result in anarchy. 2.) The canon of English literature, itself of relatively recent origin (Horner, 2-3), is protean -- it has been and is changing and evolving, expanding to include works by women and minorities. 3.) Such evolution is natural, since canon selection is not based on aesthetic principles alone, but on values, which also evolve.

The so-called "traditional canon" theoretically represented what the oft-quoted Matthew Arnold called the "best that is known and thought in the world" (38). Only relatively recently was Arnold's view questioned as controversial (Searle, 82). With the breakdown of the fo...

... middle of paper ...

...ED

* Arnold, Matthew. "The Function of Criticism at the Present Time." Essays in Criticism: First Series. London: MacMillan, 1910. 1-41.

* Horner, Winifred Bryan. "Introduction." Literature and Composition. Ed. Winifred Bryan Horner. Chicago: U Chicago P, 1983. 1-13.

* Menand, Louis. "What Are Universities For?" Falling Into Theory: Conflicting Views on Reading Literature. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: Bedford, 1994. 88-99.

* Pratt, Mary Louise. "Humanities for the Future: Reflections on Western Culture Debates at Stanford." Falling Into Theory: Conflicting Views on Reading Literature. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: Bedford, 1994. 55-63.

* Searle, John. "The Storm Over the University." 79-88. Falling Into Theory: Conflicting Views on Reading Literature. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: Bedford, 1994. 79-88.