I was just doing a little "world wide web surfing," looking for some information on the canon to fulfill some personal curiosity of what exactly was included in the cannon. I thought it would be easy, and expected a ton of sites, claiming to be the official list of the literary cannon, to show up on the search engine. On the contrary, it took quite a bit of looking to find some sort of list (http://www.classicscentral.com/titles.htm). I also found a site that reported the top 10 banned classics (http://classiclit.about.com/cs/toppicks/tp/aatp-ban.htm). I found it interesting that both sites were trying to make money off of this. Nevertheless, it is interesting to compare this one list with the ones we came up with in class last week. See you all tonight.

~JC

After the, I'll will admit, somewhat painful reading from Richter, and yes, even Culler, I found this article refreshing. Until this article, I was overwhelmed with the feeling that I was missing something-that I didn't understand or relate to Richter or Culler because I didn't have the intellectual capacity to comprehend their continuous practice of using a question to answer a question. But J. Rose's article opened my eyes to the distinct possiblity that it's not that I don't understand-just that I don't agree.

I was lucky enough to have parents and educators that exposed me to a variety of authors, and not just the "typical" novels. So not to repeat exactly what was said, Lionel articulated my feelings of great literature perfectly. If we're all given the opportunity to make something of these books-I believe most people will certainly make the best of them.

At times as I read these essays, it seems as if there are two camps consisting of parallel arguments which almost but never quite address those of the other side. Does sympathizing with the views of the Marxists and Postcolonials mean that I should only read the Classics to find objections to their characters and characterizations? Does acceptance of the transcendent power of certain books mean that I am somehow complicit in the continuing exploitation of the weak over the powerful--because I've elevated only books that have been chosen for me (and at the expense of others ignored) by the existing, dominant power structure? Should I then ignore the context that the Classics where written in even if the racism and upper-class bias in the text serves to alienate me from that text? For me there's a schism between what is taught to the many and what then resonates with individuals. I'm not rich or white but I can enjoy the Great Gatsby, because there are other themes that resonate within it I CAN identify with--unrequited love, etc. At the same time, I would expect that someone from a different background than my own could appreciate Invisible Man, because at heart it is about the individual trying to find a place in a harsh, unforgiving society. To me truly Great Books allow us to transcend in this way, to empathize with the ‘other’s experience, but only if we meet the text halfway. Expand the canon to include more books without eliminating past work, provide context--then allow the students to make the personal connection with text required for transcendence...

This reminds me of the Monty Python sketch with the coal miners getting into violent arguments over Proust or somebody like that. I always thought that was just an amusing bit of fiction, but apparently there's a lot of truth behind it.
I like this article. It certainly reaffirms the multiple benefits of reading, and how such an activity is (or should be) anything but elitist. It also offers a moment of solace amidst arguments regarding the canon, in that it shows how any well-crafted piece of writing, regardless of the political or aesthetic reasons for its continued existence, can enrich someone's life and play a very important role in the development of our society. It's a shame that this type of culture doesn't still exist. "Good" literature is now considered the domain of scholars and snobs, and multi-media formats continue to command more and more of our attention. So how do we get the attention of all the unwashed, unenlightened masses of the 21st century? Since money has never gone out of style, maybe we should consider replacing dead presidents with dead poets on our currency...

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)