Social Implications of a Literary Canon

By Andrew Burt

If we're not careful, the literary canon can become a negative, restrictive influence rather than an enlightening one.

The Canon, while presigious, isn't infallible

Literary canon is a popular topic of debate amid English scholars. By deciding what counts as true literature, and what deserves extensive critique, scholars also choose what we as a public consider valuable. Yet an unfortunate and perhaps unconscious secondary effect is controlling where our thoughts go. The canon is the primary source for English teachers to pull from to create their high school or college curriculums. Our minds are a basic conglomerate of the stories we consume, be they movies, television, or books. By deciding which literature is best, they also cultivate a worldview. The question remains, should that worldview be so systematically perpetuated? Because of its overarching pessimism and restrictive nature, the literary canon should not be prioritized in education.

Pessimism in the Canon 

When I was in high school, I was a reader. I read anything I could get my hands on- not tempered by genre or interest, but on what constituted a good story. In school, the books had a running theme...The Lord of the Flies displayed the inherent evil in mankind; Macbeth embraced the corruptibility of character; The Great Gatsby illustrated the death of idealism. Individually they were masterpieces; together, they were a dreadful plunge into depression. I noticed a trend in those around me- they hated reading because they associated it with the labyrinthine way school books seemed to tell us life was an unrewarding experience. 

It's important to recognize the influence this has on society. Happiness is a choice, and the canon gives the unsettling sensation that literature's overarching message is that it's a naive, unwise choice. Such a conclusion is not just discouraging- it's wrong. Literature is full of hope. Even the canon has optimistic works such as Austen's work or the Pilgrim's Progress. Being in the very small minority, they just aren't emphasized.

Although the canon has a wide variety of perspectives, an undeniable trend promotes bleakness and depression. As English scholars assert the artistic dominance in these works, many naturally consider the most prevalent ideologies as intellectual. In a sense, this is a form of quiet censorship. The canon would do better to be considered a guide in the navigation of literature rather than a suggested curriculum. The true spectrum of ideas and philosophies would no doubt be more apparent to modern students. That way, students would be more likely to find something they like in their studies. If English Professors are concerned about the decline in modern reading activity, perhaps the subject's passion should be higher on the list of priorities.

Wycliffe and Hus gave their lives to make the Bible
widely available to the public

Restrictions Never Work Out

 Think of the restrictive nature of the canon. It might be compared to the watch cry of the Reformation- Sola Scriptura. They believed Catholic authorities didn't have the right to impose their interpretation of values on the public- that the works should speak for themselves. Heroes such as Jan Hus, John Wycliffe, and more dedicated their lives bringing the Bible to the common folk and making the middle-men obsolete. Just as the Bible is more meaningful when applied individually, literature is better when approached personally. Today's top scholars shouldn't impose their value system on the entire school of literature. 

Ironically, reformers upheld the sanctity of the biblical 'canon', whereas we explore the triviality of the literary 'canon'. Instead of deciding who has God's authority, we're deciding who has artistic merit-a necessarily subjective topic. With little diversity, other ideas become stifled when they should be made available for the public's easy viewing. Consider the value if professors in all fields could use literature as a tool to teach their subjects. By relying on the canon in our education system, the value of reading skews to the side of mistaken objectivity.

Potential Changes

Clearly, based on its pessimism and restrictive nature, the literary canon should not be used so exclusively. By doing so, society ultimately imposes powerful ideologies on the public. While many consider entertainment to be thoughtless, entertainment guides our thoughts perhaps more strongly than any other medium. By becoming aware of what is influencing our perspective of the world, we become the captains of our own mentality. Although the literary canon is a helpful tool to find strong, profound works of literature, its repercussions should be noted before accepted.

Professors should be given the leeway to teach literature unfettered by the canon. One of the primary considerations in choosing the curriculum should be diversity-not necessarily in culture, but in perspective and philosophy. The proffered variety will expose students to challenging new ideas and mindfully form their own opinions. That's the kind of education that English has the potential of giving.

Sources

'John Wycliffe and Jan Hus'

'The English Literary Canon'

Image Credits

"The Literary Canon" and "John Wycliffe and Jan Hus" made available by the Creative Commons

The Lord of the Flies by Adams Carvalho