Saturday, April 11, 2009

Literary canon information

I support. It is a short introduction to a specific English course from a faculty URL at Goucher College, Baltimore, MD. I was going to post my views, but decided to search literary canon. Glad I did. What their introduction covers/ are my views since I believe literary canons from the strictest to the loosest are implicit in any anthology of literature and in any literary manifesto, neither of which is likely to cease being while, for whatever reasons, humans interact with the artifacts they create, artifacts which someone contends are literary. There is in all this the question of texts (in canons birthed and nurtured by institutions) devolving into ventriloquisms fit only for the scholars who autopsy them. To me this question has merit, but only in a narrow political sense. Yes, texts can be enhanced or demeaned by scholarly investigations; but, if I come upon an unfamiliar text, and interact with it, my opinions of it at that time will be informed by the degree of my knowledge and persuasions at that time; and even if I were to seek further knowledge, I would not have to be persuaded by it. After its author is no longer able to revise it, a text is a text, and no amount of dissectioning or perverting can alter the original text unless that original is mutilated or destroyed. bl00331

No comments: