While recognizing that this is perhaps an ambitious topic to discuss in (now less than) 800 words, my research has led me back here on multiple occasions. So, I'm going to give it a shot. The problem being, the dates and information surrounding canonicity, the history of literacy, and privileged access to books and readership are often fuzzy at best. At which point in history would it be most effective to deliver my message? I also recognize that I've perhaps interpreted the question differently than others. I was thinking of a message that might serve to affect the course of history in some manner. What is one crucial message I could bring to medieval times, or early modern London, that would be received and seriously considered by privileged male scholars? Oh, and from a woman. From the future. I'd be insanely popular.
There are a multitude of factors that likely contributed to the canonization of certain texts over others, not least of which is the fact that preserving texts throughout much of history was a severely limited practice; one had to be selective in their choices. While I respect the expertise of the process, I don't believe that such a small, uniform sample of the population can possibly represent the entire social and political atmosphere of its time.
A. O. Amoko (2001) address the concept of justifying literary studies on the basis of aesthetic value rather than on literary canons that function as "preeminent repositories of national cultures" (20). Amoko points out that an aesthetic disposition is the product of a restricted process of formal training and "is therefore implicated in processes of unequal social reproduction" (20). In other words, canons are traditionally established by privileged members of society who have been taught to view the world in a particular way. When presented with a list of privileged texts, one should always ask whose interests are being served and whose voices are being excluded (Reisz 2009).
Can you imagine what the literary landscape might look like if books and readership (and literacy itself) went open access in early modern London? More readers means more writers, which means more texts. And while we're looking through these rose-coloured glasses, let's also assume that scholarship shifts from the canon to the archive and attempts to preserve a diversity of texts more representative of the entire population. What might be the effects of higher literacy rates and increased access to tools for reading and writing at specific points in history? We could have completely new or altered genres today; we could have an entirely different perspective of literature throughout periods of time. Think about what social media and online publication platforms have done for exposing unique voices that may otherwise remain largely undiscovered. This is what happens when barriers break down; we discover creativity within and among us.
This of course would be no small feat; the reorganization of power and class structures to encourage sharing of skills and knowledge in lieu of wielding them as symbols of status. I would have to deliver a brilliant, impassioned speech about how the shift from canon to archive and the elimination of privilege and exclusivity in books and readership would better serve the advancement of human knowledge; and about how class and power structures seeking to exclude the majority of the population from the acts of learning and creating serves to foster a selective rather than a collective representation of literary history. I'd get through to them somehow.
References
Amoko, A. O. "The Problem with English Literature: Canonicity, Citizenship, and the Idea of africa. Research in African Literatures 32, no. 4 (2001): 19-43.
Reisz, Matthew. "Canonical Texts: Are These the Most Influential Books Ever Written?" https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/canonical-texts-are-these-the-most-influential-books-ever-written/406223.article
Tracy, your post hit upon a lot of issues I'm trying to deal with in my paper, especially the idea of canonized texts. The idea of "unique voices" going "undiscovered" as a result of the canon is also something I saw first hand during my first year of university. In first year I did what is called the "Foundation Year Program" at King's. The program was a look back at the "great books" of the Western canon. Well, you can expect that there were few woman writers on that list. We read Wollstonecraft and that's about it. Like you said, unique voices, the voices of women in this case, went relatively unnoticed in the program because of this idea of canon. I'm proud to say though that students have taken initiative regarding this, and now the Foundation Year program features way more women writers!
ReplyDeleteAlso, love the gusto in that last sentence!
DeleteWow, that's so wonderful that students at your school took initiative to change the program to include more women writers! I was lucky enough that the English program I was in at UVic must've already gone through that kind of process, because most of my foundational classes had a pretty good balance of men and women writers ( they were also mostly taught by women...). It's good to see Universities at least seem to be on a path away from the ridiculous idea of "canon" of past years.
DeleteI love this idea so much! I wish I had thought to do something similar for my own trip to ancient Rome, and told the Romans to have their non-elites and women write more! We'd know so much more about ancient Rome if even just a tiny amount of writing by those groups existed now. "What might be the effects of higher literacy rates and increased access to tools for reading and writing at specific points in history?" I feel like the effects would be huge! The world would be a completely different place. I'd love to read a novel that imagines this kind of alternate history!
ReplyDelete