Beyond The Canon Debate: A Dual Approach

In this thesis I try to relate the debate over the literary canon to both the institutional aspects of English departments and the personal aspects of an individual reader's choice of reading. The setting background is the profession of English literary studies, especially in the U.S. I shall begin my discussion by an inspection into the origin and history of the concept of"canon."I then proceed to trace the literary-critical lineage of canonical discussion in English back to the early eighteenth century and the high Romantic period of the nineteenth century. My main focus, however, is on the canonical debate since the end of World War Two. By dividing these criticisms into four major groups—the Right, the Romantic, the pluralists or the multiculturalists, and the Marxist approach—I hope to illustrate how each of their arguments is a direct result of their different political, cultural, and academic interests. In this way, I try to point out their specific insights and blindness, which actually serves as a preparation for the discussion of my own idea about canonicity. I shall develop my argument on two levels: the individual level of private reading, and the institutional level of liberal and literary education. On the first level, my general thesis is that the function of canon be understood as a pragmatic tool for the satisfaction of specific reading needs. In other words, canons can be useful in helping readers to find what and how to read toward particular targets. But on an institutional level of higher education, I shall argue that today's democratic spirit of mass education calls for a pluralism of both canonical works and methods; and moreover, the canon debate should itself be part of the curriculum so as to generate a critical inspection of the literary discipline. And finally, I wish to comment on how the canonical debate may be related to current educational and cultural issues in China.