Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T14:22:12.195Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Canonicity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Wendell V. Harris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The canon of biblical books is frequently cited as a parallel to a unitary literary canon that, though often presumed, is in fact not to be found. The biblical canon was created for the purpose of forestalling change and exiling competition. There are at least ten kinds of literary canons, all ultimately resulting from selections made for such distinct purposes as providing models, transmitting a heritage, creating common frames of reference, logrolling, legitimating theory, historicizing, and pluralizing. Canons formed for any of these purposes necessarily yield to change over time and compete with one another at any given time. We can reasonably expect neither the abolition of selective canons nor agreement on a single one; we can, however, seek clarity about purposes.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 106 , Issue 1 , January 1991 , pp. 110 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Altieri, Charles. “An Idea and Ideal of a Literary Canon.” Critical Inquiry 10 (1983): 37–60.Google Scholar
Augustine Bishop of Augustine. On Christian Doctrine. Trans. Robertson, D.W. Jr. Indianapolis: Bobbs, 1958.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. The Advancement of Learning. Ed. Wright, W.A. Oxford: Clarendon-Oxford UP, 1900.Google Scholar
Bloom, Harold, and Trilling, Lionel. Victorian Prose and Poetry. New York: Oxford UP, 1973.Google Scholar
Bowyer, John Wilson, and Brooks, John Lee. The Victorian Age: Prose, Poetry, and Drama. New York: Appleton, 1954.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. The Philosophy of Literary Form. 1941. New York: Vintage, 1957.Google Scholar
Crane, R.S.The Language of Criticism and the Structure of Poetry. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtius, Ernst Robert. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Trans. Trask, Willard R. Bollingen Series 36. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1953.Google Scholar
Dollimore, Jonathan, and Sinfield, Alan, eds. Political Shakespeare: New Essays in Cultural Materialism. Manchester, Eng.: Manchester UP, 1985.Google Scholar
Erasmus, Desiderius. De Ratione Studii. Concerning the Aim and Method of Education. Ed. and trans. Woodward, William Harrison. New York: Teachers Coll. P, 1964.Google Scholar
Felperin, Howard. Beyond Deconstruction: The Uses and Abuses of Literary Theory. Oxford: Clarendon-Oxford UP, 1985.Google Scholar
Fowler, Alastair. “Genre and the Literary Canon.” New Literary History 11 (1979): 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. “The Way We Think Now: Toward an Ethnography of Modern Thought.” Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic, 1983. 147–63.Google Scholar
Golding, Alan C. “A History of American Poetry Anthologies.” Canons. Ed. von Hallberg, Robert. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1984. 279–307.Google Scholar
Graff, Gerald. Literature against Itself. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1979.Google Scholar
Harris, Wendell V. “The Continuously Creative Function of Arnoldian Criticism.” Victorian Poetry 26 (Spring-Summer 1988): 117–33.Google Scholar
Hirsch, E.D. Jr. Validity in Interpretation. New Haven: Yale UP, 1967.Google Scholar
Kenner, Hugh. “The Making of the Modernist Canon.” Canons. Ed. von Hallberg, Robert. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1984. 363–75.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. “Institutional Control of Interpretation.” Salmagundi 43 (1979): 72–86.Google Scholar
Kimball, Bruce. Orators and Philosophers: A History of the Idea of Liberal Education. New York: Teachers Coll. P, 1986.Google Scholar
Kolodny, Annette. “The Integrity of Memory: Creating a New Literary History of the United States.” American Literature 57 (1985): 291–307.Google Scholar
Krieger, Murray. Words about Words about Words: Theory, Criticism, and the Literary Text. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1988.Google Scholar
Lauter, Paul. “Caste, Class, and Canon.” A Gift of Tongues. Ed. Harris, Marie and Aguerro, Kathleen. Athens: U of Georgia P, 1987. 51–82.Google Scholar
Lauter, Paul. “Race and Gender in the Shaping of the American Literary Canon: A Case Study from the Twenties.” Feminist Studies 9 (1983): 435–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Harry. “Core, Canon, Curriculum.” College English 43 (1981): 352–62.Google Scholar
Ohmann, Richard, with Ohmann, Carol. “A Case Study in Canon Formation: Reviewers, Critics, and The Catcher in the Rye.” Politics or Letters. By Richard Ohmann. Middletown: Wesleyan UP, 1987. 45–67.Google Scholar
Pater, Walter. Plato and Platonism. London: Macmillan, 1910.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, Rudolf. History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginning to the End of the Hellenistic Age. Oxford: Clarendon-Oxford UP, 1968.Google Scholar
Quiller-Couch, Arthur, ed. The Oxford Book of Victorian Verse. Oxford: Clarendon-Oxford UP, 1912.Google Scholar
Ricks, Christopher, ed. The New Oxford Book of Victorian Verse. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1987.Google Scholar
Smith, Barbara Herrnstein. “Contingencies of Value.” Critical Inquiry 10 (1983): 1–35.Google Scholar
Stange, G. Robert. “1887 and the Making of the Victorian Canon.” Victorian Studies 25 (1987): 151–68.Google Scholar
Stedman, E.C.A Victorian Anthology, 1837–1895. Boston: Houghton, 1895.Google Scholar
Thorndike, Lynn. University Records and Life in the Middle Ages. New York: Columbia UP, 1944.Google Scholar
Woods, George Benjamin, ed. Poetry of the Victorian Period. Chicago: Scott, 1930, 1965.Google Scholar