SCRIBBLE
Diversity Canon In this edition of ‘Scribble’, Head of English, Mr Aldridge, considers the diversity offered within the canon of English Literature.
L
iterature is such a cornerstone of any culture’s self-representation and expression of identity, that it really should not be hard to make a case for English Literature’s ability to tell a range of stories from a variety of perspectives, to celebrate a diverse plethora of voices, ideas, experiences and identities, or to find a host of gender and sexuality identities open to students during their time at school. And
yet it is.
The canon of English Literature has long been a contentious concept, and one increasingly rejected by scholars and critics alike. The term ‘canon’ is derived from Ancient Greek: κανών (kanṓn), meaning a measuring rod, or standard; a simple definition of English Literature’s canon is a collection of ‘significant’ and ‘worthy’ texts which embody or exemplify Western culture and ideas - ‘essential’ and ‘important’ works that any student should read. In my first term at University, the compulsory module for students of English Literature was called ‘The Canon 101’ and ensured that all undergraduates developed a common grounding in English Literature’s ‘classics’. We read texts by Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dickens, Hardy, Spenser, Marlowe, and needed some passing understanding of the works of Ancient Greece (Virgil, Homer, Sophocles) and of wider European writers (Pushkin, de Cervantes, Dostoyevsky). This was, by design, a grounding in the ‘canon’ of English Literature so that we were able to demonstrate an understanding of English Literature’s rich heritage and tradition. I don’t remember thinking it as a naïve eighteen year old, but I am staggered looking back at how gender and culture blind this initiation to undergraduate study was. The only female writer that was given any kind of prominence was Jane Austen; writers of colour were entirely omitted. Instead, women writers, non-English writers, non-conformist writers were all given their own unit, entitled ‘The Canon and its discontents’, which immediately followed the initial study of the Canon; I am glad that non-Canonical writers were celebrated on my degree, but it nonetheless remains problematic that these voices and stories were not deemed canonical, remembering that a canon comprises ‘significant’ and ‘worthy’ writers and texts, and, therefore, by definition, these non-canonical texts are somehow less significant and worthy than their canonical counterparts.
14
