Students name
Professor
Course
Date
American cultural canon
whether the American cultural literary is still important or is no longer important remains a question for most discussions. The relevance of contemporary writing is unarguably significant in shaping the modern works. However, modernism comes with trends and new ways of doing things. With new issues in the society comes new ideas to solve them. That in mind, there is no need to bring the contemporary writings in the modern society. Modern institutions prepare pupils to interact with the real world and become survivors. The American cultural canon is not important in the current literature. Literary canon describes the literature classification based certain criteria. I have based by stand on the some of the theories underpinning the existence of literary canon. The united states have a long history of race implications on authors. Several literary works did not meet the potential or reflect the content because of external factors. the role played by political influence was massive during the past years of literature writing. The biasness in establishing the authenticity of literature works puts the American cultural canon in jeopardy. Most literature works which met the standard during the period were excluded because of the personal reasons. Political factors played major roles in the selection of the works. Most authors had to face the ruthlessness of moderators because of their political stand. The American cultural canon composed of literature works authored by Americans. However, the content of the works varied depending on captured theme. The major limitation of American cultural canon is the lack of diversity in cultural reviewed. Most America works published over the past decades addressed the American culture. Authors who addressed external cultures were eliminated despite the high level of writing skills. In most instances, authors classified in the American cultural canon addressed issues that promote American culture, political prowess and good things about America. That explain the political implications of the strategy in influencing the literature works. The collection of works written in specific period depended on certain factors: the credibility of the work, author profile and themes addressed. The American cultural canon employed one major criterion which never promoted transparency in the literature profession. The idea that American cultural canon should address American history limited the authors who had global views. The lack of multiculturalism in the American cultural canon tarnished the effectiveness and authenticity of the criterion. The status of canon in the 60s in different from what is observed in the 21st century. A lot has changed. However, the fact still remains that the canon has been far from rewarding authors what they rightfully deserved. The American cultural canon was relevant in the 1960s because of the issues that rooted the country. The racial discrimination and gender inequality in the country resulted to several movements that relied on literary works. In the current generation, there are still movements but that should not necessitate efforts to establish canon. The world has changed and the modernist writers embark on matters that promotes inclusiveness. American communities in the 1960s differ from the current situation. The political transformation has occurred over the past decades. From my stand of view, the literature work, “Battle Royal” by Ralph Ellison should never be taught in the modern schools. The relevance of the literature work has declined relative to the societal demands.
The new America strive to has eradicated the old stereotypes, if not fully. Cases of racial abuse is a taboo to most parts of the country and offenders are at risk of facing the full force of the law. A better option for the American cultural canon is to use multimedia approach. For the benefit of the nation, American cultural canon should not incline too much on the country’s issues, rather global trends. It is the fact that Americans were known for self-reliance and culturally-centralized, a practice that shaped the literary canons. Turing to multimedia option will help clear the country’s tarnished image and attract global writers into discussing issues affecting the country. Canonization should make changes that fits to the modern writing. The old ways of categorizing the literature writers should not apply to what is seen in the modern writing. While the American history still remains, the American cultural canon should turn to the multimedia platform to embrace the developed technology.
Based on the experience of authors of the 1960s, changes are inevitable on how canon should be formed (Rakefet, 153). Most authors suffered on thee hands of publishers and critiques. For example, women writers in the 60s had difficulties finding publishers because the period was dominated by gender stereotypes. Men had upper say in literature profession. Literary works were approved based on acceptance by universities and critics. With the current trends, there is need to change how canon is formed to ensure fairness to authors who strive to leave a mark in the writing profession. Most writers have struggled to match the current writing styles to those identified in the past. That should not be a problem because themes in the society have changed dramatically, requiring different approach to canonization. If there should still be an American cultural canon, its formation should require conserve the power of canon. The process of forming canon should be culturally sensitive. The battle on whether to include or exclude cultural correctness give the notion that canon is non-persistence.
Canon formation entails production, consumption, diffusion and evaluation of canon authors and literary works. Institutions of canon works should allow for autonomy of the authors. Over the past years, authors were regulated and evaluated of the type of content to write. Institutions and critics dictated the type of literary work to published. The authors lacked writing autonomy to express their ideas and reciprocate their writing efforts. there is need to include current societal trends in writing. If there was the American cultural canon, cultural inclusively should have dominated its formation. While the universities and critiques played major roles in attesting canon groups, the trend should change. Instated, of the critiques and universities, independent panels should be created. The role of the panels should be to evaluate the authors based on literary works. The rigidity of the universities and critiques in assessing determining the canon.
General readers should be given chance to evaluate the authors. In literature works, general readers form a higher percentage of literary consumers. Readers can provide a representative information about authors and their works. Over past decades evaluation of authors only required the decision by institutions and critiques. The modern canon should be selected based on the credibility of works. Readers can provide substantial suggestions on whether literature work is credible or not. The reason for including readers in the evaluation process is because they interact with literature works more frequently.
Media is another platform which should be included in the canon formation process. The contribution of media is massive, especially in disseminating information about literature works and authors. Cases of propaganda can be harmful to the success of authors. Inclusion of media will help lower the incidences of propaganda and therefore the spread of misinformation. Also, mass media is a useful tool in the marketing of published works. The current society requires that literatures be marketed in medias.
Ideological influence is another factor that should play significant role in the canon formation process. The ruling class have had influence in the canon formation and that should change. Modern should be independent of political or other external influences. The unfair treatment of authors based on race and political stands denied them the right to express ideas. The ideology of powerful people should never influence the formation of canon, even if they have the opportunity to do so.
Certain principles guide the formation of canon. One of the majorly discussed principle is the transitoriness which describe the versatility and negotiability of the canons. Transitoriness views the canon as persistent cultural reservoirs and accumulative. Another principle which underpins the formation of canons is the generativeness. The principle of generativeness explains the ability of the canon to act as cultural shock absorber. Canons have cultural standards and guidelines that are either acceptable or declined based on the qualities.
In summary, canon formation should never be viewed on the basis of traditional critical perspectives. Consumerism cultures dictates the evaluation approach, distribution channels and evaluation standards. Mass media is likely to influence intensity of external formation on the formation of canon.
Works cited
Rakefet Sela-Sheffy. canon formation revisited: canon and cultural production. (2002) 2, 141–159. Retrieved from https://www.tau.ac.il/~rakefet/papers/Canon-formation-revisited.pdf