The literary canon has long been upheld as an exclusive list where the best classics go to be celebrated and revered for eternity. Admission to the canon is basically like being granted sainthood for books, after all.
But what exactly is this mysterious canon, and who decides what makes the list? Is there even an actual list? We’ll answer all those questions and more in this post, while also taking a look at how this standard can be problematic.
What Is the Literary Canon?
The literary canon is part of the larger “canon,” which is a list of the most important, influential, or definitive works in art, literature, music, and philosophy. These works are often described as “the classics,” but the two terms aren’t necessarily synonymous.
To be considered part of the canon, a book has to be more than just great and able to withstand the test of time; it has to be considered essential.
The term itself is derived from an ancient Greek word for a measuring rod, or standard. Therefore, books that are deemed worthy of entering the canon are considered standards by which all other works are measured.
It’s because of this “essential” status that most high school and university curricula consist almost exclusively of books considered to be part of the canon.
Who Decides What’s In the Canon?
Now, we’ve been talking a lot about the standards for what’s considered canon-worthy, but there’s actually no official list, nor any specific criteria for what can be described as an “essential” book.
As this New York Times article points out, canons have traditionally been determined by “an elite group of scholars and critics who embraced a work of art and sent it aloft to some deifying realm.”
What the canon is intended to represent, though, is our collective idea of which books you need to know in order to have a high-quality, well-rounded education; it doesn’t take the form of a specific list until high schools, universities, critics, or respected institutions determine their own canons.
So, we can say that the canon is subjective and determined by a select few, and while controversies do arise (more on that later), many decisions are obvious.
For example, you’d probably agree that The Great Gatsby is worthy of being in the canon, while Fifty Shades of Grey, however much you may love it, is not. A book can be highly enjoyable, and even really well written (I’m clearly not talking about Fifty Shades anymore), but that’s not enough to qualify it as “essential.”
What Books Are Part of the Literary Canon?
The literary canon includes writers from ancient times, all the way through the late-twentieth century.
In 1994, literary critic Harold Bloom published The Western Canon, in which he names 26 “immortal” authors, including Homer, William Shakespeare, and Virginia Woolf. Of course, his choices sparked a lot of debate, especially about who gets to decide what’s considered worthy of canonization.
But, in a series of appendices, Bloom lists hundreds of other authors that he considers canonical (he later said his editors insisted on including the extended list; he wasn’t really for it). You can find a partial version of that list here.
Below are just some examples of books that are generally considered part of the literary canon:
- The Odyssey by Homer (750 BC)
- The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri (1320)
- The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer (1400)
- Macbeth by William Shakespeare (1606)
- Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen (1813)
- Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley (1818)
- The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne (1850)
- War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy (1869)
- The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain (1884)
- Ulysses by James Joyce (1920)
- The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (1925)
- The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck (1939)
- 1984 by George Orwell (1949)
- The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger (1951)
- Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (1955)
- To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee (1960)
- One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez (1967)
- Beloved by Toni Morrison (1987)
Canons are easier to define when looking at a specific time period or place (for example, 19th century North America)—and that’s usually how they’re studied.
Think back to your high school or college days: there was probably and American Lit class, where you studied the works of Hawthorne, Twain, and Fitzgerald; a World Lit class, where you were introduced to writers from Europe or South America; and any number of other niche courses, where you may have studied a specific time period, literary theme, or movement.
Debate Over the Canon
Though they didn’t realize it, the earliest canonizers in the U.S. were the professional educators who planned the curricula for the first American literature classes, which began to sprout up in the late nineteenth century. Many of the educators who helped select works for those early textbooks were also clergymen—usually older, almost always white, clergymen.
It’s been pointed out that most of the texts studied in secondary and post-secondary schools are written by white men, which might give the impression that only white men are capable of writing canonical works.
But we know this isn’t so; the reality is that the people who have long been in charge of deciding the curriculum looked a lot like those authors they chose, whether they were consciously biased or not. (For significant chunks of the twentieth century, many women and Black Americans couldn’t even vote, much less help decide national school standards.)
None of this is to say that white male authors need to be removed from the canon, but that our idea of what constitutes the canon needs to be updated and expanded.
Some expansion and reassessment did take place in the twentieth century, and authors like Toni Morrison are now regularly taught in high school literature classes and considered part of the canon, but there is still a long way to go if we want our notion of classic, essential works to reflect the vast diversity of great literature that is produced each year.
Honoring the Classics
While it’s certainly faced its fair share of criticism, I’d argue that there’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea of having a literary canon.
It’s still seen by some as a mark of snobbish, elitist preferences, but there are standards that determine the best of pretty much everything—from films to food—and a distinction between what’s “good” and “bad” and “mediocre” is necessary for all artists to grow, as this article argues.
What’s important is that our standards reflect the diverse body of authors creating a wide variety of outstanding works, and not just one type of writer or one type of story.
What do you think of the literary canon? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
If you enjoyed this post, then you might also like:
- 28 Must-Read Modern Classics
- Living Books: Definition and Examples
- 8 Books That Are Lost to History
- Why Diversity in Literature Matters
As a blog writer for TCK Publishing, Kaelyn loves crafting fun and helpful content for writers, readers, and creative minds alike. She has a degree in International Affairs with a minor in Italian Studies, but her true passion has always been writing. Working remotely allows her to do even more of the things she loves, like traveling, cooking, and spending time with her family.
Hi, I really enjoyed this article. I’m using this as one of my sources for an essay that I’m writing but I can’t find the date of publication, can you please let me know? Thanks :)
IMO Dostoyevsky, next to Shakespeare, is the author with most unforgettable insights into human nature. Not always pleasant, but stunningly incisive. Reading daily news, I’m frequently reminded of The Brothers Karamazov, Crime and Punishment, Notes from Underground, etc. Though I’ve enjoyed the work of most on your list (and for pure pleasure might choose Gabriel Garcia Marquez)…..I have to say, Dostoyevsky and Shakespeare have proven far more indelible than any other authors.
Not a lot of poetry
You know I found this article to be very informative thank you to whom ever wrote tis very pleasing article
The books of American Economist Thomas Sowell should be considered as essential to the modern individual for a well rounded introduction to american society in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Economic writings should be categorized with literary works?
Please add or read the book :
Snow Country by Yasunari Kawabata.
Thank you for the suggestion, Dylan! That’s a great classic and award-winning book.
Dear valued Kaelyn
With such a name
born to success & fame
And to surely win.
Thank you very kindly
For your ever so highly
Stimulating stimulus.
But WHERE’S The Good Book?
W/o it man’s a blind coock
And a grotesk homunculus.
WOman too, groping in the dark,
On a truth searching spree
And constantly prone to bark
Up the wrong tree.
W/o The Good Book first
On top, any such lofty list
Is at best fit for Amhurst.
Thanks for getting my gist.
I rest my case, that’s all
Kind regards from Michael.
Hi Michael, thanks for your comment. While there is a biblical canon, the Bible isn’t traditionally considered part of the literary canon, so I didn’t focus on it in this post.
To note though is the fact that throughout history, women and minorities were not given the same opportunities as white males in education and opportunity in general, so much of the best talent pool never manifested. Nor were they tolerated to express themselves and in fact, surely discouraged. Thus sadly, it makes sense that there would be a primary representation of white male literature. Simply put: for most of our world’s history, white males wrote the best and most essential literature. That fact can’t be changed as what it just was. We can’t make up for the fact that the best literature was probably never written and or discovered because of this oppression of most of the worlds talent of the time. However that puts more pressure to make sure any essential literature not in the canon authored by women and people of color are represented for sure. As modern eras become defined and humanity becomes enlightened, the cannon line will have a future that will blurr these white guys. The smartest and most artistic minds will no longer be suppressed and they will contribute the literature essential for all our prosperity and enjoyment.
Hi Lancer, thanks for sharing your thoughts, you definitely make a good point. Sadly, most women and minorities were not given equal access to education. Hopefully we’ll see more diverse voices continue to be added to the canon :)
The best literature was the classics, whether it was written by blacks or whites. Dumas was black btw. To think that people should not consider the classics because of gender or race is a retarded thought. Merit and not diversity is and will always be the true goal. Read “The delusion of diversity” for example. Universities are pandering to the hysterical liberal view. Thank God it’s a passing phase… otherwise we would all be doomed by the dumbing down of society
Hi Andre, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I definitely don’t think we shouldn’t consider the classics because of gender or race. But as I state in the article, I do think it should be updated from time to time. If we’re truly focusing on merit, we should get diversity too, since not just one type of person is capable of writing canon-worthy literature.
Very interesting discussion. I particularly agree with the statement: “None of this is to say that white male authors need to be removed from the canon, but that our idea of what constitutes the canon needs to be updated and expanded.” Better recognising the contribution of diverse writers is long overdue, but the way many other commentators speak, it’s as though they have limited room on their book shelves. Kudos to Kaelyn Barron for some unseasonable common sense.
Thanks for sharing this interesting insight, Gregory! I do agree with more diversity in the literary canon, considering how far literature has evolved.