Who knew that copyright has so much influence on literature survey anthologies? I didn't and, being the English major dork/Norton anthology bitch that I am, find it fascinating to read about.
The connection between copyright and The Canon (captialized, of course) made by that article ties into a very interesting review by The Little Professor of a book called The Reading Nation in the Romantic Period, which argues that copyright laws have had a much bigger impact on shaping The Canon than scholars have ever given it credit for. Really cool stuff.
(Via Maud Newton)
2 comments:
Read the same article, and it makes sense and is somewhat disturbing. I've never been a fan of Norton Anthologies; it's hard to digest a work when you can't flip the page effectively b/c they're tissue-thin, and reading something like Blake's 'Tyger Tyger burning bright' loses some of its beauty and simplicity when it's attached to 1000 other pages of so-called canon text. I prefer individual volumes, thank you.
And, this article can be added to the stack of literary battles. Joyce's grandson is truly disagreeable and greedy (and I say doing a number of students a great favor by keeping them from reading his grandfather's work) but may have a valid point. And next to the battles between various Steinbecks, and corporations and executorial estates like Disney v. Milne, this isn't so huge.
Still, if you're a Bloom fan, and believe in Canon with a capital 'C' then this is disturbing. I count myself in that group moreso than I sometimes wish.
No Bloom fan here! I think he's a pompous old windbag. I do think there is a canon (whether or not it should be capitalized, I don't know), but I don't think it's an unchanging stone temple.
Have to disagree with you about Nortons, though! I LOVE their paper! And I like having a smorgasbord of different texts to choose from.
Post a Comment