Embedded Files
canon /ˈkanən/ noun [from the lat. canon -ŏnis, gr. kanṓn -ónos “ruler”, then “norm”]. - 1. [a fundamental principle to adopt in a certain area: literary canon; moral canon] ≈ criterion, model, rule, paradigm, norm. 2. (literature) [list of works or authors proposed as a model].
canon /ˈkanən/ noun [from the lat. canon -ŏnis, gr. kanṓn -ónos “ruler”, then “norm”]. - 1. [a fundamental principle to adopt in a certain area: literary canon; moral canon] ≈ criterion, model, rule, paradigm, norm. 2. (literature) [list of works or authors proposed as a model].
Why DO We read classics?
Why DO We read classics?
According to Italo Calvino, the classics are the “books that come down to us bearing upon them the traces of readings previous to ours and bringing in their wake the traces they themselves have left on the culture or cultures they have passed through.” As a result, we acknowledge the incredible legacy of works like The Argonauts of the Western Pacific, for example. Malinowski, like many others, is recognized as a model in anthropology and hence he is canonical for ethnographic writing.
This canon, however, is viewed as flawed and constrained to some extent. The canon is accused of having roots in the colonial era and perpetuating racist behavior. In Heart of Darkness, for example, the crisis of representation raises questions about who is included and who is excluded from the model. As a result, the value of reading classics is still debatable.
Intellectuals hold a wide range of viewpoints. "Reading the canon symptomatically to understand prior worldviews while remaining ready to dispute, disrupt, and subvert it," says Yarimar Bonilla. Adian Benton, on the other hand, believes that we should simply abandon the classics and create our own personal list of classics.
(1899)
HEaRT OF DARKNESS
HEaRT OF DARKNESS
In Conrad's haunting tale, Marlow, a seaman and wanderer, recounts his physical and psychological journey in search of the enigmatic Kurtz. Traveling to the heart of the African continent, he discovers how Kurtz has gained his position of power and influence over the local people. Marlow's struggle to fathom his experience involves him in a radical questioning of not only his own nature and values but the nature and values of his society.
The Heart of Darkness is a great classic of literature. Despite the fact that it has been studied for years in school, it has numerous controversial and racist features. As a result, many individuals condemn it for its socially unacceptable behavior, among these Chinua Achebe is a well known author who openly wrote against it.
An Image of Africa
"Heart of Darkness projects the image of Africa as "The other world," the antithesis of Europe and therefore of civilization, a place where a man's vaunted intelligence and refinement are finally mocked by triumphant bestiality."
"The point of my observation should be quite clear by now, namely, that Conrad was a bloody racist. That this simple truth is glossed over in criticism of his work is due to the fact that white racism against Africa is such a normal way of thinking that manifestations go completely undetected." (Chinua Achebe, 1930)
WHY WE SHOULD READ THEM
WHY WE SHOULD READ THEM
To gain insights, learn about the content and positioning of their historical record and contribution to social science (Myers, 2017) while critiquing their problematic theoretical and colonial approach we need to value them as witnesses and testimony of other places and times.
Because some classics allow the development of complex critical arguments (Myers,2017)
as Jackson (2017) argues, it is like watching the same movie repeatedly. You are not distracted by the characters of the storyline anymore and you can analyze beyond the surface of the story. So we should read " the classics [because they] conjure up a way of sensing and making sense of complex cultural worlds that still has much to teach us as we recalibrate and reenchant its methods for the exigencies of our unpredictable and precarious times."
to consider how the approaches used in the classics reflect the epistemic roots of the discipline (Bonilla,2017)
When taking the critics on books like this one into consideration it shows the mistakes and grievances of the past, from which future research or canonisation practices can learn.
Without these debatable works, the risk that the problems they caused disappear out of sight, and we may be prone to repeat them.
It serves as a negative moral standard to which we can uphold current and future work.
It can bring up hope, that society will move in a better direction, through showing us how we’ve changed for the better. Nowadays we don’t support racist ideas anymore for instance, although racism is still alive, it shows us that we can improve. Reading classics can guide us in learning what we still need to change and why.
Learning how to sit with the uncomfortable and take on responsibility and accountability of the past.
WHY WE SHOULD NOT READ THEM
WHY WE SHOULD
The content of some classics is overtly racist, there is no use in mentioning them over and over again.
By juxtaposing this kind of literature with opposing views, the discussion revolves around these books with their outdated morals, instead of moving forward and really embracing contemporary views. While the aim is to ‘unsettle’ anthropology from its colonial past you, then, get stuck in its intricate web.
By scrapping these works from the curriculum of anthropology as an academic discipline, there is room to read about works that are actually important for the current times.
By breaking with the past and its canon, there is a chance to cherry-pick what is important for a to-be established canon.
Instead of constantly rereading and criticising older research texts, that have already been reworked many times, it is important to also read contemporary books and criticize those instead, in order to progress.
It is very much the question of what anthropology wants to be when deciding what to keep and what to ditch in its literary canon. With new voices entering it seems like common practice to broaden the horizon of anthropology.
Breaking with the canon, allows other voices, that have been oppressed in the past, to be heard. This can lead to a change of power relations, where authority is now also given to these voices.
The question of whether or not we should read the classics is still up to debate; in any case, there is no single solution to this complicated issue, but rather a variety of ways to engage with the canon. It is, nevertheless, essential to engage critically with them, which entails going beyond the book's surface and delving deeper into the historical background, into what is so normalized that we don't ordinarily notice it, in order to gain a better understanding of it. What should be avoided is the celebration of literature that reinforces colonialism and bigotry. With postmodernism, it's evident who has the power to represent and who does not; as a result, we need to make room for new voices and representations.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse