Is the Western Canon still tenable? The very concept of Canon - which imbues groups of writings with status and authority - looks extremely tenuous in the fractured and diverse post-modern world. Given the close association between Christianity and Christian ideas and the Western cultural heritage, will the demise of the Western Canon presage the demise of the Canon of Holy Scripture? Evangelical Christians are often predisposed as a result of this connexion to culturally conservative positions. Is this a healthy alliance given the incisive ethically-based contemporary attack on Western culture?
No, it most certainly isn’t. Christianity needs to renew its status as counter-cultural and seek, by proclaiming its Gospel, repentence, atonement and reconciliation between and within cultures as far as possible. Sensitive reading of the Canon will assist the process of humble cultural and personal reflection. Often by placing literature in a Canon however, it has been hermetically sealed from the careful and exacting reading that is necessary. Great literature, almost by definition, stimulates both individual and collective self-examination which is sometimes painful. However, history has illustrated what the Bible already teaches: that the reading of literature cannot keep us from the terrible effects of human evil and self-destruction. The failed moral optimism 0f the nineteenth century must not be re-endorsed.
The great books that comprise the Canon continue to be great. It is worthwhile for many reasons to “rub your nose in the stuff”. These works rise above the squabblings of academics. Let them be read, but not “canonically” - if that means granting them an authority they do not have or using them in the subjection of others. Let them be read, but not if that means importing into reading our own ideological proclivities at every turn. Let them be read, but not without due consideration of historical contexts. Let them be read, but not without appreciation of creative genius, imagination and artistry.
4 comments:
Hey Michael,
Perhaps I pre-empting a future post you have in mind, but are you going to give us a rough idea of the sorts of writings you believe are in the Canon (for those of use ignorant of these things). I'd love to know so I can "rub my nose in it".
Blessings,
Marty.
Well now:
actually, no I wasn't going to!
But I could...
Thanks for the posts on Canon. They are very interesting.
I am somewhat surprised that the concept of literary canon is said to be a Western construct. India, China and Japan seem to have a rich set of literary text that they regard as important to their national identities. China, certainly, has a long tradition of teaching classical texts to students.
In fact, I might venture to say that every community of peoples have some kind of literary canon, although for many communities (such as aboriginal peoples) that canon is oral rather than written.
The Jewish bible itself probably has its origins in an oral canon that became written over time.
Literary canon help define a community in a two-way relationship. The community looks to its literary canon work out questions common to that community such as who they are, what are their origins, what their mission is. The literary canon itself is not static but changes over time as the community changes. While not a historian, I am sure even the Jewish scriptural canon has changed over time.
I think of "scriptural canon" as simply a special type of literary canon. It defines a religious community, often one centered around a transcendental relationship with a god of some kind. The boundaries of a scriptural canon need not be fixed. Although the Bible seem to be fixed, in fact Christian communities have supplemented the scriptural canon with other writings that may have "semi-scriptural" status.
Even specialized communities such as academics have their own specialized canon that define that community is. I am sure that is the case with (say) English literature academics. That is certainly the case with academic economists (who I have some familiarity with). Certain journal articles or textbooks have acquired a special status within academic economists. Every economist is expected to be familiar with (or at least know of) a core set of writings by prominent economists such as Milton Friedman, Maynard Keynes, Alfred Marshall and going back to Adam Smith. A similar requirement applies to a certain set of "core" economic models. These writings (and models) help define the community of economists. A person's claim to be an "economist" is weakened if he/she is unfamiliar with those writings and economic models.
In the same way, I suspect theologians have a set of literary canons (Barth, etc?).
So literary canon (whether scriptural, academic or more generally) all play a role in defining a community, and setting some kind of normative standard for that community. The canon itself is not static, but dynamic; it changes as the community itself changes.
Thanks for the posts on Canon. They are very interesting.
I am somewhat surprised that the concept of literary canon is said to be a Western construct. India, China and Japan seem to have a rich set of literary text that they regard as important to their national identities. China, certainly, has a long tradition of teaching classical texts to students.
In fact, I might venture to say that every community of peoples have some kind of literary canon, although for many communities (such as aboriginal peoples) that canon is oral rather than written.
The Jewish bible itself probably has its origins in an oral canon that became written over time.
Literary canon help define a community in a two-way relationship. The community looks to its literary canon work out questions common to that community such as who they are, what are their origins, what their mission is. The literary canon itself is not static but changes over time as the community changes. While not a historian, I am sure even the Jewish scriptural canon has changed over time.
I think of "scriptural canon" as simply a special type of literary canon. It defines a religious community, often one centered around a transcendental relationship with a god of some kind. The boundaries of a scriptural canon need not be fixed. Although the Bible seem to be fixed, in fact Christian communities have supplemented the scriptural canon with other writings that may have "semi-scriptural" status.
Even specialized communities such as academics have their own specialized canon that define that community is. I am sure that is the case with (say) English literature academics. That is certainly the case with academic economists (who I have some familiarity with). Certain journal articles or textbooks have acquired a special status within academic economists. Every economist is expected to be familiar with (or at least know of) a core set of writings by prominent economists such as Milton Friedman, Maynard Keynes, Alfred Marshall and going back to Adam Smith. A similar requirement applies to a certain set of "core" economic models. These writings (and models) help define the community of economists. A person's claim to be an "economist" is weakened if he/she is unfamiliar with those writings and economic models.
In the same way, I suspect theologians have a set of literary canons (Barth, etc?).
So literary canon (whether scriptural, academic or more generally) all play a role in defining a community, and setting some kind of normative standard for that community. The canon itself is not static, but dynamic; it changes as the community itself changes.
Post a Comment