The Canon, Ideology and Assumptions

 

Canon in English Literature: Meaning and Formation

What is a Canon?

A Canon is a group of literary works that are officially accepted as important and worthy of study.

• These texts are considered "great literature".
• They are taught in schools and universities.
• They shape what students think literature is.

Writers like William Shakespeare, John Milton, and Jane Austen are traditionally part of the English literary canon. Texts outside the canon are often labelled:

• Popular fiction
• Regional literature
• Minority literature
• Third World literature

Students studying English literature usually read canonical texts. As a result:

• They learn to value certain works more than others.
• Their understanding of literature is influenced by these selected texts.
• Their responses are shaped by what institutions decide is important.

The passage argues that the canon is not neutral, it is created by people with power.

Many writers from countries like India, Nigeria, and other former colonies write in English. However, their works were often excluded from the traditional English canon. Separate categories had to be created for them. For excample, commonwealth literature and postcolonial literature. This shows that English literature was often treated as separate from literature written in English by colonized peoples. 

India inherited its English education system from Britain. Therefore, the indian canon is largely based on the British canon. To understand Indian English studies, we must understand how the British canon developed. 

England changed dramatically during the 19th century. Earlier, power was with aristocrats and wealthy landowners. Later, Industrial Revolution expanded, factories grew, new middle class became wealthy, and large number of workers moved from villages to cities. 

This created three major groups: 

1. Upper class (Aristocracy and Wealthy Elites)
2. Middle class (Businessmen, professionals)
3. Working class (Factory workers)

As the middle class gained wealth, they wanted education too. This led to conflict. The upper class wanted to keep control over education, to preserve their cultural authority and to maintain their social position. The middle class wanted more access to education, greater influence in society and recognition of their cultural values. But they were not completely democratic. They wanted education for themselves, not necessarily for the working masses.

Literature and culture were seen as solutions to social confusion in Victorian England, but access to them was restricted to a privileged elite, which shaped the literary canon.

The Newbolt Report and English Education

A major influence on the formation and spread of the English literary canon was the Newbolt Report, titled The Teaching of English in England.

This report defined the aims of teaching English, shaped literary and cultural education, addressed the cultural needs of colonial populations. It explicitly promoted English as a key educational and cultural tool within and outside Britain.

The report argued that: 

Every child must be familiar with English, which gives access to one of the world's great literatures.

This statement implies that English is essential for cultural participation. English literature represents "great literature". Other languages are indirectly positioned as secondary. 

The report worked in the context of British imperial strategy. Nations were becoming more conscious of their cultural identity. Britain used English to maintain influence in colonies. English was promoted as a global language. It was positioned against languages like French, which earlier held global prestige.

Through policies like the Newsbolt Report, English literature was presented as universal and superior. Studying English became linked with cultural legitimacy. It gave access to "literature" which was tied to knowledge of English. Thus, English was not just a language but a marker of cultural power. 

The report also shaped the role of teachers. Teachers of English were seen as:

• "Missionaries" of culture
• Agents who spread English values and beliefs
• Individuals reinforcing the idea of "Englishness"

This strengthened the idea that English education carried ideological authority, not just academic content. 

Reading English literature became a pathway into cultural acceptance, a means of entering the dominant literary canon, and a way of participating in established power structures. 

Leavis and Eliot : Influence on the Canon

In the 20th century, literary critics such as F. R. Leavis and T. S. Eliot played a major role in shaping how literature was valued and studied. Their ideas continued to influence English studies in universities worldwide. 

F.R. Leavis attempted to redefine the canon. He focused on moral seriousness in literature. He emphasized on "great tradition" of English fiction and inclusion of selected middle class values. He did not include working class or mass literature. His canon remained selective and exclusive. 

One of the most significant contributions of F. R. Leavis to canon formation was his work The Great Tradition, which established a narrow and selective literary canon. In this work, certain authors were elevated as representatives of “great literature,” while others were dismissed as writers of popular or entertaining fiction. Notably, Charles Dickens was excluded from this canon, and women writers such as Emily Brontë and Charlotte Brontë were marginalized. This demonstrates that the formation of the canon involves both inclusion and exclusion. Leavis was also associated with the journal Scrutiny, which promoted the principles of Liberal Humanism. The journal emphasized faith in individual moral goodness, universal human values, and the cultivation of educated sensitivity. However, these ideas largely reflected middle-class perspectives and failed to adequately represent the working classes or colonized peoples. The influence of Leavis and T. S. Eliot continues to be felt in universities and academic institutions, where their ideas have shaped literary syllabi and notions of “serious literature.” As a result, the literary canon has often reflected middle-class cultural values, selectively privileging certain texts while excluding marginalized voices, thereby linking literary value closely with social and cultural power.

T. S. Eliot belonged to an aristocratic class that had lost much of its power. Through his literary criticism, he tried to keep the importance of this class alive. In his famous essay Tradition and the Individual Talent, Eliot argued that literature cannot be understood without studying the works of the past. He believed that every new literary work should be connected to earlier traditions. Although this idea helped create a sense of continuity in literature, Eliot's understanding of tradition was selective and did not include everyone equally.

Eliot also believed that the modern world had become very complex and difficult to understand. In his poetry, meaning was often found not in society but in the past and in tradition. His ideas became very influential and helped shape the English literary canon.

The study of English literature had important effects in colonies like India. British rulers used English education to strengthen their control. Macaulay believed that English education would create Indians who were Indian by birth but English in their thinking, values, and behaviour. The goal was to spread English culture and ideas among Indians.

The British also wanted English to replace Persian as the official language of administration and education. They believed that English language and culture were superior to Indian languages and traditions. As a result, English became a symbol of education, power, and social status. People who knew English were considered educated and belonged to an elite group.

This created a class of Indians who admired and imitated English culture. At the same time, Indian languages were treated as less important. English education therefore helped the British maintain their rule while also influencing India's education system, administration, and social structure.

Terry Eagleton's View on the Rise of English Studies

In his essay The Rise of English, Terry Eagleton explains how the study of English literature developed alongside changes in English society. He shows that the term "English" does not simply refer to a language or literature. It is also connected to power, culture, education, and the growth of the British Empire. Eagleton argues that the literary canon is not just a collection of great books chosen for their artistic value. Instead, it is closely linked to social and political power.

The word "canon" originally came from the Church. It referred to official rules and sacred books that were accepted as authoritative. Today, the term is used for literary works that are considered important and worthy of study. The canon acts as a standard by which books are judged and classified as either mainstream literature or something outside it.

During the eighteenth century, English society began to change. Earlier, landowners and aristocrats held most of the power. However, a new middle class started gaining wealth through trade and business. Money slowly became more important than land in determining social status. As this middle class became stronger, literature also changed to meet its needs.

One important literary form that emerged during this period was the periodical essay. According to Eagleton, this genre helped teach the rising middle class proper manners, taste, and social behaviour. Literature was used to refine and educate this new group so that it could fit into higher levels of society. In this way, literature became a tool for shaping social values.

Coffee houses also played an important role in this period. They became places where people from different backgrounds could meet, discuss ideas, and exchange opinions. This helped create a new culture of public discussion. Unlike the feudal system, where power and expression were mainly controlled by landowners, coffee houses allowed a wider group of people to participate in debates and form opinions.

Eagleton argues that literature did more than reflect social values. It actively helped spread and strengthen them. The ideas discussed in literature, essays, and coffee houses supported the interests of the growing middle class and helped it gain social influence. Thus, literature became closely connected with changes in society, economics, and power. According to Eagleton, the rise of English literature cannot be separated from the rise of the middle class and the changing social structure of England.

Romanticism, Imagination and the Canon

According to Terry Eagleton, the modern idea of literature as a creative activity developed because of major social and economic changes during the nineteenth century. The Industrial Revolution changed society in many ways and affected how people thought about literature. Literature was no longer seen simply as writing; it became closely associated with creativity and imagination. Eagleton argues that this definition did not arise naturally but was shaped by the needs of society at that particular time.

As industrialization expanded, society became increasingly focused on money, business, and market relations. Human relationships also changed. Earlier, craftsmen and workers were directly connected through small workshops and guilds. In the industrial system, however, owners and workers became separated, and people were often valued only for their economic role. This created feelings of alienation and dissatisfaction among many people.

In response to these changes, the Romantic writers developed the idea of imagination. They believed that imagination could provide an alternative to the materialistic and profit-driven world created by industrial capitalism. For the Romantics, imagination was not simply a way of escaping reality. Instead, it was a way of criticizing society and imagining a better world based on freedom, equality, and human creativity.

Eagleton argues that Romanticism emerged because of real historical conditions. The Romantics were reacting against the harsh effects of industrialization and the growing importance of money in social life. Imagination became a powerful force that allowed them to challenge existing values and dream of a different society. Poets such as Shelley believed that poetry and social change were closely connected.

However, the Romantics also had certain limitations. While they criticized the existing social system, they did not always clearly understand class differences within society. Some of them failed to recognize the distinction between workers and capitalists. Because of this, their ideas often remained at the level of imagination and did not develop into a practical alternative social structure.

Eagleton further explains that Romantic ideas later influenced concepts such as symbolism and aestheticism. Writers began to see the poet as a visionary figure who could look beyond ordinary reality. Literature was increasingly treated as something special and separate from everyday life. These ideas eventually became part of the literary canon and shaped the way literature was studied and understood for many years.

God, Evolution and the Role of Literature 

According to Eagleton, the idea of imagination gradually became part of a new literary canon. Art was seen as something separate from society and everyday life. Symbols in literature were treated as mysterious and special, meant to be felt rather than explained. This gave art a privileged position and made it seem accessible only to a few educated people. Literature was increasingly viewed as existing for its own sake, with no connection to social or political realities. As a result, writers were seen as isolated artists creating beauty rather than engaging with society. Eagleton argues that this way of thinking limited literature and ignored its wider social role.

In the middle of the nineteenth century, two major events changed the direction of literature. The first was the failure of the Revolution of 1848, and the second was the weakening of religious authority. Earlier, religion had acted as a force that held society together. It encouraged people to accept values such as obedience, sacrifice, and humility. According to Eagleton, religion often helped maintain the interests of the ruling classes by making social inequalities appear natural and acceptable.

After the failure of the Revolution of 1848, many working-class people became dissatisfied with society. At the same time, religion was losing its influence, and people began looking for a new source of meaning and unity. This raised an important question: if religion was declining and science was becoming more influential, what role would literature play?

This question concerned thinkers such as Matthew Arnold. Arnold believed that literature and culture could provide the moral guidance that religion once offered. He argued that culture meant learning and appreciating the best ideas and achievements of humanity. For Arnold, literature could help improve society and prevent social disorder.

Arnold divided society into three groups. He called the wealthy upper classes the "Barbarians," the rising middle class the "Philistines," and the working classes the "Populace." He believed that the middle class could be improved through education and culture and could help maintain social stability. However, Arnold paid little attention to the problems faced by the working classes and did not see them as central to his vision of social progress.

These ideas later influenced Liberal Humanism, which emphasized the goodness of individuals and the importance of literature in developing moral values. Although Liberal Humanism claimed to speak for all people, it did not offer any practical solution to social inequality and largely ignored the difficult conditions of the working class. Eagleton therefore argues that literature, culture, religion, and education were all closely connected to the social and political struggles of the nineteenth century.

Literature, Power and the Place of Women

According to Eagleton, literature gradually became a tool that helped maintain the existing social order. The views of the ruling middle class, or bourgeoisie, were presented as universal truths, while the problems of ordinary people were often ignored. Literature was turned into a private and solitary activity that discouraged people from taking political action or questioning society. Like religion, literature was used to influence people's emotions and make them accept the existing system.

The ruling classes also used literature to educate workers in a limited way. Instead of encouraging them to challenge inequality, literature often taught them values that supported capitalism and social control. Social and economic differences were not discussed critically. Instead, poverty, suffering, and exploitation were presented as subjects to be observed rather than problems to be solved.

Eagleton also points out that literature often represented colonized countries through the writings of authors such as Kipling and Conrad. Readers were encouraged to view these societies from a distance and believe that the world was generally orderly and moral. The real experiences of colonized people and working classes were often removed from their social context and turned into objects of literary interest.

The position of women in this system was even more difficult. Women were rarely given an active role in literature or society. As trade, industrialization, and colonial expansion increased, men gained greater mobility and power, while women were increasingly confined to limited social roles. Literature reflected this situation by focusing mainly on male experiences and perspectives.

Women often appeared in literary works as symbols of morality, goodness, or beauty rather than as independent individuals. They were expected to support social values created by men. Even when women began writing novels, many had to use male pen names and follow strict social expectations. Working-class women were almost completely absent from literature and rarely received attention.

Eagleton argues that the literary canon has largely ignored marginalized groups such as women, workers, and colonized people. Therefore, to fully understand the canon, it is necessary to study how it represents or fails to represent these groups. A complete understanding of literature requires paying attention to the voices that have traditionally been left out.