Oh Mann!

"Ohmann shows that aesthetic judgements are inflected by capitalist criteria" (1878). This idea is insane to me. It rings absolutely true, but I wish that were not the case. What we find beautiful in a book has more to do with what sells than what is actually quality writing. Capitalism, while it is very much a part of our everyday life, should not affect our appreciation of literary beauty. It is extremely sad to realize that Ohmann is correct in saying that advertising is important to the shaping of the canon. Perhaps I am too much of an idealist, but I like to think of the canon as some pure thing untouched by human vices. I see it similarly to how I view the Bible (although there are obvious differences here). I don't like to think that capitalism and advertising are at the root of our great works of literature. The literature should speak for itself. It's beauty and greatness should be self-evident rather than man-made. This is just my little rant for the day.

On a completely separate note I was struck by the section in Ohmann's essay, "The Shaping of a Canon: U.S. fiction, 1960-1975" that discussed liking works of literature. He asserts that "it doesn't matter that Norman Podhoretz hates Updike novels, so long as he takes them seriously enough to argue with his peers about them" (1887). This is interesting to me because it indicates that the canon has more to do with discussion and popularity than likeability. It matters more how much a text is talked about than how much readers like it. I am not sure how much I agree with this statement. I am sure that the worst book of all time would get talked about a great deal, but would such popularity reserve it's place in the canon? I should hope not.

Originally, I had never really taken the time to look at literature from a perspective of class structure. After reading Ohmann though, I have come to the conclusion that class does play a role in the construction of the canon. All of this discussion regarding the canon and its subjectivity has got me rather frustrated. Is there any such thing as a purely good work of literature?