Abstract
The place of the canon in institutions of higher education has been a matter for considerable debate in recent years. While there are important variations between different conservative positions in the battle over university reading requirements, many traditionalists assume that texts should be selected purely on the basis of their literary or philosophical merit, and that some people are able to objectively distinguish "Great Books" from those of lesser value. This paper concentrates on Allan Bloom's version of this thesis. Bloom suggests that "writers of quality" know other writers of quality. The author argues that Bloom's analysis is premised on a problematic theory of legitimation, a flawed conception of greatness, and a restrictive view of possibilities for reading at the university level. An alternative position - one based on the Freirean view of critical reading - is advanced.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
