Off the Beaten Canon

Sir Wilson Harris, *The Guyana Quartet* — These four novels, published between 1960 and 1963 by Faber & Faber, feature some of the most stunning writing in twentieth century fiction. The first novel in the Quartet, *Palace of the Peacock*, was chosen from the slush pile by T. S. Eliot himself, and Harris’ work features elements similar to the great Modernist authors: experiments with plot, character, and perspective; a poetic density of narration; themes attending to the movement of history and the presence of the unconscious and mythic in daily life. Harris himself points to the dream-visions of Blake as an important precursor to his experiments. His novels are surreal, at once nightmarish and redemptive, revisions of the history of colonialism. His mode is the comic — not the comedic, but the comic, with an emphasis on ultimate unity and harmony in diversity.

Try John Williams’ “Stoner.” It’s incredibly compelling (and has nothing to do with drugs).

My BA was in English in the 70′s, and it included few classic works – Women’s Studies was at a zenith, as was feminist lit crit. Twenty years later I went to St John’s Graduate Institute and completed the MA-LA in Great Books. I discovered all I hadn’t known. Had I done it the other way around, I’d have had an infinitely stronger basis to branch off the canon path into the subsequent world of literature, which is informed by all that came before it culturally, as I do now. I teach Great Books courses at a community college now for this reason.

Laurie is spot-on regarding Bowles’s _The Sheltering Sky_, which is an astonishingly compelling work. I have no idea why it is merely a sleeper. The 1990 Bertolucci-directed film version is also not to be missed, IMHO.I would add Durrell’s _Alexandria Quartet_ to any list of passed-over great books.

Clearly some people read these blogs simply to get their undies in a bunch. Five people offer suggestions, and already it’s “OMG! Where are ye books of olden dayes?” Why not simply suggest something yourself by Lem? Why not suggest your own sleeper masterpiece of non-fiction? Why must others do what you would like? But, so that these multi-numbered folks don’t explode with righteous indignation:1. Constance Rourke, *American Humor: A Study of the National Character* (1931) — This has been reissued recently by NYRB, with an excellent introduction by Greil Marcus. I first heard of Rourke’s work in Marcus’s amazing *The Old, Weird America*, and I read it to use in a dissertation chapter on Ishmael Reed (another neglected genius). Rourke’s study takes 18th and 19th century American popular culture seriously, examining comic types such as the pioneer, the backwoodsman, and the minstrel. Her analysis of how these character types embody distinctively American qualities is brilliant and provides a model for the serious study of popular culture.2. Herman Melville, *The Confidence-Man* — It might seem odd to propose a work by an acknowledged master like Melville, but I think most readers get through *Billy Budd*, “Bartleby”, a few odd short stories, and maybe *Moby-Dick* (a novel more talked about than read). *The Confidence-Man* is a later masterpiece, formally innovative — sort of a variation on *The Canterbury Tales* — with a group of people on a Mississippi steamer, telling stories, conning one another, fashioning identities out of thin air. 3. The poetry of Edward Taylor — Puritan theological verse, with conceits and figures that could drive Donne mad. He was our first true poet, ‘tho whether to claim him as American or English is another argument entirely. He is the baroque counterpart to Anne Bradstreet, whose neo-classical verse is more widely read (at least in American lit surveys).

I would like to add Thomas Mann’s “The Magic Mountain” (1924). The “Great Books” are the ones that take me elsewhere, for however long I’m reading, and upon completion have bequeathed a fresh “molecule” to my make-up. This experience has come from both fiction and non-fiction of any genre.

Are all Great Books fiction? (That’s a take-it-at-face-value question, not a Critical Theory question). As an old English prof with an strong interest in how science works I’d recommend Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”and Abraham Kaplan’s “The Conduct of Inquiry” as accesible introductions to thinking about how, respectively, natural science and social science work. Indeed, the biggest gap in most canon/great books lists is in the area of the sciences.

It should come as no surprise that any list of significant works, events, people, institutions, etc., is by its nature provocative (the annual US News and World Report list of best colleges being the mother of all lists in academia). For those of us in the professoriate, such exercises are, unfortunately, less provocative in the make-you-think way than in the what-the-hell’s-the-matter-with-you? way.Lighten up, #8 et al.Oh, and to #9: “Undies in a bunch?” Much preferable is the phrase “knickers in a twist.”Uh-oh…I feel a list coming on…

A more fundamental question is, “What makes a book Great?” Is this solely an aesthetic judgement? Or should it expand to include the impact on civilization? — if I can use such a retro word without invoking sneers. Prof. Fendrich’s list seems to me to be purely aesthetic, books whose qualities might make them tower above their contemporaries, but which have had little or no influence on society at large. I don’t suppose she, or anyone else, would argue that any of these books have had 1% of the impact of Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” or Popper’s “The Logic of Scientific Discovery” (which has actual equations in it). Of course mere impact isn’t enough for greatness; “Atlas Shrugged” is a mess. But how about Agatha Christie, A.A. Milne, and P.G. Woodhouse? They all mix literary superiority with a strong impact on contemporary society — yet none are classed as producing “Great Books”.I would like to see the subject of “Great Books” explored from the opposite end. Why do some books by Western authors, aesthetically superior and of high cultural impact, end up excluded? What makes “Winnie-the-Pooh” ungreat?

I agree with Dedalto that we can deep-six anything and everything by Roberston Davies. I would however recommend a good close look at just about anything by Robertson Davies.

Thank you Laurie for setting this going. I’m always on the lookout for good novels I’ve somehow missed. I found ‘Mrs Bridge’ in our local library and read it in one go last night. (Why are bleak novels about sad little lives often so enjoyable? I pig out on Anita Brookner regularly.) ‘Mrs Bridge’ has quite simply one of the most brilliant endings I’ve come across.