Untitled - Sexey's School Moodle

To reconcile the emphasis placed on criticism and interpretation with the concept
of an academic canon, an economic parable could be introduced by integrating Guillory’s
concept of “cultural capital” and Greenblatt’s notion of “cultural
negotiations/exchanges,” where the “exchange value” of literary texts rises or decreases
in accordance with their consumption at various levels of academic discourse. In other
words, the canon is “cultural capital,” whose texts not only act as “stock”—or currency—
whose value varies through time, but are continuously and perpetually exchanged and
negotiated, i.e. received, consumed, and re-distributed, by the various members of
academic institutions in the forms of anthologies, university course syllabi, classroom
discussions, and scholarly research.
* * *
Within the broader context of society, whether conservative or liberal, the
university has always been considered as a privileged environment, a location where the
free exchange of thoughts and ideas is encouraged, regardless of political affiliation.
While some would argue that as a consequence of the culture wars academic institutions
have become increasingly politicized and fragmented, others might answer that this has
always been the case. As pointed out earlier, because of the disparity of opinions
pertaining canonical discourses, ensuing revisions, and the current state of academic
curricula, some would advance the view that in lieu of a specific, single “canon,” there
are multiple canons, one corresponding to each “cultural” tradition. The notion that all
types of cultural capital circulate unrestrictedly is one that is recognized and cherished by
a majority of its members. In other words, even though elitists and populists might
disagree on many matters, both are able to treat their subject matter within the context of
56