I think that Cutter's article was interesting and posed a lot of quality things for people to think about.  Issues of race, gender, and sexuality are major parts of our culture today that the older classics do not acknowledge or do in a stereotypical or racist way.  By teaching these things and only these things the acticle showed that in a way we can reinforce these behaviors because it is acceptable from these people because they are great writers.  I don't think it is anyones write to say something just because they are deemed a classic.  I thought it was very interesting that the article talked about cannons vs. anticanons in a sense of books but also in the classroom viewing as a text.  It was pointed out by teaching the same works the same way is turning your class into a canon and forcefeeding your students information.  You need to keep variety in the works that you teach as well as the way that they are taught in order to encourage the most from your students because you yourself wont get set in your ways about the topic.  I think that it posed an issue for students being the reader, because the article said that the teacher does not know the information as fact and that a students view is as good as any teachers.  This can raise issues with grading because if you tell a student that they are right no matter what because literature is what you make of it, then in all honesty other than grammar and spelling how can a student get a bad grade in an English class.  There is a certain level to which students need to learn to comprehend and analyze information from texts.  I believe that by having a mixture of the old and the new you can connect books more easily to the world today and issues your students face.  I think it is also imperative to connect old books to new books because it brings about interesting conversation in the classroom and helps to fully understand literary definitions because you can see them in classical and popular novels.  All in all I thought the article was interesting even though it was hard to follow at times due to the repetitions of information.

I agree with some parts of Cutter's article, however there are areas of disagreement.  I understand where they are coming from with what is to be considered classics.  It does make sense that classics should shift through changing times.  Classics have always been directly corralated to society and beliefs.  Many years ago canons were based on folklore.  There were classic stories from Akilies to  Paul Bunion and many other  influential "heroes", before we had the written works we consider classics today.  I do not agree with the way she introduces the works to the class.  She treats the classroom as a "Text".  This can encourage student participation, however she may be taking away from the classroom what she is trying to create. 

 jonesld wrote a nice blog. I can say that I agree that being politicaly correct is silly and that incorporating works that explore a time in history are key to understanding the present. Besides, who doesn't want to read a needlessly complicated work written in slang yo.

In regards to mhausser's post, introducing contemporary works into the classroom sounds like a great idea. Works like the Da'Vinci Code or Angels and Demons are highly contraversial novels that could allow a classroom to explore one mans philosophy along with exploration of their own beliefs and principles etc. Although it may not be the best idea to throw gasoline on a fire, sometimes its good to read a work that helps you salidify what you believe in.

I was in complete agreement with Cutter's article in suggesting that both canon/non-canon books should be taught in the classroom. In grade school and high school you were always given the ultra-classic books to read, Huck Finn, Great Gastby and many others that were similiar. You could see throughout our class that pretty much everyone has read these at one time or another. You could also see that everyone said the same things about each of them. I think this is due in part to teachers thinking they know exactly what the writer was thinking and then pounding that one answer into our brains. Why not let us think for ourselves? and does there always have to be an answer to everything in a book? No. Reading should be enjoyable and fun in your own way.

If I were to pick five books to teach to a class, I would have a hard time picking the best ones. My favorites are Tuesday's with Maury, The Great Gastby, Their Eyes Were Watching God, The Scarlet Letter, and Indian Killer.   I think there is a wide variety here, all with different meanings and themes. However, my opions about each of these would not be "the law" when my students were reading them.   

For the most part I agree with Cutter's article on canons and non-canons.  I believe that it is very important to bring different subjects and different points of view into the classroom.  I am studying to be an elementary teacher, and when going through one of our literature classes I learned how much what a child reads really does influence the way they think and the way that they will think and act in the furture.  By having very diverse books and books that show different opinions it would help the students to become more open-minded about other peoples opinions and outlooks on different subjects.  If I were to teach and upper level class I would choose these books; The Great Gatsby, Black Like Me, Of Mice and Men, and Animal Farm.  These books are all very different from each other and they can be used to teach students many different ideas.  They all have very different outlooks and opinions on life.  For example, Black Like Me, is a great book on the canon of perspective.  The man in the book is changing his entire life just to get a different perseption of life.  I think using different canons are very important to help people see things different ways and learn more about what they are reading.

I strongly agree with Cutter's ideas on cannons and non cannons. It appears that "If It's Monday This Must Be Melville" provides us with a new an innovative way of thinking about grouping works, along with a healthy twist on how incorporate various ideological perspectives in one "survey course". Specificaly, I thought Cutter was justified believing that one should introduce a "canon" or specific ideology of a period then counter it with a "non-canon" or opposite view to show contrast. This then allows the exploration of multiple perspectives or dimensions while reducing any dogma that one might hold on an issue. In turn I believe that these ideas should be adopted by as many professors/teachers as possible as it does not incorporate only great works, but works that summarize a cornocopia of ideologies encompasing that which is human existance.

If I was to teach a class I would likely choose more than five texts as to incorporate as many perspectives as possible into the eager minds of my students. I would likely introduce more than a handful of ethinic works such as an African American piece like Their Eyes Were Watching God, a Native American piece, a work done by a woman, or something by a gay or lesbian etc. With this my students (or my babies as I will call them) will be thrown into an ideological melting pot and truely gain insight into what a classic within multiple lights. 

It's Friday morning, and it took way to long for me to understand this article. As it was said before in class, Cutter could have easily condensed her ideas into a few pages. I do fell like she brought to the table many good points, and addressed a question I probably should have been asking myself.

Cutter considered her ideas radical in her first years of teaching this survey course, but I think they are ideas that should have been incorporated into the school system years ago. I remember being spoon fed information. The teacher was the one with the correct answer, the "fount of information." Allowing the students to share their opinions about a text, I believe, brings more thought and analysis to the classroom. Another idea of hers that intruiged me was that she organized her semester into five units, each with direct issues that can be discussed. Some books have so many hidden meanings or message that not each one can be addressed.

When it comes down to picking 5 books, it becomes more difficult for me. I took the courses with the international tinge. Lord of the Flies, A Brave New World, and the rest were a mixture of short stories and poems all analized from a text book stance. One book that did stay with me was The Great Gatsby, and yet again, it too was discussed and fed to us by our teachers.

Cutter's article finally introduced the lifelong question that's been eating away at my brain since I first learned how to read at the tender age of 18:  Should canonized and/or non-canonized books be taught in the classroom?  Actually, that question hasn't really been eating away at me nor did I first learn to read at the age of 18, but the article did bring up an interesting question that I never really thought of till now. 

I am in total agreement with the article (even if there too many damn words in it), and truly do feel a nice mixture of the two types should be taught in class rather than one or the other.  What I'm really starting to wonder, though, is what should be considered canon or non-canon these days?  I mean it looks to me that what's considered canon is what many would consider a "classic" from maybe a certain time period long ago...that is, something from Mark Twain and similar writers of his caliber.  Should all other books in literary history not share the same title?  I say sure, if it's a good read or brings up really good issues.  I'm probably reading too into this though, plus I want to say the article brings up this question somewhere but I could be wrong since it's been a couple of days since I've read it.

 I don't think I'm in any place to name the five books I'd teach in my class since I'm not as familiar with literature out of particular genres and I am bias to certain books and writers simply due to personal tastes.  Taking note of that, I'd go with something written by Phillip K. Dick (probably A Scanner Darkly), Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, Invisible Man, and either Beloved or Fahrenheit 451...I'm undecided.

For the most part I do agree with Cutter's article on canons and noncanons. I think that it is important to impliment a variety of books into the classroom. I think that by having the different types it would hopefully cause students to be more open minded. If I were to teach a course that involved novels, I would definately  include a few of the traditional classics along with a couple of the newer novels. I like the fact that if you do analyze the older classics you can find a way to relate it to your life and the world today. I think that it is amazing that no matter how much the world has changed from when the oldest classics were written, that so much has also remained the same.

I wanted to go ahead and make my post before reading all of the others out of fear of sounding repetetive or like I was stealing ideas! Hopefully this makes sense. I agree with the article 100%. I feel like completely limiting oneself to either side would be detrimental to the quality of the class, and Cutter's proposal of a "happy medium" of sorts seems to be the logical way to avoid doing so. A mix of classic and contemporary novels focusing on an array of issues and stylistic items would suit a class well. I do not think limiting your students to only classics would be good, because the students would have a hard time seeing how the text is applicable today. On the other hand, the classic books are still very important because of the issues and things they highlight, and might be even more useful and easy to interpret when coupled with some books relatable to today's culture. As I said in class, a classic is not a classic merely based on the written textual concepts, but rather because of the stylistic themes, motifs, etc. it includes. I think in the current day and age, some very important issues are the rights of women, diversity and equality, and the improvements made on those issues from the early part of the last century to today. I do not know of any specific titles as I have not read many classic books. Maybe those commenting on my post would be able to come up with some ideas? I would include in my personal classroom a mix of books from different periods, say 2 from 1900 and before, 2 from 1900-1975, and 2 from 1975-today just to highlight the accomplishments made. I just think it is important to choose books based on theme and relevance, not neccessarily popularity level or because America has deemed the book a classic.

There are some points that Cutter makes that are valid, such as varity.  There should be a reason each book is chosen.  For example, Huckleberry Finn not only is a good piece of “classic literature” but also can be viewed as a history lesson.  Nowadays, there are few people who act, speak, or even have the same mind set as the characters in that novel.  In the same respect, books such as Tuesdays With Morrie, that aren’t really novels, are realistic.  They are memoirs, true events, and are easier for students to relate to because they know it really happened and the lessons learned are obviously realistic.  As for being politically correct, I think worrying about that is a waste of time.  Especially in high school age and younger because someone somewhere will be offended because that’s just how our country is now.  It’s similar to people saying their kids’ shouldn’t learn about the holocaust because it’s too horrible of a thing, but if no one ever learned about it, history would repeat itself more often.  But to get students to really participate, their opinion has to be respected and it has to be a book that gets them thinking and engaged and sometimes controversy is a big factor in getting students to open up and keep reading. The five books I’d choose would be,  Huck Finn, Tuesdays with Morrie, Invisible Man, Pride & Prejudice, and Things Falls Apart.

I thought that the author had a good point with her article. I liked her idea to present the students with traditional canons and then refute the ideas with the so-called non-canons. I think that if you chose just canons, you will offer a biased opinion of what was composed throught the various time frames. Furthermore, you cannont just offer a selection of so-called anticanons, because the selections would become canons themselves. If I were to create a list of books, (I do not have a wide knowledge base of classic titles) I wiould want to select several of the preceived "classics" as well as some books which are classified as anticanons. If I were to teach this class more than one time, I would definately change both of the canon and anticanon lists in order to help maintain the objective of using both.

I agree with Cutter's article for the most part. I really like the way she split up the course into 5 units: Slavery and Freedom,The Women Question, The Frontier, Race, and War. If and when the cultural opinons change on what makes a "classic", she still has a foundation which really never changes, being that these are still big issues in our world. I don't think that I would really be able to choose five books if I had to teach a class, as I am not familiar with many "classics". I would, however, follow Cutter's idea, using 2 to 3 different books per unit, showing ones from different eras that contrast and also compliment one another. This way, both canons and non-canons are being used while giving students the opportunity to see issues from both sides.

       Cutter's article was insightful yes, but she spoke with such magniloquence that i fond it hard to follow and at points i seem to become resentful towards her for because she sounded like she thought she smarter than me.  I did agree with some of her major aurguments though.  I liked that she felt that she needed to balance the new and the old classics. I personally love the ancient greek stories such as the illiad or the oddesey and even the mythology.  If it was up to me to chose what material to cover I would definately cover these areas. I feel that these stories set a pattern for all works to come.  Almost all literature fornd can be linked to ancient literature.  I would also like to cover different time periods, one for each major movement, such as Mark Twain, and Edgar Allen Poe.  Also i would cover the issue of racism, feminism, and religion.  I think that it's important to read books that cover these topics because its very possible that the authors have a different perspective as their readers.  I always appreciate other points of view to an important topic.  As for Cutter I believe that she was on the right track, but she sounded like it wouldn't have done her any harm to listen to a few other suggestions. 

Although Cutter makes many convincing arguments for including canon and “anticanon” works in a survey course, caution should be taken when attempting to create an aggressive balance. It is important to remember that many works that would be considered canon were or are popular because they represent the ideas and values that were important at the time of inscription. Much focus has recently been directed towards the ethnicity, religion or sex of authors of those books taught in American literature courses. Although it is important to include works by minority writers of a given time period, it is also important to not avoid canon books simply because the author was say a white, male, Christian. It may seem frustrating to feminists or other equality groups to not see literature taught that was written by figures of the minority group, however it is important to remember that because the majority has produced the most works there is a higher chance that these works would be chosen. It goes without saying that if you have thirty works to choose from you are more statistically likely to find a quality work than if you simply have a small handful of works to chose from. Cutter repeated herself continuously and only briefly mentioned the importance of balance, limiting the scope of her argument. In a survey course it is important to think of the many factors that play a part in striking a convincing balance; this is the main challenge in many aspects of life as well.

Cutter paid heed to the idea that a balance should occur between canon and anticanon works but did not consider in length the many other important factors. One of the factors primarily overlooked was the amount of material to cover. There is much debate that can go into choosing between covering a wide range of material or focusing on going more in depth on a few carefully chosen works. Based on Cutter’s ideals for the classroom more focus should be made on studying carefully a few chosen texts. Doing so allows for the student to invest much thought and gain insight into how the text applies to their own experiences in the past and future. Also by limiting the number of works studied, less time is spent on reading and more time can be successfully committed to analyzing.

Based on the limited knowledge and experience I have in American literature finding the right texts ,to strike the balance I would aim to achieve, is not something I am well prepared to do at this time. It is extremely difficult for me to conjure up five books written by American authors, let alone classify those works as canon or anticanon. For fulfilling the requirement however I would choose the following works, partly due to the fact that they are the few works I know of that are American.

1.      Ernest Hemingway: The Sun Also Rises

2.      William Faulkner: The Sound and the Fury

3.      Arthur Miller: Death of a Salesman

4.      Toni Morrison: Beloved

5.      Kate Chopin: The Awakening 

I agree with Cutter in the fact that you should use different types of works in the classroom, because sometimes if you use the "traditional" classics, students just end up reading the same five "Great American Novels" for the next eight years, and while sometimes that makes life easier, it can also get boring.  Many students, especially at the college level, wish to be challenged to read books and stories that they have never read before.  Thus, it would be a challenge to read not only some more difficult canons, but also some anti-canons that the student had never been introduced to before. 

If I were teaching a class like this, I would have to include The Great Gatsby, because it is a canon that I believe everyone should read at some time in their career as a student.  I would also include The Catcher in the Rye because of its unique perspective (being told as a teenage boy).  I would include Uncle Tom's Cabin because of its historical value and because of the fact that it was written by a woman.  After that, I would probably choose a few novels by famous authors, but that are not as well-known in the "classical" sense, so that students may be introduced to different works by the same beloved authors.  This would give the novels a sense of familiarity, but would also introduce new works to the students, that may possibly become a new set of "classics" in the future.

In some ways I agree with Cutter. A believe there should be a variety of literature taught in the class. Althgouth the students are all going to be different, they should all take something away from the class and be able to participate. Changing with the times is very important. If you continue to teach the same works, how can "new classics" develop? The students should be lead in a discussion to a certain point, but I believe literature is what you make of it. Therefore, I agree that a variety should be put out there for each student to interpret for themselves and contribute to the class.