Search

Some scholars debate the purpose and nature of a literary canon that reaches to the 18th century, while others insist a canon has existed since the 16th century and fulfills a continuing need. Still others believe the concept of a canon is no longer historically relevant. A fourth view holds literature must be kept separate from the concept of canon, and that establishing a canon also involves the perilous task of exclusion.

The author responds to the comments on his article "Criticism and Truth," which examined the epistemology of close reading and how that core practice of literary critical writing is a distinctive way of knowing. Topics include the reasons for the need for literary humanities, a description of the baseline competence shared by literary study and the rest of the humanities profession, and the author's argument about creativity and its relation to the nature of literature as a medium.

The authors respond to commentaries on their essay "Form and Explanation." They argue that the meaning of the term "form" vary according its use by critics. They address some questions about the sort of pluralism raised by the commentaries. Also discussed is the use of the word "pluralism" to describe the attitude toward the methods of literary study.