3 ms·
"English Canon" would be more precise. For example he specifically mentions the King James version of the Bible (rather than just "The Bible" in general). This
by goto11 7y ago
"English Canon" would be more precise.
For example he specifically mentions the King James version of the Bible (rather than just "The Bible" in general). This translation had a large influence on the English language - just as say the translation by Martin Luther had on the German language.
For the non-English works, it is clear he has selected the ones which are known and influential in the English-speaking world, not necessarily the ones which are most influential in their home country.
Nothing wrong with that - he was en English professor after all - but calling it the Western Canon is a stretch.
- xixixao 7y agoDo you think the Martin Luther translation had a more significant impact on the Western Canon than the King James version? Also presumably the list’s biggest value is in allowing someone to go and read all these works to get a better understanding of the Canon. Would you suggest people read both versions? (presumably further translated to their own language) You do have a good point, but I think it’s more against the notion of the Canon than this list.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- DubiousPusher 7y agoThe most important translation of the Bible for "Western" society is probably the Vulgate. The most important for English speaking society is probably the King James though the ubiquity of the NIV today may be giving it a run for its money. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate
- goto11 7y agoThe Martin Luther translation obviously had a more significant impact on western culture on the whole, but the King James translation had an important influence on the English language and therefore it is fair to include it in a canon over English literature.