Valid points, but lest one thinks the canon is just some sort of unanimous, homogeneous cohort of writers, one shouldn't forget that this particular western can

Valid points, but lest one thinks the canon is just some sort of unanimous, homogeneous cohort of writers, one shouldn't forget that this particular western canon is built itself as a conversation between authors, often contradicting each other, over the span of centuries. Its value is in the breadth of that conversation and the fact that new authors, whether trying to inscribe their works inside the canon, or trying to break away from it, can hardly escape being positioned relative to it (partly the point of Bloom's "anxiety of influence"). There can however certainly be competing canons, and canons that are more single-minded, and should be recognized as such.