Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
Either publishing is losing it or we are.
According to the press release, the works were selected with the assistance of an A.I.
Diverse Editions was rightfully ridiculed for thinking canonical exclusion ought to be remedied cover-first.
Days later, after a public backlash, the effort was scrapped.
The covers are pretty cool to my eye.
It works well as an artistic initiative.
As a political one, not so much.
Yet its deserved death rattle still hasnt arrived.
off the strength of the same language that would ostensibly critique its existence.
When representation is the only measure worth considering, only the surface matters.
The canon is an easy punching bag, not undeservedly.
Answers to prompts like these trend toward the ethical-seeming imperative to uppercut the steely jaw of the literary canon.
Unpopular opinion: James Joyce is a hack.
Unpopular opinion:Moby Dickis too long.
It seems hell hath no vitriol like that inspired by the Advanced Placement English test.
Similar to the sentiment guiding #representationmatters, the one here is understandable, even admirable.
The canon gets trashed not because its bad, but because its canon.
Meanwhile, the patriarchy, whiteness, imperialism all the bad things escape attention.
It feels like a win, though its not really.
(The opponents are dead or at the very least not listening.)
The canon is not a stable thing.
Publishers both lead and follow suit in this regard.
