Canon Fodder

In "The Study of Poetry," Matthew Arnold makes various grand claims for poetry, including that "more and more mankind will discover that we have to turn to poetry to interpret life for us, to console us, to sustain us." Because of the importance accorded to poetry, though, Arnold must subsequently state that "if we conceive thus highly of the destinies of poetry, we must also set our standard for poetry high, since poetry, to be capable of fulfilling such high destinies, must be poetry of a high order of excellence." And there's the rub, right? How do we judge when poetry (or fiction or any individual work of literature) is of "a high order of excellence"? For years and years, English departments have built curriculums around "the canon," those works of literature that every self-respecting student of literary studies must know. Here, by the way, is the full roll call from the Modern Library's ranking of the "100 Best Novels", including the accompanying reader's list.

All of this has me wondering what would be on your personal canon of required works. That is, if you were in charge of building a curriculum (in our department here at U.M., say), what literary works would you consider essential to have appear in the classroom at some point? And would you move beyond traditional notions of the canon and include, for example, any films? Pieces of music? Literature that might normally be classified as merely "popular"? Critics like to debate the case of Bob Dylan, for example, specifically the fact that he has been a frequent nominee for a Nobel Prize in literature. So, would "Mr. Tambourine Man" or "Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands" be plausible reading in a literary studies class?! If you're reading this post, why don't you leave a comment with ten works that would be in your canon!