Check the Syllabus

Based on information from http://www.uta.edu/english/mal/e/roemer/

        Today, if one asked a student in a History of American Literature course, “what qualifies a work as American Literature,” one most likely would get a blank stare, since the student has yet to overcome the trauma from the start of summer school. Given enough time to gather her or his wits, the student would give an generic answer, such as “American Literature is work done by American writers.” Press the issue and the student probably would say, “American Literature is what we’re reading in class. Check the professor’s syllabus.” However, different teachers have different syllabi. One professor uses Heath’s Anthology of American Literature, while another goes with Norton’s publication. Two teachers may agree on the use of Faulkner, but differ in which book- As I Lay Dying or Light in August? The microcosm of a single English department’s differing views on what American Literature is reflected in the criteria used by editors of nationally distributed anthologies and histories.
        The prefaces and introductions written by the editors of anthologies and histories (in the abovementioned website) usually serve as an explanation of the choices made in the selections published within the books. The comparisons of these brief essays reveal contrasting as well as similar reasons. Factors such as the current time, social era, and editorial preferences contributed to the selection process.
        One of the first things the editors did was state the purpose of the collection. In 1887, Stedman and Hutchinson intended to gather the artistic wealth of American literature for the enjoyment of people. This was before the study of American literature truly began. In other introductions, from 1896 and on, the general purpose was to serve as a supplementary textbook for students of American literature. In 1896, the purpose of Pattee’s collection was to trace the influence of American literature, studying external factors such as “race, environment and epoch.” Then later in another collection published soon after World War I, Pattee stated that the works selected were to encourage learning and moral growth to combat the “experimental lawlessness” happening at the time. He was referring to what is now called the “Lost Generation,” the disillusioned veterans of the 20th century’s first major war.
        The times in which each collection was published reflected in the purpose, as seen in Pattee’s 1919 collection. In the 1887 collection by Stedman and Hutchinson, they said they wanted the works to reflect “the different stages in American history and aspiration.” Remembering the Civil War ended only twenty years earlier, one could say Stedman and Hutchinson were trying to bolster America’s identity. If nothing else, the Civil War was an identity crisis. Also noticeable is the effort to move onto the future by a kind, albeit Northern, look on the past. They wrote that it was a “fitting moment for this historical survey of the stages through which we have reached the threshold of an assured future.”
        Even the editorial itself can reflect the times in which the collection was published. The editorial by Stearn and Gross showed a strong militaristic streak, in its discussion of the constant struggles and conflicts throughout American history. Where other editorials praised the bravery of the colonizers, Stearn and Gross labeled them as rapists. Their unflinching view of the past is tempered by a balance of different writers, who held stark views and romantic views of America and American ideals.
        The purpose affected selection as well. In Pattee’s 1919 introduction, he selected a large body of work from often studied authors, knowing that students would have difficulties being able to check out library materials when their whole class was focused on such authors, like Longfellow or Poe. In a different time, 1962, the reverse situation occurs. Stearn and Gross, citing the mass paperback market that provides cheap copies of popularly studied authors, selected work from less reprinted authors such as Emily Dickinson.
        In some cases, the editors explicitly listed their criteria for selections of “literary” work. Pattee’s 1919 introduction stated he had three factors, “literary excellence and originality... style and individuality of the author; and, third, light thrown upon the period of the author and upon the growth of the American spirit.” The last factor is repeated in the other editorials. Stedman and Hutchinson explained that the selected early colonial work reflected the authors whose “spirit was one of independence and New World life.” Even in the 1960’s, Stearn and Gross agreed, saying that the American spirit was one of constant rebellion. Work ranging from speeches to poems to sermons to journalists were included in these different collections. Their common theme was they showed “American spirit.”
        Interestingly enough, the earliest collection’s editorial had a very strong patriotic overtone. Stedman and Hutchinson practically boasted about the high quality of literature being produced in the 1800’s, stating “half of our work is wholly occupied with the best and most creative Literature of the Republic, that of the last Fifty Years.” Perhaps this was a defensive boast, to justify the ambitious task of collecting all these American works into ten volumes. Later editorials borne no similar boasts, instead treating the works of Melville, Hawthorne, and others as fait accompli. Stearn and Gross said that no student can say he has covered the breadth of American literature unless he has read the novels Walden, The Scarlet Letter, Moby Dick, Leaves of Grass, Huckleberry Finn among others.
        One thing noticeable in all of the editorials is that most avoided speaking of what was not included. In a few instances, mention was made for why less work of one author was included in favor of other authors. However, few editors talked about what was not American Literature. Only the earliest editorial explicitly stated that accounts from Spanish and other non Anglo explorers were not included since they were not written in the English language. Reading between the lines, it becomes apparent that at some points, female writers wrote very little “American literature,” and Mark Twain’s work was not “American literature,” at least not until 1962 when his name is finally mentioned in Stearn and Gross’s editorial.
        In the end, it is clear as one reads through all these editorials from the 1880’s to the 1960’s, that the collections were a way to entertain, educate and/or enlighten students. They were to supplement the study of literature. They were to compensate deficiencies in published material of worthy writers, and in some cases, the deficiencies of the readers themselves. For over a century, Americans have been publishing collections of American literature, according to varying criteria.
        This shouldn’t be surprising since in each editorial, the American spirit has been defined as one of rebellious independence which can be reflected in academic circles just as well as military circles. The fact that there is no standard criteria for American literature does not diminish the fact that American literature exists. However, one may question the existence of Heath’s Anthology of American Literature, since one has not seen it at the bookstores yet, even though it’s on the professor’s syllabus.

(note:this essay was written at the beginning of the first summer session, and the textbook hadn't been stocked at the university bookstore yet.)

Return to Writing Stuff