Here's a breakdown:
* The Canon: A collection of works (literature, art, music, etc.) considered to be the most important and influential within a particular field.
* Social Significance: The impact and relevance a work has on society, often measured by its cultural influence, historical context, and ability to resonate with a broad audience.
This perspective argues that the canon is not fixed or inherently superior but rather a reflection of societal values, power structures, and dominant ideologies at a particular time.
Key ideas of the social construction of the canon:
* It's not objective: There's no universal standard for what constitutes a great work.
* Power Dynamics: The canon is shaped by those in positions of power who promote certain works and suppress others.
* Cultural Shifts: The canon changes over time as societal values and priorities evolve.
* Diversity and Inclusion: This view advocates for a more inclusive canon that represents a wider range of voices, perspectives, and experiences.
Criticisms of this view:
* Subjectivity: Critics argue that judging art purely based on social impact can lead to prioritizing popular works over those with artistic merit.
* Elitism: Some argue that the emphasis on social significance can lead to a "canon" that is largely inaccessible to the average person.
Overall, the social construction of the canon provides a critical lens for understanding how cultural values and power dynamics shape our understanding of artistic excellence. It encourages us to question the existing canon and consider alternative narratives and voices.