Hello, world!

And when I say world, of course I mean America, because we live in a bubble. Before we embark on this journey together, we have some preliminary foundation to lay and ground rules to cover.

Ground rules:
1. It is out of freedom, not laziness, that I won't cite some sources that may not seem common knowledge. Why? Because I can. It's my blog, not a stuffy analytical college paper, and if you want to fact check, you can do the research yourself. I'm here to share my opinion. I won't generally address anything that I haven't read about or experienced extensively, so don't feel as though I'm making facts up.

2. When I enjoy literature, whether it be because of narrative structure, creative and unique concepts, or anything else, I will sing praises to it. When I read a book that I know (not feel, but know) is a waste of my time, I'm going to criticize it harshly, like a 5th grade bully stealing milk money from the bookworm nerd who sits alone at a table nearest the exit to the lunchroom. Why? Because I was that kid, and if years of being harassed and millions spent today in anti-bullying campaigns have taught me anything, it's that you should always pay it forward... in a creative outlet that doesn't do harm to others, mind you.

3. I mix metaphors constantly. I douse my criticism in sarcasm and light it on fire. I use melodramatic examples to prove my points. These aren't crutches, they are a part of my writing style. Whoever told you mixing metaphors is wrong is a fool. Sarcasm and a rapier-wit do wonders for comedic timing. Everyone loves melodrama; it's why TV is so popular. Remember, every criticism you receive in writing is a SUBJECTIVE OPINION, not law. Think about that while you read anything, especially whilst deciphering illegible undergraduate English professor scribble in the margins of your papers.

4. You are the ones with the power. The students, not the professors. YOU define the contemporary literary canon, because YOU are contemporary readers. Don't ever allow a professor to take that power away from you. If they try, spray them in the face with a squirt bottle. Bad professor! Bad!

5. It seems prudent to have five ground rules, as four is a weaker number than five. Let it be written.

Foundation:

Alright folks, this blog isn't just for English majors. At its core, it's a means to grapple with literature that may or may not suck ass through a straw (GASP!!! PROFANITY!) in a pressure-free environment. Here you can be completely open with your opinions on novels, short stories, poetry, films, paintings, sidewalk-chalk renderings, and smoke signals. Here we understand that teachers aren't infallible, and that everything prescribed to us from Kindergarten onward isn't the best stuff out there... by FAR.

For those of you who still don't know what a literary canon is, let's tackle that quarterback now.

A literary canon is a stuffy phrase to describe the literature that is most representative of any given era. The Victorian era has a canon. Literature of the American south has a canon. Gays and lesbians have a canon- and a parade, too. Here, we're really not so much interested in the old stuff. Why? Because without being alive in the era, how the hell are we supposed to know what literature defines it?

"Because, Matt," you say, pushing your ultra-thin glasses midway up your nose, "We have collections of literature from these eras. We can read them all, find patterns, and pick out examples that best represent trends in these time periods."

Actually, Mr. The Man, history, much like memory, is imperfect. We have collections of literature that were exposed publicly, were successful, and were widely read and distributed. Does that mean by default that they represent an era? Do you feel particularly represented by the Twilight series just because it sold loads of copies? I DIDN'T THINK SO, AND IF YOU JUST SAID YES, GET THE INTERCOURSE OFF OF MY WEBSITE.

Anyway, we might not be interested in redefining the canons of ages past, but we will certainly criticize the "antiques" from a modern perspective. I'll warn you right now, Shakespeare isn't sacred.

I just thought of a fifth ground rule:
5. I can and will digress constantly. I promise that if I bring something up, I'll finish the thought... it may just not be immediately or in any assemblance of order.

So here's the way this will work. I'm going to climb back into the far, dusty reaches of my brain and pull out every reading list I've ever been given from Junior High to today. I invite you to share your perspectives, opinions, and rantings alongside mine. Feel free to disagree. Remember that we're here to criticize the work, not each other. Let's not make it personal to anyone other than the author. I'll be asking you through this entire process to include books I haven't covered yet at the ends of your comments, so that by the time I've exhausted my own bookshelf, we can begin networking outward.

As a final comment, I want to make it clear that the extent of one's vocabulary does not qualify or disqualify them from having an opinion about literature. Herein is the entire point to this project. Everyone needs to be involved in this conversation. I don't even care if you can't read. Just hit the pretty buttons until a response box pops up, and mash your fingers on the keys until you're satisfied. Post pictures in response if you want. Record yourself performing an interpretive dance about the text if it makes you happy in the down-below. Just get involved.

With all of that said, we'll continue next time with the first novel I was ever asked to read in Junior High:

Cheaper by the Dozen by Frank Gilbreth and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey.