Even though I think most ‘canon’ talk is just another popularity contest — I would not include a book in any ‘canon’ unless it has huge cultural impact, and longevity of 500 years or so, and, um, that leaves what? foundational Judeo-Christian texts? other similar religious monomyths? what else? Seriously. — the book-centered site The Second Pass has listed books they would nominate to nix from the Western Canon — wait, just the definition of the word ‘canon’ alone makes me gag a little: since when are writers supposed to respect any sort of institution/law/principle, and can we really say definitively that another artist’s work is ‘authentic’ outside the catharsis the artist achieved in his/her bedroom/prison cell/cabin while they’re creating? I guess the calling-into-question of what makes something ‘authentic’ is another discussion. Maybe it’s only ‘quality’ being talked about, and then doesn’t that just revert back to the culture-boom/500yr thing anyway? Ddddoinkyff.