Nations Novels

Nations and Novels: Cultural Politics and Literary Use Author(s): Sarah M. Corse Source: Social Forces, Vol.
73, No. 4 (Jun., 1995), pp. 1279-1308 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2580448 . Accessed: 16/09/2013 13:52
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 200.75.19.130 on Mon, 16 Sep 2013 13:52:42 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Nations and Novels: Cultural Politics and LiterazyUse*

SARAH M CORSE,University of Virginia
Abstract andAmerican andhigh-culture A comparative analysis of 184 Canadian popular novels theinadequacy suggests of thetraditional understanding of national literary differences as reflecting I presentan alternative uniquenationalcharacters. understanding of that considers national literatures variation in production contexts and literary use In brief I arguethat popular-culture acrosstypesof literature. novelsdifferlittle between the Canada and the U.S. precisely because theyareshaped massby similar marketstrategies and read by similaraudiences. My data on the cross-national in thetiming andcontent differences ofcanonical literatures, on theother hand, suggests thatsuchnovels havea highlysymbolic valuetiedto thedevelopment of thenation-state andareshaped by eliteinterests in national identify construction. and the icons of one's own nationalliterature, The idea of nationalliteratures, are a given part of modem culturalrepertoires. Educatedpeople are expected to be familiarwith the GreatBooks1of their own countryand to have a basic sense of the canon in countries of similar literaryheritage.State-mandated school coursesgenerallyexpose even the less educatedto the nationalclassics. been understoodas The phenomenonof nationalliteratureshas traditionally and experienceof a nation;the uniquearisingout of the distinctivecharacter ness of the nation produces an equally unique literatureindigenous to the people and their ethos. Although it may seem obvious that Americansare different from the Japanese,and the British differentfrom the French, the are translated mechanisms into literature have never by which these differences been fully specified. Instead, existing theories simply imply that individuallevel, cross-nationalpsychological differences, i.e., differences in national characteror the "spirit of the people," are "reflected"in unique national literatures(e.g., Atwood 1972;Fiedler 1966). I focus here on two questions:
* I would like to thank Mabel Berezin,Harold Bershady, Wendy Griswold, Sharon Hays, MichaleLamont,Marty Lipset,JoEllenShively,Ann Swidler,and the two anonymousreviewers for their helpful discussions and commentson earlierdrafts. This article was written while I was a Sesquicentennial Associate at the CenterforAdvanced Studies, University of Virginia. Direct correspondence to Sarah M. Corse, Department of Sociology, 539 Cabell Hall, Charlottesville, VA22903, emaihsmc6r@virginia.edu.
? The University of North CarolinaPress
Social Forces, June 1995, 73(4):1279-1308
1280 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995
(1) the extent and specifics of literary differences between two countries theoriesin explain(Canadaand the U.S.) and (2) the sufficiencyof traditional ing the source of these differences. The intuitive appeal of the formulation "distinctive nation/national failsin thefaceof questionsabout character equaldistinctivenationalliterature" exactly which aspects of the nation are unique, which aspects will appearas literary differences, and how precisely the former become the latter. The makesno provisionfor cross-national traditional conceptof nationalliteratures or intranational in literature. Identification of exactlywhat similarities differences nationalliteratures has beenwidely arguedbothcurrently it is thatcharacterizes and historically(Lease1981;Ziff 1981). reflection on nationalliteratures Argumentsfromthe traditional perspective make two implicitassumptionsabout the processesof culturalproductionand use. First,they assume thatsocial groups generatea "collectiveconsciousness" (Goldmann1970:585), centered on particularcommunalvalues, tensions, and experiences,and that authors are capable of embodying this consciousness. Trilling(1950),a strongproponentof the traditional perspective, arguesthat"in any culture there are likely to be certain artists who contain... within themselves... the very essence of the culture"(7). Second, such arguments assume that membersof the group wish to participatein or experiencethese collectivemeaningsthroughreading.For example,Goldmann(1970)describes the "conjointactivity of ... a social group" creating "significantcategorical in theirfictionalworlds and thatmake structures" thatauthorsrecreate (584-85) the text meaningfulto its readers.Thisperspectiveimplies thatsuccessfultexts a superiorskill at tappinginto the collectiveconscious are those demonstrating and meanings ness and explicatingits centralconcerns,makingthe experiences of the collectivityespeciallyaccessibleto readers.Arguments by authorssuch as Atwood (1972),Wright (1975),Fiedler (1966),Wolfensteinand Leites (1950), Trilling (1950), and Goldmann (1964) exemplify this perspective. In this perspective,Americannational literature,for example,is simply an expected consequenceof 250 million people sharingthe experienceof being "American." Sharing a national identity means sharing a set of common experiences, problems,and myths that togetherproducea collectivenationalconsciousness focused on issues unique to a particular society. This perspectivegeneratesan interestingimplicationaboutthe designation of a national literature.If one accepts the assumptions that people read to in a collectiveexperienceand thatwritersgain legitimacyfromtheir participate superiorability to articulateissues centralto the collectiveexperience,then it follows that the canonized texts should be those that membersof the group prefer above all others. The choice of a nationalliteratureshould be readerbased and consensual,consistingof those texts most popularwith the national audience.However,the most popularor best-sellingtextsare .arely considered the canonicaltexts of any nation. Thus thereis a disjuncture between the texts that reflectionargumentsimply should be privilegedand the duly designated canonicaltexts of most nations. This disjuncture stems in partfromthe largerproblemwith the perspective - its failureto considerboth (1) the organizational and institutionalcontextof literaryproductionand (2) the questionof agency.Booksare published,read,
Nations and Novels / 1281 and evaluated within a complex social and institutionalsystem. Books and are partof both commoditymarkets(Coser,Kadushin&Powell 1982) literature and symbolic markets (Bourdieu 1984, 1985). Researchersworking in the cultural production perspective have shown the importanceof production contexts in any considerationof the shape and range of available cultural products. Griswold (1981) demonstratesthe importance of the legislative environment,as opposed to traditionalnational characterexplanations,in of American-authored and European-authored determiningthe characteristics novels in the eighteenthand early nineteenthcenturies.Similarly,researchers have shown the importancefor culturalform and content of such factorsas &Berger industryconcentration (Peterson 1975),the decision-making processin publishing (Powell 1985),publishers'payment methods (Watt1959),and the political ideology of governmentalfunders (Berezin 1994). In addition to ignoring questions raised by analyzing production contexts, the traditional understandingof national literaturesglosses over the question of agency. Literarycanons are created by particularhuman actions and choices, yet reflection argumentsfail to include notions of agency in any but the most superficialmanner.Instead,traditional reflectionarguments assumethatcanon formationis a "natural" process - time passes and "thebest"endures(Arnold 1949). of canon A critique of traditionalassumptions about the "naturalness" formationand the lack of attentionto questionsof agency is being articulated within literarycriticism.Theseresearchers have refocusedtheirattentionfrom inherenttextualattributesto emphasizeinstead"thecomplexof circumstances that make texts visible initially and then maintainthem in their preeminent position" (Tompkins1985:xii). Argumentsof this type focus explicitly on the question of agency and the sociopoliticalcontextof textualevaluation.Tompkins (1985)argues that canon formationand the establishmentof authorial reputationscannotfail to be a politicalmatteras intellectualelites compete to establisha canonthatvalidatestheirworld view (see also Clark1970).Textsare not read in isolation, but encounteredwithin a web of specific, historically works (Lauter situatedmarkers regardingthe value of particular 1983).Literary outsideof politicalstrugglesand evaluationis "notan activitythatis performed institutionalstructures,but arises from them" (Tompkins1985:23,italics in original). Historicallyspecific culturaland criticalassumptions,values, and rhetoric position and interpret,and thus createthe text for readersin particulartimes and places. Because "the text we read is never separablefrom its history of recognition,"the judgmentsof the past prime us for similar understandings Thecanonis largelyself-preserving since "the Uausscited in Holub 1984:148-9). canonicalwork begins increasinglynot merely to survive within but to shape and createthe culturein which its value is producedand transmitted, and, for that very reason, to perpetuatethe conditionsof its own flourishing"(Smith Becauseof its effect on the life of the nation,canon formationis of 1983:28-9). greatconcernto nationalelites (see Hunter1991).Research acknowledgingthis concernanalyzes the activitiesof intellectualelites and otherswith interestsin canonizingspecific authorsor types of works. Interestin these issues has not been confined to literaryscholars - Lang and Lang (1988)investigatedthe
1282 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995 conditions of engravers'reputationsand DiMaggio (1982)has analyzed the consciously constructedand elite-drivennature of high culture in nineteenth centuryBoston (see also DiMaggio1991). of the productioncontextand of canon In additionto addingconsiderations must considerthe role of the nation. formation,a model of nationalliteratures and "literature" is now assumed,the Althoughthe connectionbetween"nation" pairingis actuallya modem constructstemming,not surprisingly,from early theorists of nationalism(Maclulich1987).Recenttheoreticalattentionto "the the constructed natureof this allegedlymost natural nation"has demonstrated of entities (see Hobsbawm 1992:4-5). Nation building is a conscious process requiringthe creationand forgingof an "imagined community" whose claimto the loyalty of its citizens supersedes all other claims (Anderson1991;Hobsbawm & Ranger 1983). This "community"is constructed in part through literature(Griswold1992).National literaturesdifferbecausethe identity,and thus the uniqueness, of the nation is a centralsubtextof nationalcanons (Neil 1975;Spencer1957;Ziff 1981).The historicalrole of the nationand the national elites who identifyand promotea nationalliterature must be incorporated into an analysis of nationalliteratures. This researchis intendedboth to evaluatethe sufficiencyof the traditional model of national literaturesand to supplement this model, should it prove insufficient,through the addition of (1) a focus on variationsin literarytype, of the role of (2) a concernfor the productionenvironment,(3) a consideration elites, and (4) an analysis of the self-consciousnatureand extentof the alliance of the nationalcanon with the developmentof the nation. ResearchDesign and Methods The comparisonof high-cultureand popular-culture literaturein Canadaand in the U.S. providesa strong test for the existenceof uniquenationalliteratures that the two societies are similar across many dimensions(Nevitte & Gibbins 1990). At the same time, a well-developed body of literaturedocumentsthe differencesbetween Canadianand Americansociety generally(Doran& Sigler 1985; Lipset 1963, 1990) and between Canadian and American literature specifically(Atwood 1982,1972;Fogel 1984).2 in the and popular-culture literature In orderto compareboth high-culture two countriesthreesamplesof novels were selectedfor eachcountry.3 Thereare two high-culturesamples:one of canonicaltexts and one of literaryprizewinning texts (see AppendixesA and B). The canonicaltitles were selectedfrom a literature classesat collegesanduniversities collectionof syllabiforintroductory in each country.4 The ten core novels for each countrywere chosen on the basis of their frequencyof assignment.The prizewinningsamples are composed of the 1978to 1987winnersof the PulitzerPrizefor Fictionand the NationalBook Award in the U.S. and the GovernorGeneral'sAward in English Language Fictionand the CanadianAuthors'AssociationAward in Canada.The sample of prizewinnerswas selected both to provide a comparisonof contemporary high-culturetexts and to allow for a cross-national, high-culturecomparison uncomplicated by the time differenceaffectingthe canonicalcomparison.While
Nations and Novels / 1283 the canonical novels in the U.S. and Canada have significantly different publication dates, the prizewinners provide a high-culture comparison controlling for period effects. Popular-culture literature is represented by a sample of best-selling novels in each country. The popular-culture sample is composed of the ten novels that remained on either the Publisher's Weekly best-selling hardcover fiction list (U.S.) or the McCleansbest-selling hardcover fiction list (Canada) the greatest number of weeks each calendar year from 1978 to 1987 (see Appendix C).5 Each book in the samples was coded using content analysis. The coding of the novels included author's nationality and gender, a plot summary, descriptions of the protagonist's characteristics, descriptions of plot attributes and themes, and descriptions of the text's stylistic characteristics. The coding sheet was generated from a summary of previous arguments regarding the distinctions between Canadian and American literature and from a pretest of 1977 novels. All the previous arguments are traditional in that they understand Canadian-American literary differences as reflections of differences in national character and/or history. A number of researchers, some influenced by Lipset's work on general social differences,6have theorized about Canadian-American literary differences (e.g., Atwood 1972; Brown 1979; Green 1984, 1986; Stouck 1988). They focus on four main areas: gender, rebellion, narrative tone, and familial significance. These previous arguments, which are incorporated in the coding sheet, can be summarized as indicated in the following sections.
GENDER
Researchers have argued that Canadian and American literature are gendered; that is, each literature focuses on or resonates with one gender's experience more so than the other's. Fiedler (1966), for example, argues that the typical American protagonist is a man fleeing the confines of corrupt society and emasculating heterosexual relationships for the wilderness and for male relationships. Brown (1979) argues that American national experience echoes the myth of Oedipus - the violent and final rejection of the male parent by a male child. These arguments see male authors, protagonists, and experience predominating in American literature. Writers and critics of Canadian literature, on the other hand, comment on its resonance with women's experience, especially the relationship between mothers and daughters. Some, such as Green (1984), argue that the motherdaughter relationship of "rejection and reconciliation" (2) is the personal-level enactment of the Canadian relationship with the past. The difficulties for Canadians of coming to terms with both the repressiveness of the past, and the concomitant continuing attraction and strength of tradition, is echoed in narratives featuring women as mothers and daughters. Other commentators on Canadian literature (Brown 1979; MacLennan 1949) see the resonance of the female relationship as reflecting the Canada-U.S. relationship. These theorists argue that female experiences of powerlessness, passivity, and accommodation to a superior strength are the personal-level enactment of Canada's relationship
1284 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

with the U.S. These arguments see female authors, protagonists, and experiences as predominating in Canadian literature.
REBELLION
Atwood (1972) describes Canadian literary figures as "victims," unwilling to rebel against injustice, and condemned to "mere survival" in a nation without moral purpose. Literary Americans, however, are inhabitants of the Frontier, "a place that is new, where the old order can be discarded ... [a place] that is always expanding . . . or 'conquering" (31-32, italics in original). In the U.S., the "defiance of law was itself sanctioned by the Revolution, the overthrow of traditional authority, and Americans have been rebelling against authority ever since: outlaws are heroes" (166). In contrast: All Canadian revolutions arefailedrevolutions.... Canadians ... areterrified of having authority undermined.... Canadahas fromthe beginningdefineditselfas a placewhere revolutions... are against lawful authority- which ... is seen as the social form of divine order.(170-71) These arguments imply that American protagonists will be rebellious, or at least in opposition to authority, while Canadian protagonists will be dutiful and conforming.
NARRATIVETONE
A corollary to tl, ? above argument involves the narrative tone of American and Canadian novels. Again, Atwood (1972) provides the seminal discussion, but many others (e.g., Lipset 1990; McGregor 1985; Stouck 1988) have embellished her general point. The narrative tone of the prototypic Canadian novel is best summarized by the title of Atwood's (1972) key work of criticism - Survival: A Thematic Guideto Canadian Literature. Atwood argues that Canadian narratives are stories about perennial victims, about people who manage to do little more than stay alive, people whose only achievement is "mere" survival. Literary Canadians, Atwood argues, are under siege by Nature, entrapped by their families, suffer genocidal extermination, die meaninglessly at the hands of faceless bureaucracies, and are generally victimized. In contrast, literary Americans have waged a successful battle against tyranny, have created a "City upon a Hill" dedicated to the pursuit of happiness, and inhabit a Frontier where expansion never ends and hope is omnipresent (Atwood 1972). Success stories are an American staple, "hard work and economic ambition ... the proper activity of a moral man," while Canadians are more apt to view ambition as pushy and success as suspect (Lipset 1990:25, 45). These arguments imply that American novels will be optimistic and victorious, while Canadian novels will be pessimistic and despairing or defeatist.
Nations and Novels / 1285

FAMILIALSIGNIFCANCE
Thefamily, in Canadian novels is "a trapin which you'recaught.The Canadian protagonist... feels the need for escape,but ... he is unable to breakaway.' Conversely,the family in Americannovels is: something theheromustrepudiate andleave; it is thestructure he rebels against, thereby defining hisownfreedom, hisownFrontier .... Thefamily, then, is something youcome fromandget ridof. (Atwood 1972:131) This argument implies that Canadiannovels will feature protagonistswith families that the protagonistexperiencesas a negative force while American novels will feature either protagonistswithout families or protagonistswho leave their families. I coded for conjugal (the protagonist'sspouse and/or children)and parental(the protagonist'sparentsand/or siblings)familiesand
for both familial presenceand importance.
Findings An analysis of the three comparativesamples of literatureshowed substantial differences between the American and Canadian high-culture texts, both prizewinning and canonical, but little difference between American and were Canadian best-sellingtexts.Previoustheoriesregarding genderdifferences somewhat supportedby the high-culturetexts, but not the popular;previous argumentsaboutrebelliousnesswere not supportedby eithersample;previous narrative argumentsconcerning tone were partiallysupportedby bothgroupof were partiallysupported texts;and priortheoriesregardingfamilialdifferences by the high-culturetexts, but not the popular.Other,unpredicteddifferences foundin thehigh-culture novels includedliterary style,protagonist's nationality and social class, the importanceof work, the centralityof romance,and the narrative's centralconflict.
CANONICAL LERATU
The ten Americancanonicaltextshave originalpublicationdates rangingfrom 1850to 1933.Six of the ten were originallypublishedin the nineteenthcentury, primarilyin the 1850s.The median originalpublicationdate for the American texts is 1885.The ten Canadiancanonicaltexts were all originallypublishedin Four of the texts were originallypublishedin the first the twentiethcentury.7 half of the centuryand six were originallypublishedbetween 1952 and 1976. The median originalpublicationdate for the Canadiantexts is 1953. that distinguishthe Table1 provides a summaryof the key characteristics Americanand Canadiancanonicalsamples. I found significantand expected differencesonly in the degreeof familialsignificance. AlthoughmoreCanadian canonicaltexts(five canonicaltextswere writtenby women thanwere American The presenceof the two female versus two), the differenceis not significant.8 authors, Kate Chopin and Harriet Beecher Stowe, on the American list is indicative of recent radical changes in the canon. Writing in 1981, feminist
scholarBaym (1985)reported"as late as 1977 ... [the]canon did not include any women novelists"(63).9 of previousresearchers, Canadian canonicaltexts Contrary to the arguments are more likely to have a centraltone of victoryand fulfillmentthanAmerican canonicaltexts - four Canadiannovels have such a tone while none of the American novels do. Typical of the Canadiannovels with such a tone is
Laurence's The Diviners or Munro's Lives of Girls and Women, in which the
life thatincorporates protagonist eventuallycomesto a fulfillingandmeaningful and make sense of her personal past. In contrast,the closest that American canonicalnovels come to a centraltone of victory and fulfillmentis Stowe's in which "victory" Cabin or Chopin'sThe is achievedonly UncleTom's Awakening throughthe protagonist'sdeath. Canadian As arguedby previousresearchers, canonicaltextsaremorelikel1r with important thanAmericancanonicaltextsto featureprotagonists families.? Eight of the Canadiantexts featureimportantparentalfamilies (parentsand In contrast,only one of the Americantextsfeaturesan siblings of protagonist). importantparentalfamily. All the Canadiantexts present either parentalor as important, while only conjugalfamilies (spouseand childrenof protagonist) four of the Americantexts do so. Although Canadiantexts are more likely to feature important families, there is no differencein negative families: one Canadianand one American novel feature negative conjugal families, one Americanand two Canadiannovels featurenegativeparentalfamilies. One differencenot discussed by previous theorists involves the greater canonicaltextsto focuson narratives of "self-knowledge propensityof Canadian and individualgrowth."The Canadiansample has six texts of this type while the American sample has two."1 This type of narrativefocuses on specific, idiosyncratic individuals rather than individuals who are intended to be representativeof some class or group. Even the most individually focused narrative providesmorals,attitudes,and messagesthatmay be extendedto life outside of the narrative itself. However, there is an observable difference between, for example,Chopin'srenderingof Edna'sstruggle to discover and conventionsof society in TheAwakendefine herself despite the gender-bound moralpovertyand materialism in Sister ing, and Dreiser'sdepictionof Carrie's The formeris primarilyEdna'sstory, albeit a story with applicability Carrie. beyond Edna'slife, while the latteris much more a story aboutwhat happens to people like Carrieor Hurstwood,and how class and gender interactwith moralityand meaningin powerfulways. The relativeimportanceto the protagonistof his or her work also differs across American and Canadian canonical texts. Only three novels in the Americansample featuredprotagoniststo whom work was important.In the Canadiansample however, eight of the novels featuredprotagoniststo whom has a work was important.So, for example, the American TheGreatGatsby protagonistwho learnsaboutbonds in a desultoryfashionand a title character whose work is only vaguelyidentified,and only thenbecausehis successat that socially suspect work allows him access to the woman of his dreams. In TwoSolitudes featuresa fallenFrench-Canadian aristocrat contrast,the Canadian whose work as a laborer awakens him to an understandingof the English Canadianindifferenceto and exploitationof FrenchCatholicsand whose work
Nations and Novels / 1287 TABLE1: Central Differences between American and Canadian Canonical Novels American Novels 0 10 40 30 0 40 50 0 100 70 10 10 CanadianNovels 40 80 100 80 80 0 0 100 0 0 70 10
Characteristics (Percent) Victorious tone Importantparentalfamily Eitherfamily is important His/her work important to protagonist Protagonistis middle class Protagonistis upper class, or upper middle class Protagonistis lower class, outcast, or slave Author is Canadian Author is American Narrative of individualism Narrative of connection N
as a writer crystallizes his vision of Canada's dual populations and the possibilities inherent in their relations. Another unanticipated finding involves the social class of protagonists in the two samples. I used an eight-point class scale with the following categories: (1) upper class/aristocracy; (2) upper middle class/professional; (3) urban middle class/more educated; (4) agrarian middle class/less educated; (5) working class; (6) lower class/poor; (7) criminal/social outcast; (8) prisoner/chattel/ slave. The social class of the protagonists in Canadian texts were clustered in categories 2, 3, 4, and 5. Eight of the Canadian texts' protagonists were in category 3 and 4. On the other hand, the social class of the protagonists in the American texts were distributed at the ends of the continuum in categories 1, 2, and 5, 6, 7, 8. None of the American protagonists were in category 3 or 4. A typical Canadian protagonist is Dunny Ramsay in Fifth Business,a child of lower middle-class parents who becomes a school teacher and hagiographer. In the American sample, typical protagonists are the rich and well-educated Isobel of Portraitof a Ladyand the enslaved Tom of Uncle Tom'sCabin. One difference between the two canonical samples is usually taken for granted. All the Canadian texts have Canadian authors and all the American texts have American authors. This difference becomes more interesting in comparison with the authorial distribution in the other samples. Previous arguments about Canadian-American literary differences in rebellion found no support in my analysis. Not only was there no difference in the proportion of Canadian and American protagonists who were rebellious, but there was an
1288 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995 even split between rebellious and nonrebellious protagonists in both samples: five novels from each country featured rebellious protagonists, five did not. Although my analysis contradicts certain traditional critical interpretations of American-Canadian literary differences, particularly those regarding gender, rebellion, and narrative tone, the final and overarching difference I found echoes traditional interpretations. As a group, the Canadian canonical novels are marked by their emphasis on interpersonal connection and social identity as the ultimate value. Although it may be fraught with difficulty and peril, human connection is the only truly meaningful action. American canonical novels, on the other hand, stress the dangers of social identity, the constraints of human connection, and the potentially destructive power of the social. A strong and autonomous self-definition is the hope offered by the American novels. This difference resonates with existing arguments about American individualism and Canadian collectivism (Baym 1985; Fiedler 1966; Lipset 1990; McGregor 1985). For my purposes, what is relevant about these differences is not their "truth" as descriptions of American and Canadian society, but their use as key expressions of national identity in each country. The U.S. developed its sense of nationhood out of the democratic ideology of the Revolution. The rights of the individual and the suspect nature of centralized power were twin pillars of the faith. In the effort to distinguish America from England, in the effort to imagine a distinct, independent entity, the emphasis on individualism, the freedom of each man from his family, birthplace, and ancestry, was one of the central myths. This recurring theme of individual liberty became one of the hallmarks of the American identity. In contrast, the development of a Canadian identity involved the rejection, or at least alteration, of both English and American traditions. Canadian national identity is "anti-American" and skeptical of the American "mobocracy." The rejection of individualistic myths and the emphasis on social identity is a central expression of anti-Americanism. Canadian literature suggests that the Canadian identity is a reaction against both the English and American traditions, however, and the rejection of American individualism is combined with a rejection of the English emphasis on identity as wholly determined by ancestry and class.
PRIZEWINNINGLlTRATURE
The novels in the prizewinning sample are representatives of contemporary high-culture literature, or precanonical texts (Ohmann 1984). Since a particular award may not be granted in any given year, the awards may go to an (ineligible) collection of short stories, or two awards may be given to one book, the sample size totals 29 (14 Canadian novels and 15 American novels). Table 2 provides a summary of the key characteristics of the American and Canadian prizewinners. Although not a focus of previous theories, nor a central difference in the canonical samples, the most striking difference between the Canadian and American prizewinners is the nationality of the novels' protagonists. All the novels in the American prizewinning sample featured protagonists with American citizenship. Not only were the protagonists all American citizens, but the fact of their citizenship was not problematic; it was a background assumption.
Nations and Novels / 1289 TABLE2: Central Differences between American and Canadian Prizewinning Novels American Novels Characteristics (Percent) Protagonistnationality is sample nationality Victorious tone Conflictis ideological Conjugalfamily present Centralromance Protagonistsingle and childless Literarystyle is postmodern or has postmodern elements N 100 0 0 40 60 60 21 15 36 21 29 72 29 21 50 14 CanadianNovels
The Canadian prizewinning texts, however, were strikingly unlike the other high-culture texts. Two-thirds of the protagonists in the Canadian prizewinning texts were of non-Canadian or only partially Canadian citizenship. In addition to the five protagonists who are Canadian, the Canadian prizewinners feature three protagonists who become Canadian citizens, two protagonists of unknown nationality, and four non-Canadian protagonists: one American, two British, and Tale).The one ex-American citizen of Gilead (a future society in TheHandmaid's sole American protagonist is Ray in Shoeless Joe,a novel written while its author was at school in the U.S. In the Canadian prizewinners, citizenship, both as an attribute of characters and as a narrative strand, is a process or choice central to the narrative. Citizenship serves as an avenue for exploring issues of personal and national identity development and for situating the self in a meaningful social world. In the Canadian prizewinners, decisions about citizenship are decisions about one's identity and social relationships. In the American prizewinners, citizenship does not provide an avenue for investigating identity and the self's relationships. Instead, the American prizewinners locate the search for identity in personal relationships as is evidenced by the importance of central love relationships. The Canadian and American prizewinners are differentiated by the relative frequency of central love relationships. Contrary to Fiedler's (1966) arguments about the American rejection of heterosexual literary romance, love relationships were more likely to be central to the narrative in American (60%) than in Canadian (29%) prizewinners.12 Most Canadian prizewinners present love relationships as settled, and issues of national identity as indeterminate, while the American prizewinners present national identity as assumed background and love relationships as indeterminate. In American prizewinners such as The Color Purple and Paco's Story, it is the search for love, the investigation of
personal relationships, that enables personal identity development.13 The canonicalnovels showed no significantdifferencein love relationships. As with the canonical sample, the prizewinning comparison does not support previous arguments about American rebelliousness and Canadian in the rebelliousness of Canadian and docility.Thereis no significantdifference an equal numberof Canadian(21%) and Americanprotagonists.Furthermore, American (20%)prizewinnershad a tone of "mere"survival, in which the protagonistwas simply existing without regardfor his/her quality of life. As with the canonicalnovels, the nationalityof the prize and the nationalityof the authorsmatchfor all the prizewinners. to previousarguments, Like the canonicaltexts,and again in contradiction Canadianprizewinnersare morelikely to have a centraltone of victoryand/or fulfillment; three (21%)Canadian prizewinners do so while no American These threeCanadiannovels, Shoeless In One prizewinnersdo.14 Joe,TheYoung Another's are all fables involving Arms,and 7heResurrection of Joseph Bourne, redemptionby love. All three are narrativesin which individuals and their emotionalcommitmentsto one anothertriumphover "thesystem."Thereis no significantdifferencein frequencyof despairingand/or pessimistictone. Anotherdistinctionbetween the Americanand Canadian samples,and one that previous researchershave ignored, is the type of centralconflict in the Four types of conflict (institutional, narratives.15 interpersonal, none, and self) were equally prevalentin Canadianand Americanprizewinners.Institutional conflictwas by far the most commonfor both countries,accountingfor roughly half of the American and Canadiancases. The major differencein central conflict between the Canadian and American prizewinners occurs in the category of ideological conflict. While none of the American prizewinners featureda centralideologicalconflict,four (29%) of the Canadian prizewinners involvedcentralideologicalconflicts.An exampleof a novel with such a conflict Arms.The centralconflictof the novel is a is Rule's 7heYoung in OneAnother's battle between those who believe in the power of redemptivelove and a cold, that destroyspeople. self-centered, world of "progress" familieswere more likely to be presentin Canadian Conjugal prizewinners (72%)than in Americanprizewinners(40%).Conversely,single protagonists were significantlymore likely in the Americanprizewinners(60%), thanin the Canadianones (21%). Despite being more prevalentin Canadian prizewinners, to the protagonists'conjugal families were no more likely to be important in Canadian(36%) thanin Americanprizewinners(33%). narrative Thereareno significantdifferencesin the parentalfamilies. A final difference between the Canadian and American prizewinners concernsliterarystyle. Realismwas the preponderant style of the prizewinners; seven Canadian (50%)and twelve American (80%)novels were wholly or primarilyrealistic.The largeststylisticdifferenceinvolved postmodernnovels, that is, those novels that have a "concernfor form and languageover subject matter"(Fraser 1989:382), exhibitingmost or all these characteristics: (1) attention to the process of narrationover the substanceof the narration,(2) lack of attentionto a logical, coherent,or meaningfulplot, (3) shifting or ambiguous points of view, and (4) focus on the structureand use of language,particularly on word play. Under these criteria,four (29%) of the Canadian novels (Burning
Nations and Novels / 1291 Water, TheResurrection of Joseph Bourne, Shakespeare's Dog, and TheEngineer of HumanSouls)were postmodernand three (21%)had significantpostmodern elements(The Handmaid's Tale, Not Wanted on TheVoyage, and Willie: A Romance). Two (14%)of the Americannovels (Mite Noiseand GoingafterCacciato) were postmodem and one (7%)had significantpostmodernelements (Ironweed).
POPULAR-CULURE LTERATURE
The first and most dramaticfinding from the comparisonof the best-sellersis the extensive overlap among the ten best-sellersin each country.That is, the first result of the comparisonis to note not how similarthe two samples are, but how close to identical they are. If there were no overlapbetween the two lists the samplewould contain200 titles.However,the sampleactuallycontains only 135 titles:39 titles exclusivelyin the Americansample,37 titles exclusively in the Canadiansample,and 59 titles thatappearin both samples.Thereare no significantdifferences betweenthe full Canadian and full Americanbest-selling samples. Given the significantduplicationin the Americanand Canadianpopularculturesamples, the next questionbecomeshow similarare the books that are not duplicated. Table 3 summarizes the differencesbetween the exclusively Canadianbest-sellers.16 Americanand exclusively First,althoughthe difference is not statistically significant, the proportion of female authors in the two of the difference exclusivebest-sellingsamplesis interestingin thatthe direction is opposite to that in the high-culture novels. The proportionof women authors in the exclusivelyAmericanbest-sellerswas higher thanin eitherhigh-culture sample;37%of the exclusivelyAmericanbest-sellerswere writtenby women, as were 20% of both the canonical and prizewinning texts. In contrast,the proportionof female authorsin the exclusively Canadianbest-sellingsample (22%) was much lower thanin the Americanbest-sellingsampleand lower than either of the high-culturesamples - 50%of the Canadiancanonicaltexts and 36%of the Canadianprizewinnerswere writtenby women. One majordifference betweenthebest-sellingsamplesinvolvedthe national identity of authors.In both high-culturesamples all the Americantexts were written by Americansand the Canadiantexts were all written by Canadians. Thebest-sellers, Americans however,had authorswith a varietyof nationalities. formedthe largestblockof authorsfor both the exclusivelyAmerican(81%) and the exclusively Canadian(34%) best-sellers,with Britishauthorsforming the second largest block, 17%and 32%respectively.The Canadiansample had a number of Canadian authors (27%),but the American sample had none. nationalidentitiesin the two best-sellingsamplesare much more Protagonists' of the exclusivelyAmerican similarthanin the high-culture samples.About68% and best-sellers featureBritish featureAmerican protagonists, 10% protagonists, Canadian. feature with a of none nationalities 22% protagonists variety Canadianprotagonistsare also uncommonin the exclusively Canadianbestsellers; only 20% of the exclusively Canadian best-sellers have Canadian protagonists. About 27% of the exclusively Canadian best-sellers feature American protagonists; 29% have British protagonists; and 25% feature protagonistswith a variety of nationalidentities.

TABLE3: Central Differences between Exclusively American and Exclusively Canadian Best-Selling Novels AmericanNovels Characteristics (percent) Rebellious protagonist Author's nationality is sample nationality Protagonist'snationality is sample nationality N 27 81 68 41 56 27 20 41 CanadianNovels
Incontrastto thepredictions of previousresearchers, rebelliousprotagonists sampleas they are in the are almosttwice as likely in the exclusivelyCanadian exclusively American sample. In fact, rebellious protagonists (e.g., Paul, a ofAfrica) comprise Germangeneralwho refuses to concedeAfricain TheGhosts best-sellers. Such the majority(56%) of protagonists in the exclusivelyCanadian rebels appear in only 27% of the exclusively American sample, however. may be victorious Protagonistssuch as Joe in L'Amour'sTheLastof theBreed and independentrebels,but the more typicalAmericanprotagonistis Anna in Plain'sEvergreen who suffersstoicallyfor the sake of her marriageand family, or Al in Wambaugh'sTheGlitter Domewho drowns his misery in drink and meaninglesssex, experiencinglittle but ironic despair. LiteraryGenre and DifferentialInfluences The data show that there are more - and more substantial- differences betweenthe Canadian andAmerican novels thantherearebetween high-culture the popular-culture novels. Furthermore, the analysis of the popular-culture texts focused on only those texts thatwere not identical,makingthe finding of little differenceespecially strong. The datafail to support the argumentthat distinctnationalliteratures are due to the reflectionof widespreadpsychologically based, national character differences. Instead, the large number of differences small number betweenthe high-culture novels and the concomitant of differencesbetween the popular-culture novels support the argumentthat nationalliterarydifferences consciousprocesses are the resultof comparatively of creatingand strengtheningnationaldistinctivenessthroughliterarydifference.Thedifference of the high-culture vs. popular-culture in the distinctiveness novels suggests that high-cultureand popular-culture literaturesserve funda-
mentally differentpurposes and are thereforeshaped by differentconstraints and opportunities. The remainderof the articleoutlines the differentuses and corresponding importantinfluences on each type of literature.The distinctivenessof highculture literatureis indicativeof its political role as an adjunctof the nationandbroadcast state.High-culture literature helpsarticulate, affirm, a legitimated literature also servesas a conduit vision of the nation-state. Current high-culture for the incorporationof new meanings of the national identity. For elites concernedwith issues of nationalmeaningand identity,then,high-culture texts in the collectivity.Popular-culture on may provide for participation literature, the other hand, meets personal,individual-levelneeds for excitement,escape, and relaxation.While high-cultureliteraturemay also be used by readersto meet these personalneeds, it is the political uses of this literaturethat require nationaluniqueness.
L1TERAIURE AND THE NATION-SrATE
Literature,or at least "great"literaturenow seems irrevocablytied to the Literature is bothinterpreted and taughtwithinnationalunits such nation-state. as "TwentiethCentury American Literature," "GreatRussian Writers,"and "MedievalFrenchLiterature." These are acceptedand familiarliterarycategories. The idea of nationalliteratures, however, is historicallyrecent,stemming from early theoristsof nationalism.Earlynationalists,particularly the German Romanticnationalists, first promulgated the idea that "literaturecomes in nationalunits [and] ... that a writer'swork should be praisedfor embodying the distinctivefeaturesof [a] ... people"(Maclulich 1987:21; see also Brubaker 1992). Nation-states arenot "anatural, God-givenway of classifyingmen"(Geilner 1983:48)but constructed geopolitical and cultural entities. Nation-building requiresexplicit campaignsto createan "essentialidentity"that will override other identities,such as ethnic or religiousidentities,that may divide national arerootedin the factthatthoughmost Nation-states populations(Lloyd1987:x). "membersof even the smallest nation will never ... meet ... in the minds of each lives the image of their communion"(Anderson1991:6;Calhoun1991). Creatingunity and loyalty from the often disparategroups that form national populationsis a difficulttask that is attackedin part with a culturalartillery. The centraltask of a legitimatednationalliteratureis to "invent"(Hobsbawm & Ranger1983)and "imagine" (Anderson1991)a nationand a nationalidentity capableof mobilizing loyalty and inspiringcommitmentfrom citizens and of full nationhoodto theinternational proclaiming community. Nationalliteratures differbecause the identity,and thus the uniqueness, of the nation is the central subtextof nationalcanons (Neil 1975;Spencer1957). Thenationalidentityrole of high-culture literature can be seen most clearly in the U.S. in the nineteenthcenturyand in Canadain the twentiethcentury.A comparisonof the median publicationdates for the Americanand Canadian canonical texts shows a 62-year gap. This reflects the time between the establishment of a canonicalnationalliterature in the U.S.and the establishment of such a literaturein Canada.The earliest desire for the establishmentof an
strugglefor indepenbeganwith the American "authentic" Americanliterature sentimentgenerallypaves theway for dence.Lease(1981)shows thatnationalist the developmentof a nationalliteraturesince one of the "standardmarks of In (Maclulich 1987:24). nationhood"is "thepossession of a nationalliterature" order to lay claim to full nationhood, nascent nation-statesneed not only militaryand political independence,but culturalindependenceas well. Lease in ThePortico which makes the American (1981)cites an 1816 announcement of this need clear: understanding whether orpolitical, is a stateofdegradation, fraught withdisgrace; literary Dependence, forwhatwe canourselves is to addto produce, on a foreign mind, andto be dependent of stupidity.17 of indolence, thecrime theweakness (3) Americanelites of the late eighteenthand early nineteenthcenturieswere interested in and committed to the development of an authentic national and a literature becausetheirstatus was linked to the status of the nation-state was both an aid to the formationof thatstate and an avenue nationalliterature for its promotion (Greenfeld1992). This interestin a nationalliteraturewas primarily confined to the elite groups operating at and committed to the national, rather than regional, stage. The intellectualelite, including literary journalists, literarycritics,authorsthemselves,patronsof the arts,and publishers, waged a conscious and vigorous campaign to stimulate, identify, and promotethe developmentof an Americanliterature(Lease1981;Ruland1972; such as JamesLowell Spencer1957).Literarycritics and social commentators Russell, William Ellery Channing,and TheodoreParkerexhortedauthors to produce an "authentic"American literature(Hubbell 1972). In addition to the intelligentsiapromotedspecific exhortation, criticism,and encouragement, infrastructure authors,commissionedliteraryworks,and developedthe literary through the establishmentof organizationssuch as publishing houses and literary magazines (see Tompkins 1985 for a description of the process in Hawthorne'scase). Many authors themselves, such as Freneau, Whitman, and Melville, lamented the Americanreliance on English literatureand encouragedtheir fellow artists to produce Americanliteratureand the public to support such notes that"scarcely a nativeauthorof any importance endeavors.Spencer(1957) before1900failed to engagein the inquiryand to declarehimselfpubliclyon its issues" (ix).The activitiesof the variouspartiescomprisingthe intellectualelite resulted in the stimulation, discussion, identification, and promotion of Americanliteraturefrom the early days of Americanindependence. fromBritish rulewas a muchlater,less violent,and Canadian independence less absoluteaffairthanwas Americanindependence.18 Canadian elites derived their status from their connection to Englandand their location within the Canadian sentimentfor the establishment of a national BritishCommonwealth. literaturearose correspondinglylater as well, since "the genesis of a local with the development literature... has almost always been contemporaneous of a truly national sentiment" (Neil 1975:ix).MargaretAtwood (1982) has writtenabouther graduatestudy in the U.S. in the 1960sand how her exposure to the histoxy of American literatureilluminated her understandingof the

struggle for a viable national literature which was then occurring in Canada, roughly 100 years later than the comparable struggle in America: fromPuritan politicaltreatises sermons, I foundmyselfreadingmy way throughexcerpts essays of the early nineteenth of the time of the Americanrevolution,and anguiished century, bemoaning the inferioritynot only of Americanliterary offerings but of Americandress design, and wonderingwhen the greatAmericangenius would come All Nobody pretendedthatany of this was superbliterature. along.It soundedfamiliar. of the United Statesof they pretendedwas that it was necessaryfor an understanding America,and it was. (382) they had gone throughall that,I weren'tgropingfor theiridentities; They [Americans] verymuchlikeours- the decades,with symptoms found,backin the post-revolutionary short-run,little-readmagazines,the petty literarysquabbles,the adulationof foreign schools,theworryovercultural and "cosmopolitan" between"native" writers,the conflict (87) imperialismn Preliminary recognition for canonical Canadian literature occurred in the postWWII era, although a number of texts now accorded canonical status were originally published earlier. Canonical national literatures are inextricably entwined with processes of national identity establishment. Therefore, their selection into the canon is driven by a national, politically rooted emphasis on uniqueness. The overriding criterion for national literatures is that they be different, particularly from the literature in the "Motherland."The timing and nature of the process of national identity formation indelibly shapes the national literary canon (Lloyd 1987; Spencer 1957). In the U.S. this meant an early interest in the canon, which was concerned with individualistic differentiation from England. In Canada this meant a relatively late interest in the canon, which was concerned with differentiation from both England and the U.S. In the U.S. a sense of moral and political distinctiveness and a coherent ideology, even amongst the first colonists, meant that an "authentic" literature was called for almost from the earliest years (Ziff 1981). Those invested in a vision of the new republic as a single body energetically promoted any means for stimulating the necessary sense of national spirit. Early American writing was derided as imitative and inappropriate to "the first new nation," since what was required was a "national" literature that differentiated itself from English literature and envisioned a unifying culture and tradition for America (Greenfeld 1992; Ziff 1981). In Canada, on the other hand, there was little sense of distinctiveness from Mother England and only the faintest stirrings of separate political or cultural identity until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Canada's political separation from Great Britain was a lengthy affair, full of ambivalence on the Canadian side, which remained unfinished until the mid-twentieth century. Full-fledged nationalism was for Canada a creature of the post-WWII era. Because of the lack of widespread national sentiment, because of the absence of nation-building ideology and rhetoric needing literary definition and support, the development of a national canon occurred later than it did in the U.S. When the Canadian canon did develop, it was defined in contrast to both English and American literature.
1296 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995 Uoyd (1987)discusses a situationsimilar to the Canadiansituationin his study of Irishliterature. Uoyd (1987,italicsin original)arguesthat"thedefacto politicalidentityforgedby Franceand Americain theirmilitarystruggles"(63) stands in contrast to the situation in countries without an identity-forging identity"defined revolution;without a "unifing conceptof Irish[orCanadian] by the revolutionaryprocess, the development of a national literature is stymied. Uoyd (1987)argues that an authenticvoice and clearly articulated uninterruptvision of nationalidentityis "natural" only in "anationalliterature ed by [prolonged]colonialpower' (63).In Canadathe situationwas especially constrainingsince Canada'scolonial status was largely voluntary.Although momentumfor a nationalliteraturebegan gatheringin the post-WWII period, it wasn't until the 1970s that academicrecognitionand teachingof Canadian Thusthe recognitionof a Canadian becamean acceptedphenomenon. literature canon was delayed until the developmentof the nation provided the impetus for it. It is not that none of the books were written until the latterhalf of the twentieth century,but that without a strong sense of Canadiannationalism, canon. therewas little or no desire for a national
REVISIONAND RENEWAL
National literaturesnot only help to createidentitiesin new nations,they also and revision of national identities serve as avenues for the reinterpretation under change. As national life or the constituency of the nation changes, precanonicalliteratureserves as an avenue for revising and renewingexisting visions of the nation. In this, and in other ways, contemporary high-culture literatureserves as a forum for the interestsand preoccupationsof the elite The issue of nationalidentitybest exemplifiesthis process of (Ohmann1984).19 revision and renewal in the prizewinners. The variety of national identities exhibited by the protagonists of the Canadianprizewinnerscomparedto the assumedAmericannationalityof the protagonists of the American prizewinners is indicative of the difference between Canadianand Americanpublic discourseson national identity.The Americannationalidentityis a strongone. Fueledby pioneerand revolutionary myths (Daniel Boone and Paul Revere),supportedby powerful symbols (the Stars and Stripes), and resonant with sturdy, if fuzzy, icons (the American Dream), the exact contours of the American identity may be debated, but nobody doubts its existence(Doran& Sigler 1985;Lipset1990). In Canada,on the otherhand, the overridingfocus of the nationalidentity debateis 'Does the Canadianidentityexist?"(Howes 1988;Lipset1990;Smart and 1984).Canadianhistoryis curiouslylackingin the heroes,revolutionaries, 1985).Rather mythic figures that populate the Americanlandscape(McGregor thana historicallytriumphant Revolution, establishevent,as was the American ing a separate nationhood was a protractedand ambivalentact in Canada: Canadian flag citizenshipwas not distinctfromBritishuntil 1947;the Canadian did not exist until the mid-1960s; and Canadadid not requestthat the British Parliament give up formalcontrolover Canadauntil 1982.20 Thus the currentdebateaboutwhat it means to be Canadian is much more problematicthan the comparabledebateabout what it means to be American.
Nations and Novels / 1297 Americans may believe that the U.S. has failed to live up to the promisesof the nationalideology, or partisangroups of one sort and anothermay lay claim to the "American Dream"with radicallydifferentimages of what thatentails,but Americansgenerallyhave a host of images about Americaand the American in contrast, identity.Canadians, are deeply and publiclyinvolvedin the process a substancefor their own nationalidentity. of determiniing The discourse regardingCanadiannationalismand Canadianidentity is common in both the popularand elite media.The issue is investigatedlegally and politically(e.g.,the MeechLakeAccordnegotiatingthe Canadian Constitution, the CanadianContent Laws);culturally (e.g., Saturday Night'sissue on Canadian identity,the TVdocumentary "Canada: TheTrueNorth"); educationof "CanLit" ally (theproliferation courses);and in just aboutevery otherforum of public life. Literatureis one of the central arenas for this discourse.The emphasis on questions of national identity in the prizewinningnovels both to the debateaboutCanadian contributes nationalidentityand demonstrates the concernwith this issue in Canadianpublic life. The prevalence of ideological conflicts in the Canadianprizewinnersis on alternative largelya resultof the emphasisin Canadian prizewinners visions and experiences.The prizewinnerswhose centralconflictsare ideological are The YoungIn One Another's Arms, Shakespeare's Dog, Shoeless Joe, and The Bourne. Resurrection Threeof these four featuresome type of utopian, of Joseph or at least redemptive, vision. Shakespeare's Dog, while not a utopian or redemptivenovel, is at least partiallya discourseon the possibilitiesinherentin the human condition and its potential superiorityto animal existence. The nature of redemptive or utopian visions is that they are generally defined throughconflictwith, or rejection of, traditional Eachof these understandings. narrativeshas at its heart a rejectionof the establishedunderstandingabout humanrelationships thatprevailsin society.Unlikethe Canadian prizewinners, the Americanprizewinnersare less apt to featureconflictaboutpossibleways of organizinghuman relationshipsthan conflictabout the division of existing power.
ECONOMIC HEGEMONYAND THE PUBLISHINGINDUSTRY
literature and its cross-national Finally,we come to the issue of popular-culture lacksthe nationallysymbolicvalueof highsimilarity. Popular-culture literature cultureliterature. textsprovideindividualreaderswith Instead,popular-culture commoditiesthat satisfy individual needs such as adventureand excitement within guaranteed,safe limits (Cawelti1976);escape from or enhancement of dull and impoverishedlives (Radway1984);and validation and reassurance about their life choices through a comparison with other, fictional lives is best understoodin literature (Modieski1982;Radway1984).Popular-culture terms of its status as a commodity produced by a "culturalindustry' and consumedby individuals. Bookpublishingis a big businessin both the U. S. and Canada.In Canada an estimated$1.5 billion worth of books were sold in 1992 (Statistics Canada 1993,Canadian dollars)while in the U.S.in thatsameperiodan estimated$15.2
billion worth of books were sold (Grannis 1993).fl The differences between the
Canadian and Americanpublishingindustriesarenot confinedto a disparityin size. The main difference between the Canadianand American publishing industriesis thatwhile Americanpublishersbothpublishand distribute books, Canadian publishers are primarily book distributors.Audley (quoted in Hutcheson1987:11)summarizedCanadianculture industriesmore generally: "the structureof the domesticproductionand distributionindustriesin every case is organized around the supply of imported content to Canadians." Atwood (1982) recalls that in 1961 "all the novels and books of poetry by Canadians, publishedin Canada... could be and were reviewedin partof one
issue of the Universityof TorontoQuarterly"(381).
Although the extent of Canadian content in the Canadian publishing industry has increased, the emphasis on distributionratherthan publishing remains. The cause of this is both historically rooted and exacerbatedby in Canada"cameinto existence... to distribute modem technology.Publishers imported books, not to publish" (Publisher's Weekly 1979). In response to the size has assumed increasingly technically complexprocessof publishing,market an evergreater forbook-selling: "Massproduction... requires importance mass marketing.As a consequence,the Canadianmarkethas become an extension In the last 20 years, roughly 75% of ... the U.S. market"(Hutcheson1987:11). of Canada's$600 million (Canadian) worth of book sales came from imported books (Hutcheson1987).As a comparison,the proportionof importedtitles in Americanpublishingin 1992was approximately 6%of all titles (Grannis 1993). The Americanpublishing industry dominatesCanada,which absorbsalmost half of all U.S. book exports (Hutcheson1987:12). In the 1970sthe Canadiangovernmentand much of the publicbegan to be alarmedby what was seen as the virtual takeoverof Canadiancultureby the Americancultureindustry.Thepublishingsectorbecamea centralfocus in this debate since it "combin[es]the ideals of economic and culturalnationalism" (Publisher's Weekly 1979:38).In the U.S., however, "publishing... is more a function of the marketplaceand less consciously an expression of national which led to some cross-border tension.In goals" (Publisher's Weekly 1979:38), responseto Canadiannationalconcerns,the Canadiangovernmentcreatedthe ForeignInvestmentReview Agency in 1974 as a screeningbody to advise the cabineton possible foreign takeoversof large Canadianfirms,includingfirms Marcel in the culture industries. In 1985, then Ministerof Communications, of the publishing industry' policy Masse, announced a "Canadianization (Hutcheson 1986,however,figuresshowed that29 subsidiar1987).In February ies of foreigncorporations of publishingrevenuesin Canada while 173 earn60% Canadian-owned companiesearnjust 40%of publishingrevenues (Hutcheson 1987:18). Although criticshave chargedthat the Canadiangovernmenthas not pursued either of these opportunities to limit foreign control of cultural production vigorously enough, the policies are obvious indications of the importancegiven to issues of foreign controlof culturalproduction.22 In additionto legislativeaction,the relativelylow Canadian contentin book publishinghas been addressedthroughfederalandprovincialfinancialsubsidy. Governmentaction on behalf of the culture industries has been vigorous, certainlyin comparisonto the situationin the U.S. Hutcheson(1987)assessed the state of Canadianculture industriesin these terms:"Canadian production
Nations and Novels / 1299 holds only a minor share of the market, but what little there is a consequence of some form of government support, whether subsidy, regulation, or tax incentive" (15). In 1990-91 the central federal arts funder's support for writing and publishing totalled $21.9 million (Statistics Canada 1994). Given the consistent inability of Canadian publishers to control the Canadian book market despite public outcry and governmental intervention in the form of subsidies, regulation, and tax incentives, the question of popular taste inevitably arises. The American presence in Canadian popular-culture is a result of consumer choice as well as economic structure. Available Canadian popular-culture alternatives, be they novels, TV dramas, or movies, are not necessarily preferred by Canadian consumers. "Canadian-ness" is a quality less riveting to the average consumer of culture than to the elites to whom the legitimation and interpretation of national-level experience falls or to the government whose right and ability to rule are legitimated by the national voice. There is no evidence that Canadian popular taste differs in significant ways from American popular taste. The market, on the other hand, provides evidence that Canadian and American popular taste are extremely similar.23 Given that American and Canadian popular taste show few distinct characteristics, the more powerful American production and distribution system triumphs. This research suggests that (1) prevailing impressions of national literatures are often debatable, (2) traditional reflection models of national literatures are inadequate, and, (3) our understanding of literary use may be improved by differentiating among literary type and considering variations in cultural use. First, traditional descriptions of national literatures are rarely rooted in a systematic definition and comparison of canonical texts, thus generating impressions that are supported on an ad hoc basis. Even given a systematic sampling and coding schema however, the meaning of texts is ambiguous and dependent on readers. Thus the selection and definition of the canon is contested by individuals and institutions with stakes in one version or another. Second, the lack of cross-national differences between popular-culture texts, and the dissimilarity between the high-culture and popular-culture texts within each country, undercut the simplistic notion of national literatures as "reflections" of national character. Third, high-culture national literatures, both canonical and precanonical, are integrally bound up in the processes of national identity formation, maintenance, and change. Their development is promoted by elites with an interest in the unity, legitimacy, and prestige of the nation. Because of their political uses, national literatures require a national uniqueness. Popularculture literature, while free of the political identity constraints imposed by the nation-state, is also shaped by its cultural uses and production context and is subject to mass market constraints generated by the structure and nature of the publishing industry.

Notes 1. TheseGreatBooksare canonicaltexts and theirselectionis the processof 'canon formation." 2. Due to my sampling desigx, and to the nature of French-English relations in Canada,this paper addresses only English Canadian literature.French Canadian literature is generally taught as a subjectof its own and is considered,at least by the English,as a subset of Canadian national literature. 3. For coding compatibilitythe samples contain only novels, not short stories. 4. In order to determine the ten "core novels" in each country, I wrote, in the US., to the English department'sof the top Ph.D. producing universities and those colleges with the highest proportionof students going on to do graduate work and to the top 20 schools in Canadaaskingfor syllabi from Introductory Amexican/Canadian Literature classes.In the US. I received a total of 24 syllabi from 10 schools (of 29 contacted): Amherst,Berkeley,Brandeis, Chapel Hill, Chicago, Michigan, Oberlir, Pomona, Princeton, Stanford, and Williams. In Canada, I received a total of 41 syllabi from 14 schools (of 20 contacted):Alberta, British Columbia, Calgazy, Carleton, Concordia, Laurentian, McGill, Queen's, Saskatchewan, Sherbrooke, Toronto,Westem Ontario,Winnipeg& and one school (of the remainiing six) which I could not identify. 5. There is no significance to the choice of decade other than that the coding was begun in 1989. 6. Lipset,startingwith TheFirstNew Nation(1963)and continuingthroughto Continental Divide (1990), has argued that the primaiy differences between the two countries stem from the individualisticfocus and revolutionary natureof America'sfoundingvision and earlyhistorical experience on the one hand, and the contrasting focus on historical legitimacy and the concomitant anti-revolutionarynature of Canadian historical experience on the other. The literary effect of these differencesis the emergenceof literaturesthat reflect distinct cultural myths and values. 7. Although the survey of syllabi identified Canadian texts with earlier original publication It In TheBush(1852)or Leacock.sSunshine dates, e.g., Moodie's Roughing Sketdaes (1912),none were novels. 8. In the American Literaturesyllabi I collected in my survey, 33% of the total number of assigned novelists (N - 49) were women and 26% of the assigned novels (N - 105) were written by women. In comparison,in the Canadiansample,42%of assigned novelists (N - 69) were women and 39%of the assigned novels (N - 120) were writtenby women. This difference is significantat the p < .01 level. 9. Forexample,Lauter's(1981)survey of 50 course syllabi at 25 colleges and universities:of the first 50 authors listed by frequency of appearance,ordy six are women. Emily Dickinson, a poet, is the twelfth author listed, Edith Whartonis, at number 27, the first female novelist listed. 10. "Important' families are defined as those that play a significant role in narrative development, as compared to families that are mentioned, but are largely irrelevant to the narrative. 11. This differenceis ordy significantat the p < .10 level and may be an artefactof the period differences. 12. Interestingly,although the differencesare not statisticallysignificant,love relationshipsin both Canadianand, to a lesser extent, Americanprizewinnerswere more licely to be central for male protagoniststhan female. This was especially evident in the Canadiansample where 3/8 (38%)of male protagonistshave a central love relationship,but only 1/6 (17%)female protagonistsdoes. In the Americansample 7/11 (64%)of male protagonistsand 2/4 (50%)of female protagonistshave centrallove relationships. 13. Each sample had one prizewinnerin which the centrallove relationshipwas homosexual; female in the Americannovel 7he Color and male in the Canadiannovel Burming Purple, Water. 14. Unde Tom'sCabin, for example, has a partial tone of fulfillment/victorybecause of Tom's moral triumph,but the continued existence of the slavery system undercutsTom's personal victory.

APPENDIX A: Canonical Novels
United States Chopin, Kate Dreiser,Theodore Faulkner,William Fitzgerald,F. Scott Hawthome, Nathaniel Hemingway, Emest James,Henxy Melville, Herman Stowe, HarrietBeecher Twain, Mark Canada Atwood, Margaret Buckler,Ernest Davies, RobertsonK Duncan, SaraJ. Grove, FrederickPhilip Laurence,Margaret Laurence,Margaret MacLennan, Hugh Munro,Alice Ross, Sinclair LadyOrade TheMountain and the Valley FifthBusiness TheImperialist Fruitsof the Earth TheDiviners TheStoneAngel TwoSolitudes Livesof Girlsand Women As for MEandMy House TheAwakening SisterCarrie Lightin August TheGreatGatsby TheScarlet Letter TheSunAlso Rises Portrait of a Lady MobyDick Unde Tom'sCabin TheAdventures Finn of Huckleberry
15. Centralconflicts in all of the samples were coded as one of nine categories:Institutional (e.g., internationalwar), interpersonal, within self, individual vs. group, ideological,no central conflict, familial, or success struggle (e.g., battlinga miscellanyof evils en route to success). 16. Six of the titles in the best-selling sample were on the list for two years. These titles are counted twice in the 'exclusive' samples, for each of which N - 41. made the comparisonbetween cultural and other claims to 17. An article in ThePort-Folio nationhoodstill clearerby urging Americanmen of lettersto emulate the drive and persistence of the military so that America would become 'as renowned in literatureas she is in armes (quoted in Lease 1981:4). 18. The presence of French Canada further increases the difficulties of forging a national identity since the Qudb6coistend to have a strongsense of identity,but one that often has little to do with the nation at large. 19. It should be noted that the structureand status of intellectual/literaryelites in Canadaand the US. are clearly different.These differencesare largely due to the extent of govenmment involvementin the arts, the historicalmodels for intellectualinvolvementin public life, and the differencesin academic funding sources (see Lipset 1990;cf. Clark1987;Lamont& Wuthnow
1990).
the relativestrengthof the provinces, 20. The internalpolitical structureof Canada,particularly also affected the process of Canadian separation from Great Britain.For unlike in the US. where political centralizationhas steadily increased,"modernization has not led to centralization in the Canadianfederal system but ratherto the power, assertiveness,and competenceof the provinces' (Smiley 1984:59).

APPENDIX B: Literary Prize Winners, 1978-1987'
United States 1978 1979 1980 1980 1981 1981 1982* 1983* 1984 1985 1985 1986 1986 1987 1987 Canada 1978 1979 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1983 1984 1984 1985 1985 1986 1987
a
Settle, Mary Lee O'Brien,Tim Mailer,Norman Styron,William Morris,Wright Toole, JohnKennedy Updike, John Walker,Alice Kennedy,William DeLiflo,Don Lurie,Alison Doctorow, E.L. McMurty,Larry Heinemann,Larry Taylor,Peter
BloodTie GoingafterCacciato TheExecutioner's Song Sophie's Choice PlainsSong A Confederacy of Dunces Rabbit Is Rich TheColor Purple Ironweed WhiteNoise Foreign Affairs World's Fair Lonesome Dove Paco'sStory A Summons to Memphis
Rule, Jane Engel, Marian Hodgins, Jack Bowering,George MacLennan, Hugh Kogawa,Joy Kinsella,W.P. Rooke,Leon Robertson,Hleather Skvorecky,'osef Atwood, Margaret Findley, Timothy Davies, RobertsonK Kelly, M.T.
TheYoungin OneAnother's Arms TheGlassySea Bourne T7eResurrection of Joseph Water Burning Voicesin Time Obasan Shoeless Joe Shakespeare's Dog Willie: A Romance TheEngineer of HumanSouls T7eHandmaid's Tale Not Wanted on TheVoyage What'sBredin theBone A DreamLike Mine
In 1978, 1979, and 1984 one of the Americanprizewinnerswas a collection of short stories. In 1978, 1981, 1982, and 1986 the GGA was for a collectionof short stories. In 1980 and 1987 the CAA did not make an award. * Won both Pulitzer and National Book Award that year.

APPENDIX C: Best Sellers, 1978-1987a
Country AB78 CB78 AB78 CB78 AB78 CB78 AB78 CB78 AB78 CB78 AB78 AB78 AB78 AB78 CB78 CB78 CB78 CB78 AB78 CB78 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 CB79 AB79 AB79 AB79* CB79 CB79 CB79 AB80 CB80 AB80 CB80 AB80 CB80 AB80 CB80 AB80 CB80 AB80 AB80 AB80 AB80 CB80 CB80 CB80 CB80
Author Krantz,Judith Ludlum,Robert McCullough,Colleen Sheldon,Sidney Tolkien,J.R.R. Bach,Richard Follett,Ken French,Marilyn Plain, Belva Deighton, Len Greene,Graham Templeton,Charles Vidal, Gore Michener,James Hailey, Arthur Heller, Joseph Ludlum,Robert Stewart,Mary Trevanian Wouk, Herman Hackett,Gen. Sir Johnet al. Hill, Ruth Beebe Styron,William Benchley,Peter La Marsh,Judy Wallace,Irving Forsyth,Frederick Krantz,Judith le Carre,John Ludlum,Robert Plain, Belva Archer,Jeffrey de Borchgrave, Amaud and R. Moss Freeman,Cynthia Eric Van Lustbader, Atwood, Margaret French,Marilyn Higgins, Jack Richler,Mordecai
Novel Scruples TheHolcroft Covenant TheThorn Birds Bloodline TheSimarillion Illusions: TheAdventures of a Reluctant Messiah Eyeof theNeedle TheWomen's Room Evergreen SS-GB TheHumanFactor TheThirdTemptation Kalki Chesapeake Overload Goodas Gold TheMatarese Circle TheLastEnchantment Shibumi WarandRemembrance TheThirdWorld War HantaYo Choice Sophie's TheIsland A VeryPolitical Lady ThePigeonProject TheDevil'sAlternative Princess Daisy Smiley's People TheBourne Identity Random Winds KaneandAbel TheSpike Portraits TheNinja Man LifeBefore TheBleeding Heart Solo ThenandNow Joshua
AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller

APPENDIX C: Best Sellers, 1978-1987 (Continued) Countxy AB80 CB80CB81 AB81 CB81 AB81 CB81 AB81 CB81 AB81 CB81 AB81 AB81 AB81 AB81 AB81 CB81 CB81 CB81 CB81 AB81 CB81CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 CB82 AB82 AB82 AB82 AB82 CB82 CB82 CB82 AB83 CB83 AB83 CB83 AB83 CB83 AB83 CB83 AB83 CB83 AB83 AB83 AB83 AB83 CB83 CB83 CB83 CB83 AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller Author Sheldon,Sidney Herbert,Frank Michener,James Robbins,Harold Smith,MartinCruz Caldwell, Taylor Greeley,Andrew M. Sanders,Lawrence Thomas,DM. Wambaugh,Joseph Deighton, Len Follett,Ken Kin&Stephen Stevenson,William Clavell, James Archer,Jeffrey Donaldson,StephenR. Follett, Ken Irvin&John Ludlum,Robert McCullough,Colleen Greeley,Andrew M. Jakes,John Lord,Bette Bao Tyler,Anne Atwood, Margaret Davies, RobertsonK. Mitchell,W.O. Donaldson,Stephen R. King Stephen le Carre,John Michener,James Sheldon,Sidney Auel, JeanM. Collins, Jackie Ephron,Nora L'Amour,Louis Bradford,Barbara Taylor Clarke,ArthurC. Mailer,Norman Straub,Peter Novel Rageof Angels GodEmperor of Dune TheCovenant Goodbye, Janette Gorky Park Answeras A Man TheCardinal Sins The 7hird DeadlySin TheWhiteHotel TheGlitterDome XPD TheKeyto Rebecca Firestarter TheGhostsof Africa NobleHouse TheProdigal Daughter TheOne Tree TheMan FromSt. Petersburg 7he HotelNew Hampshire TheParsifal Mosaic An Indecent Obsession Wife ThyBrother's Northand South SpringMoon Dinnerat theHomesick Restaurant BodilyHarm TheRebel Angels HowI SpentMy Summer Holidays Wite GoldWielder Christine TheLittleDrummer Girl A Novel Space: Masterof the Game TheValleyof theHorses Wives Hollywood Heartbumn TheLonesome Gods Voices of theHeart 2010: OdysseyTwo AncientEvenings Floating Dragon

APPENDIX C: Best Sellers, 1978-1987 (Continued)
Country AB83 CB83CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 CB84 AB84 AB84 AB84 AB84 CB84 CB84 AB85 CB84 AB85 CB85 AB85 CB85 AB85 CB85 AB85 CB85 AB85 CB85 AB85 AB85 AB85 AB85* CB85 CB85 CB85 CB85 CB85 AB86 CB86 AB86 CB86 AB86 CB86 AB86 CB86 AB86 AB86 AB86 AB86 AB86 CB86 CB86* CB86* CB86 CB86 AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller
Author Eco, Umberto Herbert,Frank King Stephen Ludluin,Robert Michener,James Steel, Danielle Uris, Leon Blume,Judy Chastain,Thomas, and B. Adler Santmyer,Helen Hooven Vidal, Gore Archer,Jeffrey Stewart,Mary Puzo, Mario Irving John King, Stephen (as R. Bachman) Sheldon,Sidney Steel, Danielle Wouk, Herman Adams, Douglas
Novel TheNameof theRose of Dune Heretics Pet Sematary TheAquitaine Progression Poland Full Cirde TheHaj SmartWomen
Wio KilledtheRobins Family?
of the Club" " . . . And Ladies Lincoln FirstamongEquals 7he Wicked Day 7he Sicilian
7he Cider HouseRules Thinner Comes If Tomorrow Album Family Inside,Outside So Long,and Thanks for All the Fish Hold theDream Bradford,Barbara Taylor TheHuntfor RedOctober Clancy,Tom Lonesome Dove McMurty,Larry Lucky Collins,Jackie Strong Medicine Hailey, Arthur Chapterhouse: Dune Herbert,Frank King Stephen and Peter Straub TheTalisman JlbalSackett L'Amour,Louis Auel, JeanM Follett,Ken Krantz,Judith Ludlum,Robert Keillor,Garrison Koen, Karleen L'Amour,Louis Michener,James Steel, Danielle Archer,Jeffrey Atwood, Margaret Davies, RobertsonK le Carre,John Smith,WiLbur Hunters T7he Mammoth LieDownwith Lions Manhattan I'll Take TheBourne Supremacy Lake Wobegon Days a GlassDarkly T7hrough Lastof theBreed Texas Wanderlust A Matterof Honour TheHandmaid's Tale What's Bredin theBone A Perfect Spy 7he Powerof the Sword

APPENDIX C: Best Sellers, 1978-1987 (Continued)
Country AB86 AB87 CB86 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 CB87 AB87 AB87 CB87 CB87 CB87
Author Clancy,Tom Clancy,Tom King Stephen King, Stephen L'Amour,Louis Sidney Sheldonm Steel, Danielle Turow, Scott Conroy,Pat Edward Rutherford, Beauman,Sally Clavell, James Smith, Wilbur
Novel RedStormRising PatriotGames Misery TheEyesof theDragon Mesa 7heHaunted Windmills of the Gods FineThings Presumed Innocent ThePrinceof Tides Sarum Destiny Whirlwind Rage
* Prizewinneralso AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller
21. The population disparity is partly responsible. Canada's population is 27.243 million (StatisticsCanada1994:110)and the population of the US. is 248.71 million (U.S.Department of Commerce1993:8). 22. The recent free trade negotiationswere also attended by vast amounts of discussion, if in the end little action, about the symbolic importanceof the culture industrieson the Canadian side and the financial value of the culture industrieson the Americanside. 23. This similarityis not confinedto Canadianacceptanceand importationof Americancultural products.Many Canadianculturalproducts,e.g., SCTVor the rockstarBzyanAdams, are quite successful in the States. Kinsella'sCanadianaward winning novel Shoeless Joewas made into Even Margaret an extremelypopular Americanmovie, Fieldof Dreams. Atwood, long-timeicon of contemporaryCanadianhigh culture, is now reachingthe apex of the Americanbest-seller
lists.
References Communities. Revised ed. Verso. Anderson,Benedict.1991. Imagined Matthew Arnold.Edited by Lionel Trilling.Viking. Arnold, Matthew.1949. ThePortable A Thematic Guideto Canadian Literature. BeaconPress. Atwood, Margaret.1972. Survival: .1982. Second Words: Selected Critical Prose.BeaconPress. Criticism, Baym, Nina. 1985. 'Melodramas of Beset Manhood."Pp. 63-80 in TheNew Feminist edited by Elaine Showalter.Pantheon. Mabel.1994."Cultural Formand PoliticalMeaning: State-subsidized Theater, Ideology, Berezint Jounal of Sociology and the Languageof Style in FascistItaly.' American 99:1237-86 A SocialCritique of Taste.Translatedby Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: of the Judgement RichardNice. HarvardUniversity Press. 1985. "TheMarketof SymbolicGoods.' Translatedby RupertSwyer. Poetics14:1344. ___

Brown,Russell M. 1979. "A Searchfor America:Some CanadianLiteraryResponses.' Journal Culture of American 2:670-681. in France andNationhood Brubaker, Rogers.1992. Citizenship and Germany. HarvardUniversity Press. Calhoun.Craig.1991. 'IndirectRelationshipsand ImaginedCommunities." Pp. 95-121in Social edited by PierreBourdieuand JamesS. Coleman.Westview Theory for a Changing Society, Press. Cawelti, John 1976. Adventure, MysteryandRomance. Urnversityof Chicago Press. Clark, Kenneth.1970. "Art and Society." Pp. 635-50 in The Sociology of Literature, edited by Milton Albrecht,JamesBarnett,and Mason Griff.Praeger. France. Urnversityof ChicagoPress. Clark,Priscilla.1987. Literary Coser, Lewis, Charles Kadushin,and WalterPowell. 1982. Books: TheCulture and Commerce of Basic. Publishing. DiMaggio,Paul. 1982. 'Cultural Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-Centugy Boston.' Parts1 and 2. Media,Culture and Society 4:33-50,303-20. __. 1991. "SocialStructure,Institutions,and CulturalGoods."Pp. 135-55in SocialTheory for a Changing edited by PierreBourdieuand JamesS. Coleman.Westview Press. Society, Doran, CharlesF. and John H. Sigler (eds.). 1985. Canada and the UnitedStates.Prentice-Hall. Fiedler,Leslie. 1966. Loveand Deathin theAmerican Novel.Stein & Day. Fogel, Stanley.1984. A Taleof TwoCountries. ECWPress. Fraser, Graham. 1989. "Metcalf's Criticism and the Canadian Canon."American Reviewof Canadian Studies19:381-396. Geilner,Ernest.1983. NationsandNationalism. OxfordUniversity Press. The Goldmann,Lucien.1964. HiddenGod.Routledge & Kegan Paul. __. 1970. "The Sociology of Literature." Pp. 582-609 in 77teSociology of Literature, edited by Milton Albrecht,JamesBarnett,and Mason Griff.Praeger. Grannis, Chandler. 1993. "U.S. Book Import-Export Data for 1992." Publisher's Weekly22 Nov.:24-26. Green, Mary Jean. 1984. "Writing in a Motherland."Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 1986. "Tradition as Mother: __. Women'sFictionand the CanadianPast."DartmouthCollege, Hanover, New Hampshire. FiveRoadsto Modernity. Greenfeld,Liah.1992. Nationalism: HarvardUniversityPress. Griswold, Wendy. 1981. "AmericanCharacterand the AmericanNovel.' American Journal of 86:740-765. Sociology 1992. "The Writing on the Mud Wall: Nigerian Novels and the ImaginaryVillage." __. American Review57:709-24. Sociological Hobsbawm, Eric, and Terence Ranger (eds.). 1983. The Inventionof Tradition. Cambridge University Press. since1780. 2d ed. CambridgeUniversity Press Hobsbawm,Eric.1992. NationsandNationalism Methuen. Holub, RobertC. 1984. Reception Theory. Forum 775:11-14. Howes, David. 1988. "We, the OtherPeople." Canadian Writers? A Study of the Changing Hubbell, Jay B. 1972. WhoAre the MajorAmerican Literary Canon. Duke University Press. Wars:TheStruggleto DefineAmerica. Basic. Hunter,JamesDavison. 1991. Culture Forum 66:9-18. Hutcheson,John.1987. 'The Thief of Arts." Canadian

Lamont,Michele,and RobertWuthnow.1990. "Betwixtand Between."Pp. 287-315in Frontiers of Social7heory,edited by George Ritzer.ColumbiaUniversityPress. and Renown:The Survival of Artistic Lang, Gladys Engel and Kurt Lang. 1988. "Recognition 94:79-109. American Reputation." lournalof Sociology Women's Coursesin AmericanLiterature." Lauter,Paul. 1981. "A Small Surveyof Introductory 9:12. StudiesQuarterly Studies Canon."Feminist . 1983. 'Race and Genderin the Shapingof the AmericanLiterary 9:435463. Encounters. CambridgeUniversityPress. Lease, Benjamin.1981. Anglo-American Lipset,SeymourMartin.1963. TheFirstNew Nation.Basic Books. Divide.Routledge. .1990. Continental andMinorLiterature. Universityof CaliforniaPress. Lloyd, David. 1987. Nationalism 27:413-25. MacLennan, Hugh 1949. 'The Psychologyof CanadianNationalism.' Foreign Affairs Nationalism,and the Critic'sNew Clothes.' Criticism,Literary Maclulich,T.D.1987."Thematic 35:17-36. Writing Essayson Canadian Universityof TorontoPress. Syndrome. Gaile. 1985. TheWacousta McGregor, a Methuen. with Vengeance. Modleski,Tanya.1982. Loving a NationalTaste.UniversityPress of Hawaii. Neil, J. Meredith.1975. Toward Nevitte, Neil, and RogerGibbins.1990. New Elitesin Old States.OxfordUniversityPress. Pp. 377401 in Canons, 1984. 'The Shapingof a Canon,US. Fiction1960-75." Ohmann,Richard. edited by Robertvon Hallberg.Universityof ChicagoPress. Peterson, Richard, and David Berger. 1975. 'Cycles in Symbol Production." American Review40:158-73. Sociological Powell, WalterW. 1985. Gettinginto Print.Universityof ChicagoPress. Publisher's Weekly.1979. "Politics and Nationalism Influence Book Trade in Northernmost American."5 March,38-69. theRomance. Universityof North CarolinaPress. Radway,Janice.1984. Reading Literature. Dutton. of American Ruland,Richard,ed. 1972. 7he NativeMuse:7heories Forum 64:15. Smart,Patricia.1984. "OurTwo Cultures."Canadian and Federalism." Publius 14:39Smiley,Donald V. 1984. 'Public SectorPolitics,Modernization 59. 10:1-35. 1983. "Contingencies of Value."Critical Inquiry HerrnsteirL Smith,Barbara SyracuseUniversity Press. 1957. 7he Quest for Nationality. Spencer,Benjamin. 1991-1992Culture Statistics. StatisticsCanada. StatisticsCanada.1993. BookPublishing: Yearbook. StatisticsCanada. . 1994. TheCanada 2d ed. Universityof NebraskaPress. Authors. Stouck,David. 1988. MajorCanadian Designs.OxfordUniversityPress. Tompkins,Jane.1985. Sensational AnchorBooks. Trilling,Lionel. 1950. TheLiberal Imagination. Abstract of the UnitedStates.US. Bureau of US. Department of Commerce.1993. Statistical Census. Watt, Ian. 1959. TheRiseof theNovel.University of CaliforniaPress. Wolfenstein,Martha,and Nathan Leites. 1950. Movies.FreePress. University of CaliforniaPress. Wright,Will. 1975. Sixgunsand Society. Viking Press. Democracy. Ziff, Larzer.1981. Literary

Nations Novels

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nations Novels

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nations and Novels: Cultural Politics and Literary Use Author(s): Sarah M. Corse Source: Social Forces, Vol.

Nations and Novels: Cultural Politics and LiterazyUse*

? The University of North CarolinaPress

Social Forces, June 1995, 73(4):1279-1308

1280 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

1284 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

Nations and Novels / 1285

1286 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

1290 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

1292 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

Nations and Novels / 1293

1294 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

Nations and Novels / 1295

1298 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

1300 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

Nations and Novels / 1301

1302 / Social Forces 73:4, June 1995

Nations and Novels / 1303

AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller

1304 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

Nations and Novels / 1305

1306 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

* Prizewinneralso AB - Americanbest seller CB - Canadianbest seller

Nations and Novels / 1307

1308 / Social Forces 73:4,June1995

You might also like