Canons,classics,and inclusion in the histories of geography

Abstract

In responding to reflections by Keighren et al. (2012) on the place of ‘classics’ within geographical literature and on the possibilities of identifying canonical works, I focus on the criteria for selection and how such works might be identified. As an example, I analyze the history of inclusion in the ‘Classics revisited’ series in the journal Progress in Human Geography, and pose questions to prompt reflection on the role of language of publication, national origins of authors, and interest in particular paradigms and subfields within the discipline as influences on selection. Additionally, I ask how the temporal and spatial contexts of readers and their motivations shape interpretations of works, what this implies in responses to ‘classics’, and for the possibilities of identifying a ‘canon’.