INTERVIEW: KEITH MITCHELL

Abstract

Q: Literary history, be it national, local, or regional, is perhaps the most conservative form of literary study, with many claiming that the method is outmoded. What can literary histories do to overcome both the risk of obsolescence and their inherent conservatism? A: One of the primary advances that literary history as an ideal and a practice can do is to become far more diverse than perhaps what it currently is. What I mean by this is that at the national, local, and regional level, literary history needs to be more inclusive in highlighting underrepresented writers and intellectuals. If we’re looking at periodization, within the field that I teach—American literature—I always include many diverse, underrepresented voices. I do so not only because of the importance of representation. I do so to emphasize that these underrepresented voices are always in dialogue with those writers who comprise the American literary canon.