From debate to dialogue: teaching contested canons through dialogic literary argumentation

This theorised Point of Departure argues that the literary canon can be taught through dialogic literary argumentation (DLA), understood as a situated, co-authored practice of revising interpretive claims. It contributes to conceptual debates on authority, power, and assessment in higher education. I outline three adaptable pedagogical moves that pluralise voice and standpoint, treat ambiguity as a driver of inquiry, and co-author evaluative criteria through dialogue. These moves are illustrated through a Tolkien example read as a culturally located canonical case. The proposal is intentionally invitational and interdisciplinary. When claims are made public, tested against text and peers, and revised in response to uptake, assessment becomes integral to learning. I conclude by asking what must change in seminars, rubrics, and facilitation to make interpretive uptake more equitable when authority is shared. In this account, judgment emerges through the quality of grounds offered and through visible patterns of revision over time.