The Hierarchy of the Author

The Hierarchy of the Author (or “writer”)

In the essay “Modern Authors” Rebecca Moore Howard discusses the binary educated society. One class that is highly intellectual and create works of originality. Another class makes up the “low literature”. She refers to these people as the one’s that write in magazines, newspapers, and other sources. They are called the “Great Unwashed”. The mass education that occurred resulted in, according to Howard, just people plagiarizing other works. As I write I am plagiarizing in some form because I my language and choice of words seems to be related to the text. Am I just apart of the “Great Unwashed” and who are these intellectual people from what Howard refers to are apart of the literary canon? I contest that many “cheap novels” from the “Great Unwashed” are very beneficial to all of society, that in turn will have benefit and little cost. On the other hand, if the “Great Unwashed” were never educated, where would equality begin? Many people today seem to preach equality of all sorts. Why not literature? This perspective seems to be one of the literary canon (authors who are original), complaining that their sales of originality are greatly outpaced by magazines, cheap novels, and newspapers. Yes some of this literature (i.e. Star magazine) can be relatively pointless to mankind. However, one example I give is Robert Kiyosaki’s book Rich Dad Poor Dad which illustrates the mind process and ability to become rich. Maybe another term is financially free from the 8-5 job. After reading this book, I have greatly increased my assets and am retiring my mom because of this book. To criticize the “Greatly Unwashed” for plagiarizing and not being original is I believe wrong. Robert got his ideas from someone else, who got the ideas from the book from someone else and eventually the originator. If this sequence of knowledge wasn’t passed down and plagiarized in his book, millions of people would not have been helped by his book (or maybe just thousands, I don’t know). I would argue that “the Great Unwashed” can and sometimes do contribute to society in much better ways than do the literary works of the highly intellectual. However, maybe I missed the point and did not see these “cheap novels” Howard talks about is not really the books that I am referring to. Or maybe I am missing the point of plagiarism. I don’t know. Can anyone attest to this argument about “the Greatly Unwashed” and maybe perhaps this is an outcry and criticism towards us? And who is “the Greatly Unwashed”? Is it us? Then who is the highly intellectuals that are original in their works? Am I an idiot and don’t see the point of her essay and totally went in the wrong direction?