| dc.description.abstract | Penguin Classics has, since its inception in 1946, been steadily increasing their brand and recognition by means of publishing good literature which was also affordable. In contemporary times, however, and especially since the release of Penguin’s Modern Classics series, Penguin’s image as an authority on classics and the literary canon has suffered, in large thanks to some questionable business decisions that decreased what it once meant to be labelled a Penguin Classic. This study aims to determine how the modern iteration of Penguin Classics differs from the Penguin Classics in 1946, for which it asks the question: How does Penguin Classics balance their bibliography between literary success and economic capital?
Building upon the existing theoretical framework of Bourdieu’s theory on capital, this thesis analyses two of the main theories on the issue of the classic, and subsequently the interpretation of Penguin’s editors of what constitutes as a classic. Research demonstrates that since Penguin moved from a single editor-in-chief to having multiple editors spread across the globe, Penguin’s interpretation of what it means to be a classic has become rather fluid, with editors varyingly defining a classic from an academic point of view academically, but also from an economic perspective. However, Penguin’s editors have been influential in expanding the Western literary canon to also include works from outside the sphere of Western Europe, as well as the inclusion of minority authors.
Morrisey’s Autobiography, Hornsby’s Fever Pitch and the copyright issue of Okada’s No-No Boy are contemporary examples in which Penguin Classics appeared to be motivated by the prospect of short-term commercial success. Where Penguin once relied on, and prided themselves in, their high amount of symbolic capital, nowadays their business approach favours the gain of fast economic capital. Because the publishing market has increasingly been under pressure over the past two decades, Penguin’s change in business strategy can be explained. Still, if Penguin Classics continues to favour short-term commercial success at the cost of their long-term symbolic capital, they will continue to diminish their credibility and what it means to be a Penguin Classic. | |
