Maybe in the American context, but not in Europe. We have teh same “purity phantasm” among Anglo-Saxon scholars, but it is in the line of an old tradition best represented by Tolkien in modern times. Beowulf is a feudal poem about a feudal world and it is understood as being a real male world dedicated to brutal force with a little bit of poetry after an expedition and a victory. Shakespeare has best captured that spirit in his Hamlet. The idea is that Beowulf is a story about REAL TRUE MEN, so women are out, of course black men are out, but also Moors, Arabs, Jews, etc. And yet the language itself is a lot more complicated, especially about gender, feminine and masculine, plus neutral somewhere in the Germanic tradition. Widen the approach bothj in the segregative dimension of Anglo-Saxon academics and in the historical periods: we find a lot along teh same line in Shakespeare, though on a few elements Shakespeare may be open. The Jew in Titus Andronicus has little to do with the the other most famous Jew, Shylock. And what about Scrooge? Isn’t it a caricature of the Jewish banker in the perfect tradition of Shylock, and with little salt on top, even if at teh end he is converted to Christian Christmas, to the Nativity, to Jesus and love. Do not reduce everything to race. It would be a mistake in a global vision, even if it is true in the USA. I was the first English LIterature professor at University California Davis (UCD) to introduce a black novel on the syllabus in 1973. Black students protested to teh Chancellor who argued taht since the novel was written, in English it was English literature. The book was Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man.