What happened to Literature?

It might be reasonable to acknowledge that what has happened to literature in the past two decades is very similar to what Thomas Kuhn says happens in the development of science.

 In the years up to 1930 a paradigm became established for literary studies. It had various methods and assumptions (these certainly included an empiricist epistemology) and it confidently discriminated between the literary canon and the productions of popular culture (or ‘mass civilisation’, as Leavis called it).

But from around 1965 this paradigm began to come to pieces, partly because no one could demonstrate that the works of the canon were good and those outside it were bad.

Then, wouldn't you know, a new paradigm, 

•  Deconstruction as a professional or ideological routine, and especially as a talismanic or valorising term, in American intellectual life, and of its penetration into the Universities by galloping logorrhoea.  For the next decade the very term deconstuction was met by students with deprecatory simpers or oracular condescension.

Then another paradigm wouldn't you know. what we might call the new Rome where we are all tributaries to the new Emperors in Silicon Valley  as we all bow our heads to their instruments and bump into each other on streets as we with head lowered pay homage, enter the age of 'smart' technology. 

Thre are vast profits from computerisation (witness all those 12 year old billionaires)