The attacks have come from Bible scholars, rabbis, and journalists, as well as from the usual academic sources, and Bloom has never been more isolated in his views or more secure in them. He likes to quote the Emersonian adage: If the conversation is not too heavy, Bloom likes to have music on, sometimes Baroque, sometimes jazz. His New York apartment, which is in Greenwich Village, allows him to take in more live jazz.
Posted on January 6, by Jerome Rowley 1. In these lectures on the value and the interpretation of literature Prof. Arnold Weinstein of Brown University was sympathetic to some of the schools of interpretation such as psychoanalysis following Freud, Marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and New Historicism, among others.
He shows giving examples of how each of these schools produces new insights that were not available before from more traditional forms of literary interpretation. Counterpoint—Unsympathetic viewpoint towards modern literary theory I wanted to do a post on the opposing viewpoint, that is, someone who is very much unsympathetic with the modern schools of literary interpretation.
Weinstein used in his lecture. Weinstein was dubious about the first three, and posited the last two as better alternatives for the value of literature.
Bloom come down on these points?
Regarding the first, Prof. Bloom would agree that it shows that you are one of the elite, but rather than seeing this is as a negative, as Prof. Weinstein implied, he unabashedly proclaims this is as a positive. Yes, literature is an aesthetic experience, both in the writing and in the reading of it.
Reading a great piece of literature is more daunting and requires more from a reader than reading the average bestseller, and for this reason it is going to be elitist almost by definition.
But along with Joseph Campbell, Prof. Bloom felt that this aesthetic elitism was a positive thing. However, the fact that great literature is written by the aesthetic elite gets conflated in the modern university system as being written by a product of the socioeconomic elite, and is, under Marxist interpretations of literature, just another tool of that socioeconomic repression of one class by another.
This is where Prof. Bloom draws the line, and refuses to go along with this politicization of literature. As far as helping one how to think, Prof. Bloom would partially agree with that. On the third point, he is dubious along with Prof.
The fourth point is where Prof. Weinstein part company the most, I believe. Reading literature may help you understand the culture in which it was created, but having that as a major value of literature is something I think Prof.
Bloom would disagree with. This view is something he is vehemently against, the idea that Paradise Lost, for example, can be reduced to an interplay of economic forces.
To use the paired poems by William Blake on the chimney sweep that were quoted in the last post as an example, the economic relations of the various classes may be illustrated by the poems, but the originality and literary genius is took to create those poems are not illuminated at all by a knowledge of those relations.
I think the fifth point, that literature can take you inside a time and place and create an inner world that compels the reader, is probably the point where Prof. Bloom could most readily agree. Bloom disagrees with the modern theories of literary interpretation can be shown in this diagram from Integral Theory: Each quadrant holds a way of viewing the world.
The top two quadrants are the viewpoints of an individual, the bottom two quadrants are the viewpoints of a group. The left two quadrants are the subjective viewpoints, and the right two quadrants are the objective viewpoints.
So putting it all together: The lower-left quadrant contains the values of the group and is the domain of culture or ethics. The lower-right quadrant contains the structures of a group and is the domain of society or politics. To sum up Prof. However, modern literary theory interprets literature through the lens of the culture and the society, almost to the exclusion of the individual aesthetic.Literary criticism: Bloom’s Literature includes critical essays from Facts On File’s extensive collection, Harold Bloom’s acclaimed essays, and criticism from the Bloom’s imprint.
Topics and themes: Bloom’s Literature features in-depth, full-text entries on literary movements, groups, . Literary critic Harold Bloom's The Western Canon is more than a required reading list -- it is a vision. Infused with a love of learning, compelling in its arguments for a unifying written culture, it argues brilliantly against the politicization of literature and presents a guide to the great works of the western literary tradition and /5(9).
The Anatomy of Influence: Literature as a Way of Life By Harold Bloom (Yale University Press, pp., $) With The Anatomy of Influence, Harold Bloom has promised us his “swan song” as a. The Divine Harold Bloom (as he uses the term for Oscar Wilde) here defends the Western Canon, and while so doing became the recipient of much undeserved criticism, from the likes of so-called New Historicists, gender theorists, Marxist interpreters, and devotees of the School of plombier-nemours.com: Harold Bloom.
They are all classic works from the traditional canon of Western literature - unsurprisingly, since Bloom is the great champion of the Western literary canon.
Any suggestion that literature might be legitimately 'reduced' to a set of social, or political, or historical texts is fiercely opposed. New Criticism. A literary movement that started in the late s and s and originated in reaction to traditional criticism that new critics saw as largely concerned with matters extraneous to the text, e.g., with the biography or psychology of the author or the work's relationship to literary history.