Power Quote
Power Quote: Harold Bloom Names Names Edition (with special “I don’t know how to control myself” bonus feature)
If you think of the major American writers, you are likely to remember Melville, Hawthorne, Twain, James, Cather, Dreiser, Faulkner, Hemingway, and Fitzgerald among the novelists. Nathaneal West, Ralph Ellison, Thomas Pynchon, Flannery O’Connor, and Philip Roth would be among those I would add. The poets who matter most begin with Whitman and Dickinson and include Frost, Stevens, Moore, Eliot, Crane, and perhaps Pound and William Carlos Williams. Of more recent figures I would list Robert Penn Warren, Theorodre Roethke, Elizabeth Bishop, James Merrill, John Ashbery, A.R. Ammons, May Swenson. The dramatists are less illustrious: Eugene O’Neill now makes for unsatisfactory reading, and perhaps only Tennessee Williams will gain by the passage of time. Our major essayists remain Emerson and Thoreau; no one has matched them since. Poe is too universally accepted around the world to be excluded, though his writing is almost invariably atrocious.
–“Walt Whiman as Center of the American Canon,” The Western Canon
**********I DON’T KNOW HOW TO CONTROL MYSELF************
For those who have been dutiflly following my reading of The Western Canon (I assume this is everyone) be warned that it’s going on a short (maybe) hiatus, because a couple chapters after the Whitman chapter is one on Dickens’s Bleak House and George Eliot’s Middlemarch, neither of which I’ve read. Of course, a lot of the books Bloom is writing about are books I’ve never read, but I’m not really worried about having The Canterbury Tales spoiled for me in the same way as I am with a plot-driven work like a Dickens novel. So, because I lack any sense of perspective and/or the ability to control myself, I’m putting Bloom back on the shelf while I read all 900+ pages of Bleak House before I read Bloom’s chapter about it. Why not just skip that chapter? Because that’s not how I roll. Will I also read Middlemarch? No telling, but probably not. I feel like Dickens is one of those writers you read primarily for plot–the first time through, anyway. His books are highly re-readable, even after you know what happens, but that first time through is really an adventure, and I don’t want to deprive myself of that. So, to all you Bloom-heads out there, hang tight. Maybe pick a copy of Bleak House for yourself? Either that, or pray for me to find an adderall connection.
Tags: Bleak House, Harold Bloom, The Western Canon
i admire your will. ‘bleak house’ has been one i have always wanted to try to try, but haven’t gathered the boomba. keep us updated, please
i admire your will. ‘bleak house’ has been one i have always wanted to try to try, but haven’t gathered the boomba. keep us updated, please
I picked up and put down Bleak House this past fall. And I loved David Copperfield, but….I just couldn’t get into it. Good luck.
Also, in that quote, O’Connor as a novelist? Her novels are her weakest work in my mind. Just a thought. Also, Cather? Hm.
I picked up and put down Bleak House this past fall. And I loved David Copperfield, but….I just couldn’t get into it. Good luck.
Also, in that quote, O’Connor as a novelist? Her novels are her weakest work in my mind. Just a thought. Also, Cather? Hm.
Bloom may mean “novelist” in the more general sense of “fiction writer,” because he doesn’t seem to distinguish “short story writer” as an independent category–in this quote or anywhere else I’ve read his work, for that matter. So that may account for why several writers who did some (or all) of their best work in the short story form are included in his list of novelists (O’Connor, Hemingway, and Hawthorne, at the very least). That said, I will happily go to the mat for O’Connor’s novels. I think Wise Blood and The Violent Bear It Away are just amazing. I don’t want to get started on whether they’re “better” than her best short stories, but I’ll say this- if there were no short stories, and all we had of hers was those two books, I don’t think her status would be much different than it is.
Bloom may mean “novelist” in the more general sense of “fiction writer,” because he doesn’t seem to distinguish “short story writer” as an independent category–in this quote or anywhere else I’ve read his work, for that matter. So that may account for why several writers who did some (or all) of their best work in the short story form are included in his list of novelists (O’Connor, Hemingway, and Hawthorne, at the very least). That said, I will happily go to the mat for O’Connor’s novels. I think Wise Blood and The Violent Bear It Away are just amazing. I don’t want to get started on whether they’re “better” than her best short stories, but I’ll say this- if there were no short stories, and all we had of hers was those two books, I don’t think her status would be much different than it is.
wise blood is indeed probably my favorite of her things
wise blood is indeed probably my favorite of her things
has anybody seen the wise blood film with john huston? criterion is about to release it.
has anybody seen the wise blood film with john huston? criterion is about to release it.
I hear you. Good point. So what’s your thougths on Cather?
I hear you. Good point. So what’s your thougths on Cather?
JT: Yer in for a treat. Bleak House is very good, very worth the effort. Middlemarch = not so much. It’s, sure, incredible in terms of its scope, but yer right that it doesn’t have the page-turning plot pleasures that Dickens does.
PR et al: Cather’s best outside of the Plains. The Professor’s House is better than most books out there.
Random opiner out!
JT: Yer in for a treat. Bleak House is very good, very worth the effort. Middlemarch = not so much. It’s, sure, incredible in terms of its scope, but yer right that it doesn’t have the page-turning plot pleasures that Dickens does.
PR et al: Cather’s best outside of the Plains. The Professor’s House is better than most books out there.
Random opiner out!
There are many imitations, but only one Bleak House. I did a similar three-way reading recently, and out of the three (Bloom, Eliot, Dickens) Dickens was by far the best, and that chapter of Bloom was probably the worst. But I won’t spoil it for you.
There are many imitations, but only one Bleak House. I did a similar three-way reading recently, and out of the three (Bloom, Eliot, Dickens) Dickens was by far the best, and that chapter of Bloom was probably the worst. But I won’t spoil it for you.
I liked Middlemarch, and not just because I’m a girl. That book was twisted in a sociopathically intriguing sort of way.
I liked Middlemarch, and not just because I’m a girl. That book was twisted in a sociopathically intriguing sort of way.
thanks dave for the cather idea. I haven’t read her in ages and I don’t remember her making much of an impression (I can’t remember the titles even) but I am always up for checking stuff out again, or uh- for the first time.
I loved David Copperfield. LOVED it. I got bogged down by the lawyer stuff in Bleak House. But, I very well may pick it up again.
thanks dave for the cather idea. I haven’t read her in ages and I don’t remember her making much of an impression (I can’t remember the titles even) but I am always up for checking stuff out again, or uh- for the first time.
I loved David Copperfield. LOVED it. I got bogged down by the lawyer stuff in Bleak House. But, I very well may pick it up again.
“the poets who matter most…”
bloom is such a bag of hot air.
“the poets who matter most…”
bloom is such a bag of hot air.
Is there an Asian equivalent of Harold Bloom?
I really can’t think of any.
Is there an Asian equivalent of Harold Bloom?
I really can’t think of any.
bonus points
bonus points
Thanks to everyone for the Bleak House support. I’m going to break ground tonight or tomorrow.
pr- i have nothing to say on Cather. never read her. i vaguely remember a friend being bored by O Pioneers! or whatever when we were in college, but that doesn’t mean much. I think he had to read Piers Ploughman that same semester and for a long time I thought they were both middle english or something.
Thanks to everyone for the Bleak House support. I’m going to break ground tonight or tomorrow.
pr- i have nothing to say on Cather. never read her. i vaguely remember a friend being bored by O Pioneers! or whatever when we were in college, but that doesn’t mean much. I think he had to read Piers Ploughman that same semester and for a long time I thought they were both middle english or something.
oh snap! eat it poe!
and tough luck sexton, berryman and lowell, you’re not invited to the sleepover party.
I respect the hell out of bloom for what he’s done for contemporary criticism, but when he gets all like, so-and-so is important and this reader is among the top blah blah blah, and start to roll my eyes at it all. like who gives a shit, really. read what you want to read.
i bet when bloom wakes up for his daily morning glory afterwards he stares down at what he’s just excreated and says something like, Now this is an important shit indeed. much better than yesterday’s which was only a minor shit by any shitting standard. the quality and texture place this shit in the upper echelon of our current shitting epoch and will remain a relevant shit into the next century of shitting to come, and perhaps remains so beyond that, depending, of course, on its projected influence, which, as we all know, is prone to variance, and then he flushes and goes and eats a cheeseburger or something.
oh snap! eat it poe!
and tough luck sexton, berryman and lowell, you’re not invited to the sleepover party.
I respect the hell out of bloom for what he’s done for contemporary criticism, but when he gets all like, so-and-so is important and this reader is among the top blah blah blah, and start to roll my eyes at it all. like who gives a shit, really. read what you want to read.
i bet when bloom wakes up for his daily morning glory afterwards he stares down at what he’s just excreated and says something like, Now this is an important shit indeed. much better than yesterday’s which was only a minor shit by any shitting standard. the quality and texture place this shit in the upper echelon of our current shitting epoch and will remain a relevant shit into the next century of shitting to come, and perhaps remains so beyond that, depending, of course, on its projected influence, which, as we all know, is prone to variance, and then he flushes and goes and eats a cheeseburger or something.
Jonny, Bloom’s book is called “The Western Canon.” If you don’t accept the idea that attempting to designate the core and transcendentally valuable works of our culture (in this case: Western culture) is a worthwhile enterprise, then you’re not going to have a very good time with this book or anything he says in it.
On the other hand, if you’re willing to grant him that such an operation has some sort of use–as an intellectual pursuit, if nothing else–then really how can you fault him for the fact that he picks and chooses. There’s a lot of less than useful postmodernism-bashing that happens throughout this book, but one moment that stands out is when he pits his own notion of The Canon against Foucault’s notion of The Archive.
It’s not that choices “should” be made so much as that they WILL, whether we like that idea or not. That in mind, Bloom applies his not inconsiderable understanding of the subject of literature to the task of trying to figure out why the things that have survived have survived, and in so doing to create a kind of continuum of literature that goes, basically, from the Old Testament to Kafka and Beckett.
Well, why not? Personally, I think the fact that Bloom is willing to name names and champion the things he thinks are the most important, is possibly the most refreshing thing about him. Everyone these days loves to fall back on this relativist bullshit, ie your own ‘read what you want to read.’ Well, how do we begin to know what we want to read? How do we begin to articulate why that’s what we want/ed?
I don’t agree with–or even understand–every judgment Bloom makes, and I imagine most people wouldn’t. But in the end the stances he takes are less important than the fact that he has the guts to actually take stands, which necessarily means he risks being wrong. He’s way too smart not to know that–in fact he says so any number of places–but how else to begin the project? You can’t have a battle without a first shot fired.
Jonny, Bloom’s book is called “The Western Canon.” If you don’t accept the idea that attempting to designate the core and transcendentally valuable works of our culture (in this case: Western culture) is a worthwhile enterprise, then you’re not going to have a very good time with this book or anything he says in it.
On the other hand, if you’re willing to grant him that such an operation has some sort of use–as an intellectual pursuit, if nothing else–then really how can you fault him for the fact that he picks and chooses. There’s a lot of less than useful postmodernism-bashing that happens throughout this book, but one moment that stands out is when he pits his own notion of The Canon against Foucault’s notion of The Archive.
It’s not that choices “should” be made so much as that they WILL, whether we like that idea or not. That in mind, Bloom applies his not inconsiderable understanding of the subject of literature to the task of trying to figure out why the things that have survived have survived, and in so doing to create a kind of continuum of literature that goes, basically, from the Old Testament to Kafka and Beckett.
Well, why not? Personally, I think the fact that Bloom is willing to name names and champion the things he thinks are the most important, is possibly the most refreshing thing about him. Everyone these days loves to fall back on this relativist bullshit, ie your own ‘read what you want to read.’ Well, how do we begin to know what we want to read? How do we begin to articulate why that’s what we want/ed?
I don’t agree with–or even understand–every judgment Bloom makes, and I imagine most people wouldn’t. But in the end the stances he takes are less important than the fact that he has the guts to actually take stands, which necessarily means he risks being wrong. He’s way too smart not to know that–in fact he says so any number of places–but how else to begin the project? You can’t have a battle without a first shot fired.
haaaaaaaaaa
haaaaaaaaaa
well…. basically because all the people he champions are white.
unless i’m mistaken.
and uhh, things can’t be that white and white
(ba ba dum)
well…. basically because all the people he champions are white.
unless i’m mistaken.
and uhh, things can’t be that white and white
(ba ba dum)
Michael, no argument about that. The only African-American writer who makes this particular list is Ralph Ellison. But keep in mind that opening sentence- “if you think of the major American writers, you are likely to remember.” So that’s what he thinks some generic “you” are likely to think of as the major American writers from the country’s beginnings until the present.
At the back of the book are several dozen pages of lists, where Bloom attempts a more comprehensive catalogue of Great Works throughout the ages, organized by nationality–and these lists span the whole literary globe, not just the US or the West. The last of those lists, “The Chaotic Age: A Canonical Prophecy,” speculates about which contemporary works stand the best shot at achieving canonicity. They won’t all make it, but these are the contenders. There are too many for me to list them all, but some of the African-American writers and works included on his list are: Cane by Jean Toomer, Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston, Native Son *and* Black Boy by Richard Wright, three books by Langston Hughes, two plays by August Wilson, and a number of others. The only thing that really surprised me is that the James Baldwin book he picked was The Price of the Ticket, which admittedly I have not read, but Giovanni’s Room, Go Tell It On The Mountain, The Fire Next Time, and Nobody Knows My Name are among the most powerful books I’ve maybe ever read, and so it seems like at the least they should have been added.
Also, to Jonny again- this same list also includes Lowell and Berryman, though not Sexton. (Probably because, let’s be honest now- she kind of sucks.) In fact, in the preface to the list, Bloom mentions that he included Lowell despite seriously disliking his work, because so many other people he respects admire it so much, he can only assume his own judgment is off in this particular case, for whatever reason.
Michael, no argument about that. The only African-American writer who makes this particular list is Ralph Ellison. But keep in mind that opening sentence- “if you think of the major American writers, you are likely to remember.” So that’s what he thinks some generic “you” are likely to think of as the major American writers from the country’s beginnings until the present.
At the back of the book are several dozen pages of lists, where Bloom attempts a more comprehensive catalogue of Great Works throughout the ages, organized by nationality–and these lists span the whole literary globe, not just the US or the West. The last of those lists, “The Chaotic Age: A Canonical Prophecy,” speculates about which contemporary works stand the best shot at achieving canonicity. They won’t all make it, but these are the contenders. There are too many for me to list them all, but some of the African-American writers and works included on his list are: Cane by Jean Toomer, Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston, Native Son *and* Black Boy by Richard Wright, three books by Langston Hughes, two plays by August Wilson, and a number of others. The only thing that really surprised me is that the James Baldwin book he picked was The Price of the Ticket, which admittedly I have not read, but Giovanni’s Room, Go Tell It On The Mountain, The Fire Next Time, and Nobody Knows My Name are among the most powerful books I’ve maybe ever read, and so it seems like at the least they should have been added.
Also, to Jonny again- this same list also includes Lowell and Berryman, though not Sexton. (Probably because, let’s be honest now- she kind of sucks.) In fact, in the preface to the list, Bloom mentions that he included Lowell despite seriously disliking his work, because so many other people he respects admire it so much, he can only assume his own judgment is off in this particular case, for whatever reason.
I wonder if you mention African-American because you maybe clicked on the link to my website and say my picture, then assuming I was aiming towards African-Americans…..
I usually say I mean and if I don’t say something, then I usually didn’t mean it.
I’m not taking offense. Trust.
But I truly meant he’s discussing a lot of white writers. Excluding all others who aren’t.
The conclusion from his assertions become: because the majority of people in America (from inception to current age) are white, that the other ethnicities somehow lack the skill to accomplish great work. You could assume that due to being oppressed, these people had a later start. And then you realize on the double, that these peoples great work was likely suppressed because of the innate prejudices involved.
So, as someone stated above, you know, Bloom ain’t stupid. He should know that this is true, and instead of championing work that you are “most likely to remember”, he should clearly assess America’s creative work and separate from what is true, to what was hyped.
And then compile a true account of what is “great”.
But… yeah. That’s asking too much from a scholar.
A poet I know wrote a chapbook called “Harold Bloom is an asshole”.
Dunno if I agree.
I love you Justin.
I wonder if you mention African-American because you maybe clicked on the link to my website and say my picture, then assuming I was aiming towards African-Americans…..
I usually say I mean and if I don’t say something, then I usually didn’t mean it.
I’m not taking offense. Trust.
But I truly meant he’s discussing a lot of white writers. Excluding all others who aren’t.
The conclusion from his assertions become: because the majority of people in America (from inception to current age) are white, that the other ethnicities somehow lack the skill to accomplish great work. You could assume that due to being oppressed, these people had a later start. And then you realize on the double, that these peoples great work was likely suppressed because of the innate prejudices involved.
So, as someone stated above, you know, Bloom ain’t stupid. He should know that this is true, and instead of championing work that you are “most likely to remember”, he should clearly assess America’s creative work and separate from what is true, to what was hyped.
And then compile a true account of what is “great”.
But… yeah. That’s asking too much from a scholar.
A poet I know wrote a chapbook called “Harold Bloom is an asshole”.
Dunno if I agree.
I love you Justin.
[…] anyone remember that about a month ago I announced that I was putting my reading of Bloom’s The Western Canon on hold so I could read Dickens’s Bleak House before reading the chapter on […]