[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 138 KB, 1000x646, harold-bloom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22450166 No.22450166 [Reply] [Original]

Was he right?

>> No.22450169

>>22450166
He's right about Mormonism and Joseph Smith

>> No.22450193

>>22450166
It’s funny how Bloom gets a lot of hate here but his views match up directly with a lot of anons. He was very vocal in support of a western canon and the issues of feminism and multiculturalism

>> No.22450923

>>22450193
The anons support those things for all the wrong reasons though. Bloom supports them in a good true healthy Nietzschean way. The anons misunderstand Bloom and Nietzsche. They support those things in a toxic festering putrid ressentiment sort of way. So they're the same as what they imagine themselves to oppose. Those anons can go to hell. But Bloom was right all the same.

>> No.22451002

>>22450923
Yeah it’s always amusing to me how Nietzsche has been adopted by the far right here. I’ve always seen him as the triumph of the individual, and more specifically, the artist within us all. There are a million interpretations of the man’s work but he certainly wasn’t a collectivist. My interpretation in a broad stroke is that Nietzsche’s mission was comparable to many other writers, like Faust, the Rainbow in Lawrence, ISOLT, and dozens of others; basically the discontent with reality, the internal vs the external, the gap in between them being a springboard for the artist to release the creative energy. Now Nietzsche wrote a lot, wrote in aphorisms that lose meaning when isolated, and his writing will never fit in a nice neat box, but I believe the crux is that of the idealistic internal and the discontent with the external, and what to do with that discontent. I’ve only read some of Bloom’s Western Canon but I agree with you in that he isn’t against multiculturalism and feminism because of resentment. There is a fine line between the chud’s stance on those things and one coming from an individualist’s stance, but it is clearly there. One is on the side of the collective and fueled by resentment, the other is avoiding those things. Bloom seems like he is coming from the side of the noble soul, a la Nietzsche

>> No.22451038
File: 400 KB, 452x686, Kek.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22451038

>>22450166
I have a feeling this character was based on Bloom

>> No.22451077

>>22451038
Nah. Harold Bloom (for literature) and also Roger Ebert (for film) are actually softie critics who are super nice and eager to like underrated stuff. I think they just developed this unrealistic association with being asshole critics for some weird reason.

>> No.22451084

>>22451038
Ezra Pound

>> No.22451086
File: 357 KB, 670x474, The American Religion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22451086

>>22451002
Yup. They have that artist individualist soul. I saw it represented very well in Bloom's book The American Religion. Bloom identified as a "Gnostic" by which he meant he yearned for this romantic/artistic intensely felt aesthetic-religious-emotional solitude where we are only together with our own sort-of God, he traces it to Emerson and Whitman and William James, but it should be familiar to anyone who knows Kierkegaard as well. Even reading Nietzsche's Zarathustra is really similar.