Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1995 :: September ::
Re: Bloom
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0673. Thursday, 7 September 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Joseph M Green <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 6 Sep 1995 14:05:30 -0500 (CDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom;
 
(2)     From:   Chris Ivic <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 6 Sep 1995 22:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0671 Re: Bloom
 
(3)     From:   W. L. Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 06 Sep 1995 22:28:38 -0500 (EST)
        Subj: Re:       SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom
 
(4)     From:   Michael Yogev <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 07 Sep 95 16:12:53 IST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Joseph M Green <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 6 Sep 1995 14:05:30 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: 6.0671  Re: Bloom;
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom;
 
I suppose that T. Hawkes means to indicate *The Western Canon* when he writes
of Harold Bloom's "latest effusion."  I can only report that I didn't think of
Leavis once as I read it.  The obsessions with death, the agon, reading as a
solitary act could only be Bloom's and I can't tell what is meant by "Leavis
with water" unless, once again, Leavis is fulfilling his usual role as great
Caesar's ghost and Bloom is right about, at least, one variety of agon.  I can
only guess at what Mr. Hawkes finds "unscholarly" (in Bloom's discussion of
Shakespeare, I guess), but would like to know.
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Chris Ivic <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 6 Sep 1995 22:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 6.0671 Re: Bloom
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0671 Re: Bloom
 
Although I haven't read Bloom's book, I'm sure Terence Hawkes's comments aren't
off the mark.  Judging from what Bloom said on CBC radio last week, his book
seems to be designed for the bestseller list (a la Paglia). For Bloom,
Shakespeare, along with Dante, Cervantes, etc. was a genius; moreover, his
works provide the reader with exemplary figures.  Does this need to be
reiterated?  Obviously Bloom thinks so--and judging from my campus bookstore,
so too do numerous shoppers.  Rather than offering anything enlightening, his
book--based on what he had to say about it on CBC--merely reinscribes a
conventional, totally ahistorical, and no doubt marketable argument, one I
first heard in secondary school.
 
Chris Ivic
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           W. L. Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 06 Sep 1995 22:28:38 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0671  Re: Bloom
Comment: Re:    SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom
 
In agreement with Terence Hawkes, I say that the praise of Bloom is over-blown.
Rather than a bloom, he is vegetation out of control. We will be overgrown with
Bloom.
 
Yours, William the Weed Killer
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Yogev <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 07 Sep 95 16:12:53 IST
Subject: 6.0671  Re: Bloom
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0671  Re: Bloom
 
Being in Israel, on a longer than average break and avoiding the environs of a
campus in order to be sequestered at home, I have evidently (again) missed a
landmark Bloomian statement to which (I suspect) I will also reply with Terence
Hawkes "Fie!" (I began saying this with Bloom's recantation of all the valuable
insights into Blake's works in his terrible book, _Ruin the Sacred Truths_).
Can someone fill me in on what "effusion" by Bloom I will be saying "Fie!" to?
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.