>Actually, it just so happens that all my favorite writers were secretly homoerotic gnosticsHas any critic projected their diseased mind more than H. Bloom?
This is just going to spiral into another corncobby chronicle crusade since no one here reads anything Bloom recommends but McCarthy.Unless you have info on Shakespeare being a gnostic. In that case I want to hear more.
>>24694334>secretly homoerotic>secretlystart with the greeks
>>24694334Should I read his little pamphlet on the Western Canon?
>>24694364Bloom is unavoidable. Like a big bloated boulder blocking your path to BECOMING LITERATE.I would only read his stuff on Shakespeare, if only because I personally find it easier to read older texts if someone enthusiastic is showing me all the stuff they like about it. Any person (even if he’s fat) who believes that Shakespeare “invented the human” has something interesting to say, at least for a little bit. Bloom is not a good writer though so sticking to the pamphlet may be best.
>>24694372I was using the word "pamphlet" ironically, I refer to this bookhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Western_Canon
>>24694372His enthusiasm soured on me once he started talking about wanting to see assorted characters across plays "try their wits" against each other and it became clear he‘s just a garden variety nerd from a time before comic books.
>>24694374I’m dumb. I guess that could still be a pamphlet in comparison to Bloom’s mass.
>>24694388>garden variety nerd I wonder how many literary geniuses we have lost from the advent of video games and comics. I guess there is something wrong with us, to still bother with things that people only focused on because there was nothing else to do. If Bloom were born today he’d be a Elden ring YouTuber making three-hour long video essays
OF WESTERN CANNONS THERE IS BUT ONE TRUE IN ALL THE BRONZED ANNALS OF HISTORY .. AND DIT WAS FOUNDED BY ORBAN THE GREAT CANNONSMITH FOR MEHMED II .. AND MANY TIMES DID ITS MIGHTY TRUNK REIGN SPLENDED DESTRUCTION UPON THE WALLS OF BYZANTINE, BEFORE THE CANNON EXPLODED, KILLING ITS ENTIRE FIRING CREW.
>>24694389He was a rotund gentleman, in his countenance like an orangutan
Reading his how to read and why. Everytime he encounters Christianity he does not understand which is not surprising.
>>24694442I have read that one but I don't remember his Christianity comments, seemed decent enough for a reading list.
>>24694397At least he would be better than Vatividya
This fat piece of mole was a total retard. I'm so glad /lit/ has been overrun by illiterate chuds and we don't have to be subjected to this idiot's acolytes anymore.
>>24694334no
>>24694372>Bloom is unavoidable. Like a big bloated boulder blocking your path to BECOMING LITERATE.Kek how retarded. Bloom is not some essential giant of literary criticism like Samuel Johnson. Reading modern literary critics isn't essential for anything, because where Johnson was himself a great writer and member of literary history, modern academia is not. The only reason Bloom is so revered is because educational standards have degraded to such a ridiculously low point, so that when Bloom says something obvious people are amazed. Literary critics barely even have original views, and when they do it's usually worthless, like Bloom's obsession with Gnosticism.
>>24695650>The only reason Bloom is so revered is because educational standards have degraded to such a ridiculously low point, so that when Bloom says something obvious people are amazedThanks for proving my point that he is unavoidable. In fact I couldn’t have avoided him because there are certain faggots posting threads of this LONG DEAD BLOATED BUFFOON. You are raging at this verbose balloon’s prolific nature while perpetuating it by discussing him. You made a Bloom thread instead of a Samuel Johnson thread. That speaks louder than anything else you could say.
>>24695673I'm not the Op you dimwit. And yeah, great argument, because someone is popular therefore he's essential for everyone's education. You're a real genius with that logic.
>>24695682>I’m not the OP I just repeated the OP’s opinionYou try to tell me he isn’t unavoidable when you yourself fail to avoid him and can’t resist the urge to bump this thread. You’re a pseud and a samefagging tard.
>>24695689You think Bloom being 'unavoidable' on the literature board of 4chan is the same as him being unavoidable in the process of becoming literate?.. LOL...
>>24695713You clearly agree, as you give him plenty of headspace. Space in your head, and space for his bloated member to bloom in your mouth. Keep coping faggot.
>>24695719I'm not giving Bloom headspace, I'm giving YOU headspace anon, because I care about you. I'm worried you're losing your sanity. So much rage and resentment just because I insulted Bloom. Where comes this? Were you secretly motivated by your own intellectual dependence on Bloom when you said he was unavoidable? Have you received my insult to Bloom as an insult to yourself?
>>24694364I don't have any interest in reading Bloom's books, but his western canon list is great. http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtbloom.html
>>24695739It's an atrocious list that he admitted was atrocious and only wrote it because the publishers demanded a list otherwise people who opened the Western Canon would be disappointed to find nothing.
>>24695735Why are you having a meltdown over a literary critic you don’t like?
>>24695791I have simply offered my opinion on the subject matter to assist anons in avoiding an academic who I regard of no great utility in their self-eduction. Is a heartfelt altruism not reason enough?
>>24695735>I’m not giving Bloom headspace lol
>>24695650Good examples of books on literary criticism that aren’t about Shakespeare?
>>24695802Eliot's Sacred Wood discusses literary criticism very finely. It only has one essay on Shakespeare.
>>24695801All for the sake of that dear anon I'm trying to help.
>>24695816Psst, that was me. No one is taking your advice for “self-eduction.” You couldn’t parse out that I already called Bloom a horrible writer. So that meltdown was unnecessary.
>>24695826You called Bloom a horrible writer, yet went to bat defending his importance. A very queer type of rejection. I only, very innocently, added that Bloom was in fact of no importance, it being at least my honest opinion, but you were unreasonably incensed. Why should it be impossible for me to comment, publicly, that I believe someone is of no importance, without me conferring upon them that importance which I said they did not have. That is an illogical assumption. People can be motivated by all sorts of things, and it is not for you to guess, in bad faith, that I am really motivated by the importance of that which I am criticising.
>>24695864You reek of desperation. I don’t care for Bloom, yet you seem overeager to prove something that doesn’t need proving. If he’s an irrelevant critic, writing paragraphs on him detracts from that point. The tard doth protest too much….you are hiding a deep-seated resentment that is hilarious to poke at.
>>24695880>If he’s an irrelevant critic, writing paragraphs on him detracts from that point.Not if those paragraphs are written for the purpose of eviscerating a misplaced popularity. History is full of worthless personalities that earned pages and pages of scorn and critique from great minds just simply because they were popular. You keep accusing me of these outlandish motivations, each more outlandish than the last, when I'm only making a simple point. Your whole argument here is dependent on bad faith assumptions about me, and an argument that has to entirely depend on bad faith is of course an argument that rests on nothing and only has its malice at its disposal. I encourage you to be more mature and open-minded in the future.
>>24695975>eviscerating a misplaced popularity….by giving him more attention? Why not make a thread on Samuel Johnson? You’re a silly, hypocritical little monkey. And each paragraph you post on this thread only confirms that. Bloom needs not fans when he has “detractors” such as yourself, showering him with attention.
>>24696001>Bloom needs not fans when he has “detractors” such as yourself, showering him with attention.So this is the power of the school of resentment...
>>24696025If I don’t see a Samuel Johnson thread in the next hour, I’ll know you were lying from the start.
>>24694334Stephan KingJ.K. Rowling Neil Gaiman
>>24696001Would you say the same thing to Alexander Pope in his endless critiques of now forgotten intellectual celebrities? Again, you're not making a very good argument as to why you can't criticise someone for being wrongfully popular. It is necessary, at some times, in every generation, to take out the trash in public culture. It is a public service act. I am only demonstrating sincerity and good-will in this interaction, there is nothing to seethe about. I am making a simple point, you repeatedly insist that my point is wrong, and we are going around in circles. Perhaps it is best to agree to disagree, and end on a note of good will, instead of projecting ulterior motivations. Would you be mature enough to do that?
>>24696047You spend too much time thinking about what others believe. And you grossly overestimate your ability to affect others. Bloom is a gross blimp and your seething only slows his descent to obscurity.
>>24696032Calm down I'm not whoever you were arguing with
>>24694374>Bloom later disowned the list, saying that it was written at his editor's insistence and distracted from the book's intention
>>24696061>You spend too much time thinking about what others believe.But you were accusing me of having ulterior motives this whole time.>Bloom is a gross blimp and your seething only slows his descent to obscurity.I dunno, I kind of think your responding to me is what's slowing that. And then there's of course the need for polemics in affecting popularity, convincing people to stop treating someone as important.
>>24696069So did he disown the book itself then? Disown all its contents?
>>24694334It does seem though like a lot of prominent people are gnostic Carl Jung was supposedly kind of a gnostic
>>24696077Again, you grossly overestimate your ability to affect others, Mr. “Public Service.” Quit the LARP.
>>24696081He is basically admitting to being a prostitute
>>24696102Why can't you answer a simple question? Why do you instead obsess with the physicality of a dead old jew? You continually speak of his body, and now even bring up this sexual connotation. It's sick. Stop it. Get some help.
>>24696093I don't know why you're so annoyed. Yes, you will say you are not annoyed, but the fact remains that you are insulting me. Why the insults? No justifiable reason yet found.
