Why were they reluctant to let you use Bloom as a source when writing papers? I know he is widely contested in academic circles, but how does that translate into his being banned as a source? What was the root of this prejudice?

Thank you for your comments. I like your comment that Bloom is a “prophet of our poorly literate culture.” I spent three hours in his poetry class at Yale this past March, and it is truly remarkable the mental capacity that this man has. I read somewhere that his mind is the equivalent of a GOOGLE search engine, and I think this is a very apt description. I fell in love with Bloom’s work as an undergraduate, and I suffered for it when I was a graduate student. I actually had professors–who I considered to be well-rounded–that refused to let me write papers using Bloom as a source!?!?!? This type of censorship from professors astounded and disheartened me. I hope more and more people will see the valuable contributions Bloom has made. Even in his late 70’s he is still a force to be reckoned with!

I never intended to attempt to diminish Bloom’s contributions! I read the book (and wrote about it) because I am rather a devotee of Bloom. But somewhere along the line I realized–perhaps after talking to others who picked it up and put it down ten pages later–that people are not reading him. Everyone has an opinion of him, however. Bloom, I feel, is aware of his stature among the reading and semi-reading public. He is provocative (which I appreciate), perhaps to spur the potential reader onward. But how many serious readers are familiar with rabbinic literature when most people aren’t even familiar with the Book of Genesis (such is my impression)? Bloom has written an exceedingly bold and interesting book for a limited readership. He is the prophet of our poorly literate culture. More power to him.

I get nervous when I read your review of Bloom’s latest book. As I professor, I see the daily decline in human intellect that plagues our society. You mention that he “alienates” potential readers; however, what readers are you talking about? I am always a potential reader of Bloom, and I never feel alienated. What I find interesting in your review is the direct relation your words have to what Harold Bloom has been arguing for years. Namely, that our society is hell-bent on avoiding difficult pleasures (such as reading scholarly material), in order to pursue less difficult pleasures (such as Hollywood movies or J. K. Rowling books). Your words do more to enforce the importance of Bloom’s contributions rather than diminish them.

Thanks for your perceptive comment. Of course I don’t find Bloom nearly so alienating as some people do, and it was with them that I was primarily concerned. I, too, am fascinated by his chutzpah and his seemingly endless intellect. More than anything, reading Bloom makes me want to read more. But I imagine there are many who, quite justifiably, may not get past the first pages of the book. They may not have the necessary tools. At least not yet.