Resurrect the Western Canon
The renowned literary critic Harold Bloom penned an elegy for the Western Canon in the 90s. Since then, his words have only grown more poignant.
Harold Bloom, the paradoxically exuberant literary curmudgeon, delivers one of the most important and accessible works of literary criticism on the titular subject, The Western Canon. Part reclamation project, part elegy, part devastating diatribe, and part erudite literary analysis, Bloom takes an aggressive stance on exactly which works are central to the The Western Canon. He invests primarily in Shakespeare, Dante, and their eminent progeny (with nods to literary forebears in the epic poetic tradition).
The breadth, depth, and erudition alone warrant a read. It is, of course, challenging, especially if you are unfamiliar with many of the texts discussed. Bloom’s mental dossier is expansive so it is almost assuredly the case for most readers. This is also partly due to Bloom's preference for verse. Bloom may be one of the most prolific readers in human history, and this is fortuitously paired with a capacious memory. The exposure to his mind that The Western Canon affords is wonderful.
Bloom's argument for canonicity or canon-worthiness is a little slippery. He acknowledges this himself. His test, if it can be called one, boils down to the quality of aesthetic craft, meaning only sublimity and transcendence qualify, the depth and variety of psychological insight, and the quantity of influence a text has on future texts. He eschews attaching canon status to literature on the basis of moral or social value or any other consideration beyond the text itself. He argues that reading high literature is an elitist activity in its essence. It is an individual and private rather than social and public project. Hence, he harbors a grudge against critics and theorists who expressly hold the opposite; those of the "School of Resentment." The School of Resentment refers to a broad swath of literary critics who share progressive political commitments, which implicates almost all extant schools of literary theory, but it would also apply to reactionaries and traditionalists, if they actually existed among literary critics with credentials. His critique of the School of Resentment is exemplary and unfortunately incredibly prescient. The dominance of these schools of thought are even more dominant than when Bloom penned The Western Canon.
The Western Canon's thesis isn't perfect as no literary theory ever is. I wish Bloom spent more time specifying the premises and parameters of canonicity. More technical details would have been dry but would have better substantiated his claims. Apart from a few scattered places in the book usually concerning the work of Shakespeare, Bloom is mostly intimating a visceral understanding of what comprises the nuts and bolts of canonical literature. It’s a show don’t tell effort, which is effective but open to critique. Moreover, I think eschewing value-based questions when evaluating literary quality is somewhat ahistorical and that questions about canon are in part historical questions. If we applied Bloom’s criteria a priori, we would likely build an unstable canon that would vary across time and place. This is also making the large and dubious assumption that the hypothetical people of those places and times would share psychological and aesthetic sensibilities. Yet the stability of the Western Canon that Bloom gestures to appears quite durable to attack and its waning institutional support. It just persists sub rosa among the those with an appetite for belle lettres. Unfortunately, it may be that those with an authentic care and love for literature, including even those of the School of Resentment, are the ones slouching toward Bethlehem.
I think Bloom's Western Canon should be forgiven its shortcomings as his case for reading and re-reading great literature and what makes that literature great is more persuasive than the available alternatives. Even if this is deeply subjective and idiosyncratic as a position, it is at least passionately and beautifully argued. It is a tragedy of sorts that the institutional study of literature has not heeded Bloom and is unlikely to ever do so. Nearly thirty years later, it does appear that this work was indeed an elegy. The Western Canon is now entombed.
5 out of 5 stars