Return to Homepage.
Amy Solomon
17-10-98
Intro. To Lit.
Dr. Tresa Grauer
I am left with a strong impression of your hatred for Bloom's ideals after reading your evaluation of his essay "Books". I believe your goal is to emphasize Bloom's fanatic worship of the cult of tradition as the primary reason for his "narrow view" of the potential modern literature and art has for the soul. A variety of important questions arise from your thesis. What viewpoints do modern individuals hold? Can such a sweeping statement be made? Who are you speaking for and to? How does the modern viewpoint differ from classical values? Does a difference exist? To what degree is recognizing tradition necessary? Does modern literature relate to today's society in a way the classics are unable to achieve? What elements comprise today's society that the classics don't recognize? What elements of literature and art do you identify with the most? How do these elements or issues relate to the soul? How does having a soul effect your quest for education? Etc, etc.
I feel you address the above questions without clearly qualifying the content of your answers. In the second paragraph of your paper you mention Ayn Rand, J.D Salinger, the phrases "viewpoints of modern individuals" and "today's society", and William Golding without providing specific definitions or connections. The reader of your article would be more inclined to seriously consider your argument if you took one of the books that Bloom actually refers to and cite a particular character from that book who symbolizes a specific theme that relates to a distinctly modern outlook according to your definition of modern. Not only would the reader then know that you read a book, but he/she would see that you are capable of analyzing, synthesizing and extracting meaning from a work of literature and are able to express what the concept of modernity means. These are qualities Bloom does not accredit the contemporary student with. You could then contextualize the modern viewpoint you chose as functioning in today's society by (you guessed it) yet another example. I perceive the most important function of modern literature in society for you as being the ability to recognize the contributions of a multi-cultural outlook you find lacking in the predominantly white, male, eurocentric world of the classics.
I hope you look at the comments I made about the technical aspects of your paper. I suggest not resorting to name calling. By making your position clear in relation to Bloom's stance the reader will deduce for himself/herself that Bloom is an elitist snob. You succeeded in avoiding what I term "wishy-washy" phrases to a great extent. There are only three instances I sighted where you undermine your point with a word like "perhaps" or a phrase saying that you "tend to" do something. An argument paper should be as directly related to the action as possible. I enjoyed learning what you consider important, and I liked your use of the words nuance and digest. I hope my comments are helpful.