Categories

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Harold Bloom on the Western Canon Jr.

This inter­view orig­i­nal­ly appeared in Home­Arts mag­a­zine, but their web site dis­ap­peared some years ago. I have archived the inter­view so that I might link to it for dis­cus­sion pur­pos­es only.

Home­Arts: “Why should chil­dren read? And why should chil­dren read good books?”

Harold Bloom: “To be cold­ly prag­mat­ic about it, read­ing good books will make them more inter­est­ing both to them­selves and to oth­ers. And it is by becom­ing more interesting—and this sounds cal­lous, but it’s true, I think—that by becom­ing more inter­est­ing both to one­self and to oth­ers, one devel­ops a sense of one’s sep­a­rate and dis­tinct self.

“So if chil­dren are to indi­vid­u­ate them­selves, they will not do it by watch­ing tele­vi­sion, or by play­ing video games, or by lis­ten­ing to rock, or by watch­ing rock videos. They will indi­vid­u­ate them­selves by being alone with a book, by being alone with the poet­ry of William Blake or A. E. Hous­man, or being alone with Norse mythol­o­gy or The Wind in the Wil­lows.”

Home­Arts: “What books would you include in a West­ern Canon for Chil­dren?”

Bloom: “I will rec­om­mend again Ken­neth Gra­hame’s sur­pass­ing­ly mar­velous book The Wind in the Wil­lows for every­body between the ages of zero and 100. I still remem­ber my old­er sis­ter read­ing me The Wind in the Wil­lows, which broke my heart many times and cer­tain­ly alert­ed me to lit­er­ary val­ues.

“My son, who’s 32, is often in our New York apart­ment these days with­out either my wife or myself. A few nights ago he spoke to me on the phone and he said that he felt very lone­some there. It’s one of those old, Edith Whar­ton kinds of build­ings with extreme­ly high ceil­ings. He said, ‘I feel like I’m Mr. Toad of Toad Hall,’ at which I broke into sym­pa­thet­ic laugh­ter. I don’t think that any­one who read The Wind in the Wil­lows when he was a child would ever for­get it.

“All of Lewis Car­rol­l’s works would have to be can­on­ized. Lewis Car­roll, I would think, more than any oth­er author in Eng­lish. And Through the Look­ing Glass more than his oth­er works. I think it’s his mas­ter­piece. It cap­ti­vat­ed me as a child.

“Edward Lear would have to be in the canon—all the Non­sense Books.

“Then there are the tra­di­tion­al tales. Hans Chris­t­ian Ander­sen’s Fairy Tales and the Tales of the Broth­ers Grimm cer­tain­ly qual­i­fy. They are both extraordinary—and scary—in the extreme.

“There is also a won­der­ful series of fairy tale books by the Vic­to­ri­an re-teller Andrew Lang, called The Green Fairy Book, The Red Fairy Book, and so on. They are remark­able.

“And Norse mythol­o­gy, of course. I remem­ber being thrilled by both The Elder Edda and The Younger Edda when I was a child; I was enthralled by mythol­o­gy.

“I would want to include a book that retells sto­ries from Shake­speare, as Shake­speare real­ly is beyond chil­dren, Tales from Shake­speare by Charles and Mary Lamb is a won­der­ful retelling of Shake­speare, won­der­ful­ly faith­ful to the ethos and spir­it of the plays, and won­der­ful­ly well writ­ten.

“William Blake’s Songs of Inno­cence and Songs of Expe­ri­ence. Chil­dren should read a great deal of poet­ry. It will intrigue and mys­ti­fy them; they won’t under­stand it, but that’s fine. When I was a lit­tle bairn, I read all sorts of poets, includ­ing that mar­velous poet, A.E. Hous­man, whom I could­n’t pos­si­bly under­stand but who nev­er­the­less fas­ci­nat­ed me. And I still remem­ber every line I ever read of Hous­man. It was the sheer invo­ca­to­ry force of poet­ry, what Ger­ard Man­ley Hop­kins calls ‘the roll, the rise, the car­ol, the cre­ation,’ that first drew me to poet­ry, to Hart Crane and William Blake. And this was before I could pos­si­bly have under­stood a line of what they were writ­ing. It was the sheer lilt of it. The glo­ry of it all.

“Robert Louis Steven­son and that remark­able book, A Child’s Gar­den of Vers­es should be in the canon. And Steven­son’s romances remain in my head. Things that I read as a young­ster, like Kid­napped and Trea­sure Island, hold up very well indeed.

“Louisa May Alcot­t’s Lit­tle Women is an absolute­ly won­der­ful book. A fresh, intense, won­der­ful­ly vibrant piece of work, and mar­velous for all ages. Ter­rif­ic writ­ing.

Win­nie-the-Pooh is a charm­ing and beau­ti­ful book. Indeed, you see the stuffed ani­mals on the couch fac­ing me? This is a lit­tle duck-billed platy­pus whom I’ve named Oscar, in hon­or of my hero, Oscar Wilde. And this baby goril­la, whom my wife gave me for my last birth­day, we’ve named Goril­la Goril­la. And I’ve named this won­der­ful don­key Eey­ore. That, I’m sure, will give you an idea of how I feel about Win­nie-the-Pooh.

“There are some mod­ern authors who are also remark­able. Mau­rice Sendak [Where the Wild Things Are] is aston­ish­ing, not just as a visu­al artist, but as a writer of prose.

Rud­yard Kipling’s The Jun­gle Book is a remark­able work; there’s no ques­tion about the high qual­i­ty of the writ­ing. The social atti­tudes it embod­ies, how­ev­er, are archa­ic, and belong to the age of High Impe­ri­al­ism. That does­n’t dis­turb me too much; it’s sim­ply an episode in the his­to­ry of the West and its hope­less attempt to dom­i­nate the East. But there’s no ques­tion about the last­ing pow­er of the book—for adults as well as chil­dren of all ages. It’s a work with uni­ver­sal appeal.

“There are some works of Mark Twain, like A Con­necti­cut Yan­kee in King Arthur’s Court, which I read when I was a lit­tle one, which strike me as being per­ma­nent­ly valu­able.

“I read Sir Wal­ter Scot­t’s Ivan­hoe and Alexan­dre Dumas’s The Three Mus­ke­teers and its sequel Twen­ty Years After. And then his Count of Monte Cristo, when I was per­haps 15. And they cer­tain­ly had a great impact upon me, and I haven’t lost them yet.

“And I read Jules Verne at the same age and that cer­tain­ly worked on me to a con­sid­er­able degree. I’m not sure I could reread any of that now. I also remem­ber read­ing a lot of the sci­ence fic­tion romances of H. G. Wells, and I’m not sure I would want to reread those either, where­as there are cer­tain things of G. K. Chester­ton which I read when I was 14 or 15 which I’ve reread recent­ly and which I still find absolute­ly splen­did, par­tic­u­lar­ly that won­der­ful romance, The Man Who Was Thurs­day.

“The Sher­lock Holmes sto­ries still work well with chil­dren, I think, espe­cial­ly with those who are inter­est­ed in ana­lyt­i­cal things, in prob­lems and rea­son­ing. I must say, how­ev­er, that I have great trou­ble re-read­ing Sher­lock Holmes. I’m 65 now—but it isn’t that so much—it’s just that they are real­ly not all that well-writ­ten, and some­times the prose gets on my nerves.

“For old­er chil­dren, I like J.R.R. Tolkien’s orig­i­nal book about the hob­bits (The Hob­bit). I think the blown-up tril­o­gy [The Lord of the Rings] may be a lit­tle over­rat­ed. It’s so heav­i­ly based in gra­tu­itous mor­al­iz­ing. It’s top-heavy.

“And The Catch­er in the Rye by J. D. Salinger is a gen­uine­ly mov­ing book which holds up amaz­ing­ly well. It’s a minia­ture ver­sion of Huck­le­ber­ry Finn in a way. It’s authen­tic, touch­ing and very poignant of course, because the nar­ra­tor, Hold­en, is real­ly on the verge of bor­der­line schiz­o­phre­nia and yet seems at the end to have just bare­ly got­ten to the oth­er side of it. Of course we’re talk­ing now about a book for chil­dren in mid­dle to late ado­les­cence. It would be a lit­tle dis­turb­ing I think before then. A won­der­ful­ly valid book, aes­thet­i­cal­ly speak­ing. Real­ly a minor mas­ter­piece.”

Home­Arts: “What do you think par­ents need to do, or what can par­ents do, to help their chil­dren become enthu­si­as­tic and invet­er­ate read­ers?”

Bloom: “Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. I can only despair about that. I mean about all that they can do is to be gen­tle and sug­ges­tive and say, ‘Look, my dears, let’s turn off the tele­vi­sion this evening, let’s not play the CDs this evening. I will sit here and I will read to you from A Child’s Gar­den of Vers­es. Or, I will sit here and I will read to you from Norse mythol­o­gy. Or I will sit here and I will read The Wind in the Wil­lows to you, and maybe, maybe you will like it very much. So let’s be old-fash­ioned for a night.’ It’s sort of des­per­ate, but that’s about all that I can sug­gest.

“But you know there must, at this moment as we sit talk­ing to each oth­er, there must be par­ents who are doing that through­out the Unit­ed States. There has to be. I mean, we are so large a pop­u­la­tion that the sen­si­tiv­i­ty, and the infi­nite vari­ety of peo­ple, would sure­ly lead to that.

“I can­not believe that the ancient occur­rence of sen­si­tive young men and sen­si­tive young women going apart, in great soli­tude, to read for them­selves and by themselves—I can­not believe that that can come to an end.

“There will always be sen­si­tive young men and women who will dis­cov­er Jane Austen, who will dis­cov­er Shake­speare. If there aren’t, then of course we are all doomed. But I can’t believe that some­thing which is so pow­er­ful­ly resis­tant to mere­ly social cri­te­ria will come to an end. These things can­not die.”

Copy­right Hearst Pub­li­ca­tions and Home Arts Net­work