Discourse-heavy alt modern pop lit (including Oyler, who would hate to be included) “a continuation of Twitter by other means” !!!!!!!!!!!
Honor Levy is not a bad writer, but she is tremendously overrated — that’s sort of not on her, the culture’s wretched thirst for 20-somethings capable of literature, which are like twice-a-century rare events, continues to ruin us. Late Bloom revolution can’t come quickly enough. It’s possible that she could evolve into something interesting, though it’s less likely if she remains successful so we will see. I see a risk of her keeping her current flaw, which is the one Barbara Grizzutti-Harrison identified in Didion — an intense preoccupation with style over substance.
As I read your bit on Milton, it occurred to me that there is no single work of art one LESS needs to ask the question “what is the point of it?” Than paradise lost. Given that the bible exists, paradise lost was inevitable. The bible is an Aramaic text, a middle-desert Assyrian Mediterranean take, which was then laundered by the italians. Paradise Lost is what marks out the beginning of a cultural christianity in English and in England. Only took us like 80 years after Henry 8th started the job politically I guess.
That this academic could see the point of Dante and not Milton is BONKERS to me.
that entire weird situation with that lit prof, with that very weird tone and content, makes me imagine or think of a hypothetical where a lit prof gets on the social media and says "i've never seen the appeal of nabokov or joyce"
like, okay, sure, but i better be about to read at least 500 fucking words of very convincing argument either about what's wrong with them or what's great about whoever you do like or ideally both. otherwise you're just being unserious.
The Milton discourse shocked me, too. I still can’t wrap my head around the fact that this person is an academic, of English at that. But this is where we are now. Like you said, Bloom’s defensive ferociousness is long overdue for a stern comeback. Also, it’s so good seeing that interview once again.
About Oyler, you are right. I tried reading her essays after reading Manov’s and Rothfeld’s reviews of her book, but I just couldn’t. I particularly think it’s intellectually irresponsible and dubious to squeeze your true convictions behind irony when caught and criticized for them.
This is such good value. Proper critique, exploration, and review. Whenever I read these posts from you I feel like I'm in class with a great teacher, learning something, and hearing nuggets of analysis that I would have struggled to form myself. Thank you.
Well, it's true. I regret not studying literature when I was younger, but I love these moments of what it might have been like. And I would have loved it.
HENRY
This is wall to wall bangers
Discourse-heavy alt modern pop lit (including Oyler, who would hate to be included) “a continuation of Twitter by other means” !!!!!!!!!!!
Honor Levy is not a bad writer, but she is tremendously overrated — that’s sort of not on her, the culture’s wretched thirst for 20-somethings capable of literature, which are like twice-a-century rare events, continues to ruin us. Late Bloom revolution can’t come quickly enough. It’s possible that she could evolve into something interesting, though it’s less likely if she remains successful so we will see. I see a risk of her keeping her current flaw, which is the one Barbara Grizzutti-Harrison identified in Didion — an intense preoccupation with style over substance.
As I read your bit on Milton, it occurred to me that there is no single work of art one LESS needs to ask the question “what is the point of it?” Than paradise lost. Given that the bible exists, paradise lost was inevitable. The bible is an Aramaic text, a middle-desert Assyrian Mediterranean take, which was then laundered by the italians. Paradise Lost is what marks out the beginning of a cultural christianity in English and in England. Only took us like 80 years after Henry 8th started the job politically I guess.
That this academic could see the point of Dante and not Milton is BONKERS to me.
“Lol” !
Ah thank you, this was very nice to wake up to. So agree about style over substance! The Dante/Milton thing was just…………..
that entire weird situation with that lit prof, with that very weird tone and content, makes me imagine or think of a hypothetical where a lit prof gets on the social media and says "i've never seen the appeal of nabokov or joyce"
like, okay, sure, but i better be about to read at least 500 fucking words of very convincing argument either about what's wrong with them or what's great about whoever you do like or ideally both. otherwise you're just being unserious.
SO unserious! It’s all the fault of reader response and all that other subjective BS
The Milton discourse shocked me, too. I still can’t wrap my head around the fact that this person is an academic, of English at that. But this is where we are now. Like you said, Bloom’s defensive ferociousness is long overdue for a stern comeback. Also, it’s so good seeing that interview once again.
About Oyler, you are right. I tried reading her essays after reading Manov’s and Rothfeld’s reviews of her book, but I just couldn’t. I particularly think it’s intellectually irresponsible and dubious to squeeze your true convictions behind irony when caught and criticized for them.
Thank you also for the mention!
Yes the irony defence is a real admission that it’s not a technique it’s just a reflex!
This is such good value. Proper critique, exploration, and review. Whenever I read these posts from you I feel like I'm in class with a great teacher, learning something, and hearing nuggets of analysis that I would have struggled to form myself. Thank you.
Well this made my day :)
Well, it's true. I regret not studying literature when I was younger, but I love these moments of what it might have been like. And I would have loved it.
It’s never too late! And isn’t it just as good studying it now?