Rating: 
Summary: More a motivation for reading....
Review: Most bibliophiles will pick up this exegesis from the renowned literary critic, Harold Bloom, simply on the inherent challenge in the title. For those of us who profess as much a desire and self-improving drive through the written word as Bloom does then this book will either confirm our own decisive belief in how to read and the reasons why we do it, or irritatingly deny and confound them. In some respects it can be seen as a marker, an attempt for the avid reader to classify how we should read the great texts and confirm to ourselves that `yes, we do understand them'. What Bloom, therefore, must hold himself up to, by publishing his theory, is whether his own form of literature accurately describes how the populace should read any great literary work. By the end I found it ended up with an answer to a rather different question.
Without going through the entire text there are three sections that leap out: Short stories, Novels Part I and Poetry.
Bloom opens his critical work with short story specialists. His own work reflects the genre, with short one-two pages discussions on each, their salient work(s) and the contribution to the art form. We move from Turganev and Chekov to Maupassant and Hemingway, touching through Nabokov, Borges and Calvino, all the while relating them back to Bloom's idolised literary figurehead, Shakespeare. Of particular interest is the note on Landolfi, highlighting as it does a great work, inspired by another great author, Gogol, that parodies its inspiration. Indeed, the entire concept of `Gogol's wife' takes the real and criticizes it with the absurd, yet an oddly perceptive absurd that echoes Ionesco.
In Bloom's section on poetry he is forced to follow the well-trodden path that any literary critic must do with this format: quote large tracts of various poems in order to get his meaning across, in sharp contrast to those sections ion the short story and novel. He does acknowledge this when he realises that each single word in a poem comprises far more imagery and emotion than is worth explaining or describing. Whereas the novel dictates the scene precisely, the poem offers a tantalisingly liminal nudge to the senses that the reader can allow to bloom in their own mind. As such, the section on poetry becomes more a classification of which of the great poets are in each poetical sub-genre. More a reason on why to read these poets, than how to read them. The section itself deals with Dickinson, Coleridge, Blake, Browning, Shelley, Keats, Wordsworth and the inevitable Shakespearian sonnets, amongst many others. The most interesting detail is perhaps on the Ballard of Sir Patrick Spence with its "tragic comedy almost unique in its stoic heroism", the most exhilarating the seventeenth century ballard, `Tom O'Bedlam'
Bloom's section on the novels (in two parts) opens with Cervantes' `Don'Quixote' which he professes the greatest of all novels, swiftly moving onto the incomparable Austen who's novels rely so much on society but never a justification for them and Dickens, picking firstly, Emma, then Great Expectations as their benchmarks. There is an interesting comparison between the first and revised versions of James' `Portrait' which serves to emphasize the growth of the author's vast (as Bloom would have us believe) consciousness.
So, by the end we don't feel that Bloom has given us satisfactory explanation of `how' to read and `why', more that his precis of what he considers the greatest of our literary artists suggests why we must read them specifically and (in an even more limited attempt) some pointers as to how to read them. For example, his explanation of Shakespearian vernacular does attempt to satisfy the `how to read' as it imparts different and more clear meaning to the poetry . By the end, we are left not with an answer to his titular concept, but a rather disparate reason for our `motives' to read, best given in his summation on poetry:
"Poetry...does...startle us out of our sleep-of-death into a more capricious sense of life. There is no better motive for reading...."
Rating: 
Summary: interesting but unsatisfying
Review: Much of Bloom's recent--that is, post-The Western Canon--fare has the flavor of being written for the sake simply of publishing another book or for broadcasting his literary affinities. Having some familiarity with Bloom's ideas and passions, I know this not to be the case; there's always something more to his books. Still, How to Read and Why possesses that written-on-the-fly quality, and while Bloom's assembly of diverse and interesting pieces of literature is excellent as always, I ultimately found the book to be unsatisfying.
Aside from some introductory hows and whys, the book never really explains, satisfactorily, how we should read and, more importantly, why. He speaks of reading to re-capturing irony, of reading to accustom ourselves to change (and especially to the final and universal change), of reading because we cannot hope to meet all people. This is all true, of course, and the book might have been more successful had he pursued those threads and others throughout the text. After the introduction, however, Bloom begins his analysis of literature, broken down into sections on short stories, poetry, plays, and novels. The analyses are often interesting, sometimes wrong (just my opinion...for example, his opinions of Flannery O'Connor and Dostoevsky are severely limited here, as they were in Bloom's more recent Genius; in How to Read and Why, both writers receive similar treatment from Bloom, in the form of D.H. Lawrence's admonition, "Trust the tale but not the teller"), but they are his; they show only one "how" of reading; they are not readily generalized.
Yes, literature is enriching and enlightening; it enhances the experience of being alive. The insights it offers are diverse and often debatable. That's all part of reading's allure. But too often Bloom allows his analyses of works to speak for themselves, to show by their simple existence how and why to read. Perhaps this is mildly justifiable, since most folks who pick up a Bloom book are likely bibliophiles themselves. Nevertheless, and even to a bibliophile like myself, the book proved interesting but not entirely enriching.
Rating:
Summary: interesting but unsatisfying
Review: Much of Bloom's recent--that is, post-The Western Canon--fare has the flavor of being written for the sake simply of publishing another book or for broadcasting his literary affinities. Having some familiarity with Bloom's ideas and passions, I know this not to be the case; there's always something more to his books. Still, How to Read and Why possesses that written-on-the-fly quality, and while Bloom's assembly of diverse and interesting pieces of literature is excellent as always, I ultimately found the book to be unsatisfying.
Aside from some introductory hows and whys, the book never really explains, satisfactorily, how we should read and, more importantly, why. He speaks of reading to re-capturing irony, of reading to accustom ourselves to change (and especially to the final and universal change), of reading because we cannot hope to meet all people. This is all true, of course, and the book might have been more successful had he pursued those threads and others throughout the text. After the introduction, however, Bloom begins his analysis of literature, broken down into sections on short stories, poetry, plays, and novels. The analyses are often interesting, sometimes wrong (just my opinion...for example, his opinions of Flannery O'Connor and Dostoevsky are severely limited here, as they were in Bloom's more recent Genius; in How to Read and Why, both writers receive similar treatment from Bloom, in the form of D.H. Lawrence's admonition, "Trust the tale but not the teller"), but they are his; they show only one "how" of reading; they are not readily generalized.
Yes, literature is enriching and enlightening; it enhances the experience of being alive. The insights it offers are diverse and often debatable. That's all part of reading's allure. But too often Bloom allows his analyses of works to speak for themselves, to show by their simple existence how and why to read. Perhaps this is mildly justifiable, since most folks who pick up a Bloom book are likely bibliophiles themselves. Nevertheless, and even to a bibliophile like myself, the book proved interesting but not entirely enriching.
Rating:
Summary: Rewarding, but not essential Bloom
Review: Other reveiwers have pointed out the inaccuracy of the title, and I state my agreement with their judgement. However, the book stands well upon the merits it does offer as a casual toned discussion of Bloom's encounters with the works he examines. Because Bloom is widely read, subtle, and grand, his personal insights can function as markers of the depth and profundity literary works can attain, but he puts forth no theory or system designed to make his audience better readers. What we have is a book of encouragement, not instruction. Furthermore, readers of Bloom will find the book repetitive of his later, popular works. Bloom continues his invective against current critical trends (justifiably, I think) and continues his idiosyncratic exaltation of Shakespeare within the context of the Anxiety of Influence. I recommend reading The Western Canon first since this book reads almost like lost chapters of that earlier and very worthwhile book, although some of the material is repeated.
Rating:
Summary: A perspective
Review: Since this book has already garnered quite a few reviews here, I will only briefly give my impression of it for others like me who are interested in "the classics" but have not studied them at any length. I like this book mainly for two reasons. The first is that Bloom awakens interest in us to discover (or rediscover) some of the great short stories, plays, poems and novels of Western literature. I had read some of these works in English lit courses or on my own but Bloom's discussion of them brings them a bit back to life and urges me to read them again with perhaps a different perspective. The second reason is that the book is a good introduction for someone already at least slightly familiar with literature and poetry, in that it covers the literary genres giving short reviews and interpretations of major works in each. Bloom's comments on how to read and why, mostly at the beginning of the book, concluding that we read to strengthen the self, seem only to state the obvious for anyone inclined to read classic literature and do not add too much to the book's value. My biggest complaint, however, concerns Bloom's incessant references to Shakespeare, how nothing in the universe can compare to him, the measure of all things human and devine, yada yada yada. Occasional comparisons to Shakespeare are appropriate and insightful (for instance with Cervantes), and of course Shakespeare hugely influenced all literature after him, but constant comparison is too much! Practically every work treated in this book is measured against Shakespeare. At times it actually annoyed me and I thought a truer title of the book could be: "How I worship Shakespeare and compare him to every other literary masterpiece rather than fully appreciating them for their own unique contributions." Perhaps this suggested title is a bit harsh, but in my opinion Bloom's habit of continually interrupting the merits of a work in order to drag the reader (scratching and kicking) once again back to Shakespeare detracts from an otherwise worthy little book.
Rating: 
Summary: Showing by sincere example
Review: The title of the book is misleading. Those looking for, as the title suggests it is, a primer on how to read literature deeply will be disappointed. Aside from a few pointers in the beginning, Bloom really does not explicitly address strategies for how to read and appreciate literature. In my opinion, this is unfortunate because such a book can be written and would be useful. What Bloom does instead is discuss a variety of novels and short stories. Perhaps Bloom is attempting to show how to read by providing examples of how he reads. As such, this succeeds, and the examples he provides are generally good ones. I praise Bloom for writing as if he was one reader simply talking to another. I wish all his books were like this one. Gone is the academic Bloom who can't even take time to read his students' papers. That Bloom is replaced by someone who wants to communicate simply his love for books and for reading. Along the way he illuminates many of the novels and short stories he reviews. In this book Bloom follows the examples of his heroes, Johnson and Hazlitt, and brings readers closer to great books by showing what makes them great. Given the state of contemporary literary criticism, this is a welcome relief. Bloom returns to being what a critic should be.
Rating:
Summary: Worshiping at the Altar of Shakespeare
Review: `Worshiping at the Altar of Shakespeare' would be a more appropriate title for Professor Bloom's book. Or possibly, `WHAT to Read and Why.' As it stands, `How to Read and Why' is excruciatingly inappropriate for what Bloom sets forth. Bloom asserts in his preface that his book teaches HOW to read and why. The word "how" presupposes that the reader requires instruction in beginning to read, in this case, some of the Western world's greatest literature. Anyone who is new to great literature certainly needs help in how to read it. Such a reader requires assistance in literary devices, content, historical significance, cultural influences, etc. inherent in the works. That type of foundation will help teach you HOW to read. Bloom gives no such help. Rather, he tells you WHAT to read, and why it should be read. (He also assumes that the reader comes to the table with an already vast knowledge of literature and "how" to read it.) Even if Bloom changed his title to `What to Read and Why,' he might as well call it, `Shakespeare is All You Need,' or `How to Read Shakespeare into All the Great Masterpieces of World Literature.' Sure, Shakespeare was profoundly influential (and continues to be) in the realm of literature, no one would deny that. But to CONSTANTLY compare every author and every piece of writing to Shakespeare is like telling a child, "That's good, Johnny, but you'll never be as good as your big brother, you know that, don't you?" Even Shakespeare himself would have to grow tired of all the adoration spewed out by Bloom. Enough already. Don't get me wrong - Bloom is obviously a genius. Anyone who read (and understood) Blake, Tennyson, and Browning at age eight, knows a thing or two. Bloom gives the reader prime examples of great literature. He just doesn't tell you HOW to read them; he tells you WHY. Another reviewer hit the nail on the head: Take the list of works that Bloom suggests, and read them for yourself. Try to find out something about them: the time they were written, the literary devices they use, the cultural and societal influences, the authors who wrote them. The more you discover, the more you will enjoy and appreciate these masterpieces. 283 pages
|
