>HB: I spend a good part of my life in bookstores – I give readings there when a new book of mine has come out, I go there to read or simply to browse. But the question is what do these immense mountains of books consist of? You know, child, my electronic mailbox overflowing with daily mesages from Potterites who still cannot forgive me for the article I published in Wall Street Journal more than a year ago, entitled "Can 35 Million Harry Potter Fans Be Wrong? – Yes!" These people claim that Harry Potter does great things for their children. I think they are deceiving themselves. I read the first book in the Potter series, the one that's supposed to be the best. I was shocked. Every sentence there is a string of cliches, there are no characters – any one of them could be anyone else, they speak in each other's voice, so one gets confused as to who is who.
>IL: Yet the defenders of Harry Potter claim that these books get their children to read.
>HB: But they don't! Their eyes simply scan the page. Then they turn to the next page. Their minds are deadened by cliches. Nothing is required of them, absolutely nothing. Nothing happens to them. They are invited to avoid reality, to avoid the world and they are not invited to look inward, into themselves. But of course it is an exercise in futility to try to oppose Harry Potter.
>Byatt - Ms. Rowling's magic world has no place for the numinous. It is written for people whose imaginative lives are confined to TV cartoons, and the exaggerated (more exciting, not threatening) mirror-worlds of soaps, reality TV and celebrity gossip. Its values, and everything in it, are, as Gatsby said of his own world when the light had gone out of his dream, ''only personal.'' Nobody is trying to save or destroy anything beyond Harry Potter and his friends and family.
Your hatred (and love of course) for the series, fans, the people being quoted and Rowling
Are Bloom and Byatt correct?
Yay it's time for one of my favorite kind of /lit/ threads!!!!!!!!!
>>8209822
of course they're right. the thing is, people think they're standing on a treestump screaming these things, trying to stop people from reading Harry Potter. no, reporters ask them their opinion and they give the obvious answer: Harry Potter isn't great literature. what do you want well-read people to say? I think McDonald's hamburgers taste great, but I would expect a food critic to be more discerning than I am.
the problem is that people think opinions are all equal, when really how much you know about a field gives your opinion more or less weight. if you've read only twelve books in your entire life, you may think your favorite one is extraordinarily powerful, innovative, thoughtful, until you read two hundred more and realize your old favorite is actually, in the grand scheme of things, mediocre. Bloom and Byatt are experts of literature. you don't have to agree with them, but make sure you're not overestimating your own expertise when you disagree.
What? Of course they are correct.
>>8209822
I love how Bloom calls everyone "dear," and "my child."
I want him to do it to me.
>>8209866
It's not without reasons that people get mad at Bloom when he criticized a book he hasn't read (see the part where he laments how much the expression "stretch their legs" is repeat when actually it's never used once in the entire novel)
p.s. i should specify that i'm not arguing for that cold, worthless pile of mediocrity that is hp
It is weird to me that they so critical of Harry Potter when Bloom raves about The Wind in the Willows and Byatt about Terry Pratchett.
>>8209822
>They are invited to avoid reality, to avoid the world and they are not invited to look inward, into themselves.
maybe I'm oversimplifying but isn't this sort of the point of HP? it's escapism. it doesn't purport to be serious literature, because it isn't. yes, there are plenty of people that never progress beyond escapist reading, but plenty of people can and do use it to get their feet wet before diving into the canon
>>8210131
We had a thread about this "stretched his legs" was searched in a Kindle by some retard.
But "he got up to stretch his legs" "let's stretch our legs" "its good to stretch the legs after a meal" and many other variants are used.
This is a "beam me up Scotty" quote. A readily recognizable place holder for a hundred permutations that do appear, while no directly being in the material itself.
>>8210189
I see. My bad then.
>>8210174
Why does this argument get flopped around for reading?
Any other art form this is prima facie retarded
>Lots of people get their feet wet with pop music before moving on to classical.
No. Pop music is ubiquitous and it's consumption is usually first because of that. It in no way prepares you to move on to other forms of music.
>>8210210
unlike that jazz, right adorno?
>>8210212
Jazz is reddit: the music genre.
Something for stupid people who believe themselves to be intelligent and cultured to consume and remain in their bubble of alleged intelligence and culture
>>8210174
That would be fine if it was true, but now it seems common to read only YA even into adulthood. That's what people will do because it is socially acceptable and it is the path of least resistance. Many people who grew up reading Harry Potter didn't move on to higher brow fantasy, they moved on to the Hunger Games.
>>8210189
interesting
>>8210210
people move on to sub genres, modern classical is all garbage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13D1YY_BvWU
>>8210273
Then these people should be reproached, if YA is all they read. It is because of inverse snobbery that they are not - which raises the question of why inverse snobbery is the prevailing culture.
>>8210359
You're not really qualified to judge modern classical if the best you can come up with is the helicopter quartet.
>>8210369
because most 'high brow' literature is pseudo intellectual and vacuous
>>8210382
second this as a classical musician. that shit's old news.
>>8209822
>Its values, and everything in it, are, as Gatsby said of his own world when the light had gone out of his dream, ''only personal.''
Only Yanks would think the Great Gatsby and, by extension, American literature as a whole, is respectably quotable.
There is a certain irony in trashing Harry Potter whilst appealing to the authority of such a plebeian work.
>>8210404
>Byatt
Born: August 24, 1936 (age 79), Sheffield, United Kingdom
>>8210404
Call the roller of big cigars,
The muscular one, and bid him whip
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Let the wenches dawdle in such dress
As they are used to wear, and let the boys
Bring flowers in last month’s newspapers.
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
>>8210407
that's besides the point, we were just saying that your example was eccentric.
but in the spirit of cooperation: https://youtu.be/me-qu2VG-rk
>>8210383
>sokal
>>8210222
Lol found the pleb.
>>8210414
except for all of it. you also used the word "whilst," like a dumb faggot. but I'll bite: tell us why Fitzgerald and (by extension) American literature is unworthy of respect.
>>8210435
I can not imagine listening to this outside of film or video game
>>8210450
yes - you.
>>8210453
>Condemning the correct use of English
Truly, we seem to have a Yank on our hands.
>tell us why Fitzgerald and (by extension) American literature is unworthy of respect
Compare and contrast the highest works of American literature to the highest work of European literature.
The former does not compare.
>>8210469
You type like a 16 year old Atheist who just spent the day watching Hitchens videos on YouTube
>>8210469
>Compare and contrast the highest works of American literature to the highest work of European literature
pffft
>>8210476
I feel sorry for your educators, though perhaps I assume too much.
>>8210479
Mediocre.
>>8210469
>could you explain why American lit sucks?
>bc European lit is better
yea verily
>>8210493
>he hasn't read James
>>8210511
Moby Dick is passable.
>>8210512
>passable
>>8209866
Excellent opinion my man. Gonna steal this.
>>8210131
He states he read the first one though? Maybe he just didn't pay much attention.
>>8210476
>>8210479
>>8210511
>>8210528
>>8210453
>pic related
>>8210718
chill out
>>8209822
does bloom have a list of books that children should be reading instead of harried poofter?
>>8211512
http://www.mrbauld.com/bloomjr.html
pretty solid imo
>>8210069
can't wait to do this in fifty years
>>8212116
>not alpha enough to get away with it at any age
>bloom
>>8210144
Maybe they don't think those books are as bad, Anonymous.
>>8210383
The Sokal thing only had to do with postmodern philosophy which Bloom is also extremely critical of, though mostly in the context of literary criticism
>>8210144
I've always read that/lit/ posters were retarded. It's interesting to find confirmation so easily.
>>8210189
This was why I ended up quitting Game of Thrones somewhere early on in the third book. By that point I was shaking my head every couple of pages.
>>8214108
Wonder what Bloom would say if asked about that lol
>>8214094
By posting here you're only making the stereotype worse.
>>8214110
Probably something like "a lazy perversion of real history coupled with a Tolkien-like universe but without any kind of ingenuity". GoT truly is a cancer, at least before the show it wasn't that big of a thing, but now it's everywhere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4C43rXNpoE
>>8210404
You're like 20, aren't you?
>>8211553
>HomeArts: Why should children read? And why should children read good books?
>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.
Why is this so true?
>>8210458
I'm not even meming. You have to be a legitimate retard and/or pleb to not appreciate jazz.
>>8214125
I'm almost convinced shows like Game of Thrones never even attempted to be art, not even ungodly "lower" art. I have no idea what people learn from it, or what it does to them internally, but they always talk about it and create memes from it. It's just cultural currency. It's a list of references you need to know to be hip. It's a convienent focus point for youtube videos and inane internet articles to circle around, items which exist to be tossed around and raise the views on websites.
It's almost as if pop shit is intricately created to be deliberately marketable to mass audiences for the sole purpose of making money.
Funny how a board that spends most its time shitting on literature has such issues when others shit on literature. Is it because these people got famous by shitting on literature?
>>8214422
>listening to rock
What decade is he living in? And that he doesn't even consider that he thinks readers are more interesting because he is one himself is laughable.
>>8209866
Fantastically worded.
I think that you have to remember that reading, as an act itself, is not intrinsically beneficial. A person who has read a volume of Chomsky, for example (replace with any critical thinker of your choosing, left or right), will have more worldly value than somebody who has read countless Harry Potters. Then again, it depends on what knowledge you take from each book- Harry Potter may be cliched, but keep in mind that its target audience have not come across its tropes before, in all likelihood.It can be said that these young adult books teach the value of empathy and resilience to the fostering mind, but the problem arises if they choose not to continually challenge themselves with new ideas as they grow older. The thirty year old Harry Potter nerd is a cliche in itself, and their attachment is based on sentiment and nostalgia. I suppose that you're looking at it from an aesthetic point of view whereas I'm looking at the novel's cult value, but the appreciation of both is assumed to elevate one onto some higher plain of being. Harry Potter has undoubtedly acted as a gateway for many into the broader realm of literature, but many of its readers also choose to seek out similarly 'inspirational novels', dulling themselves emotionally and intellectually.
>>8210404
whilst whilsting I added an es tee to my while whilst dropping the e, for twas very sophisticated to do thusly in my opinion, but sadly unbeknownst to me for most others it scanned as a distractingly inane and overly-conscious maneuver
>>8214437
Yeah it's a soap opera. Everyone knows this
>>8216022
That interview is from 1995. Also, there's some rock music that he likes, he's just pointing out that in general it's not anywhere near as interesting as great literature, or the music of Bach and Mozart, or even Jazz music
>>8214125
This is truly a new nightmare and I seriously just woke up from one.
>>8216074
"Most others" probably being Americans. British people still use the word with regularity. Brits always sound pretentious, though.
>>8209866
upvote
>>8216683
>or even Jazz music
>>8210469
>Compare and contrast the highest works of American literature to the highest work of European literature.
Why should I compare a country to a continent? Completely asinine.
>>8218369
America is a continent, dipshit.
>>8210469
Moby Dick is the best piece of English lit, second only to Ulysses.
>>8218328
>letting a Jew make your opinions for you.
Yes, and they have actually expressed it much better than I ever could.
Thanks.
>>8218903
Who is William Shakespeare?
>>8214437
It has well-written characters. (Talking about the books, not necessarily the show.) That part of the story is 100% quality. A lot of normies (mostly those who only watch the show) just like le ebin shocking twists though, so there are multiple reasons for its popularity.
>old people
who the fuck cares
they probably have dementia anyway
>>8218954
who is Chris Marlowe?
Does he have any literally merit or was he the original shitposter?
(Got to admit that parts of Naked Lunch gave me a solid.)
>>8214428
I'm just not a retard pseud who likes jazz because it gives some air of sophistication while being largely ignorant of the medium
all the redeeming aspects of jazz were incorporated into the art music tradition by guys like ravel and others. jazz on its own is a fragmentary and artistically unsatisfying genre
>>8218975
You'll be old one day.
>>8219800
Yes. I'd say he does.
The "shitposting" often does carry either satirical meaning (that's really well done when you think about it), no bullshit philosophical points, or hints at the Author's psyche.
It's obvious that shitposting wasn't his intent if he took the time to formulate the elements from his earlier works into Naked Lunch in a way that would make certain themes coherent. And the way he talked about it all when interviewed sort of proves that he knew what he was doing.
>>8210189
>We had a thread about this "stretched his legs" was searched in a Kindle by some retard. But "he got up to stretch his legs" "let's stretch our legs" "its good to stretch the legs after a meal" and many other variants are used.
Are you sure about that? I saw that Bloom quote on here a while back and out of curiosity I found a pdf of the book and ctr+f'd "stretch". I could be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure that the only use of the word in the context that Bloom talks about was on the first page. It seemed to me like Bloom just read a the first chapter or so and jumped on the first clichéd phrase he came across to slot into an argument he'd already determined.
>>8210210
In music education, students are expected to "get their feet wet" with folk music before moving on to Western Art Music
>>8220599
>jazz on its own is fragmentary...
That's because trying to label everything as just "jazz" is as stupid as applying the broad brush label of "classical."
You have fun with your feigned intellectual superiority. I'll be over here enjoying the greatest album of all time if you need me.
>>8221125
no one cares
go back to /mu/ i heard they like shit music there.
>>8216074
>Getting this butthurt over the completely legitimate use of 'whilst'
Yanks...
>>8221139
You should care. Pretending to like literature while being disdainful toward all other forms of art is a sure sign of being a pseud.
>>8221156
I like real music not jazz.
>>8221526
Tell'em Theodor!
>>8221526
If you don't enjoy any jazz at all then you probably don't enjoy a higher level of complexity, skill and intention in your music.
I'm not a huge jazz fan but fucking hell, I'm not stupid enough to say that any genre is for pseudointellectuals.
You like a strong melody and more simple construction in music, but keep your ignorance to yourself.
I didn't enjoy reading Ulysses that much. The reason isn't that it's only enjoyed by pseudointellectuals. The reason is that I wasn't well read enough and didn't understand it enough to love it.
>>8221832
>all this projection
i love ulysses and i listen to classical music
you are a pseudointellectual who is trying to posture on an anonymous laotian cave painting imageboard by saying you can appreciate the "complexities" (kek) of jazz.
>>8221842
classical music is fucking gay
>>8221842
I don't overly appreciate the complexities of jazz. I'm just open-minded enough to know that some people genuinely do. I feel like you missed the point of the post.
What are some of your least favourite composers of classical music by the way? Or do you just pretend to like it all to feel smart?
>>8221882
The good composers of classical music are the only ones that anyone still listens to. If you don't like all of them to some extent, then you're idiosyncratically picky.
Also Tchaikovsky is overrated
>>8221882
chopin, bach, satie
>Or do you just pretend to like it all to feel smart?
i have an ivy league phd to do that for me
>>8221919
>this poor justification for pleb taste in classical
>>8221930
>19th century and bach
what is it with pseuds and the 19th century
>>8221930
How can you not like those composers, fucker
>>8221860
>He wants the negro's semen in his ear
>Calls symphonic music by the old masters gay
>>8221934
Actually it's a good justification for great taste in it.
>>8221919
I still feel like people should have preferences. I never got on well with much Baroque. That doesn't take me to the conclusion that the whole genre is shit though. Anyway, this argument is getting pretty circular, enjoy your classical radio.
Still,
>>8221951
Hell, I'd rather have a buffalo take a diarrhea dump in my ear.
>>8221951
'symphonic' is just code for gay music. ooh symmetry and counterpoint and other ridiculous rules that are meaningless just to please faggot fops and dandies in their garden parties
>>8209822
Neither Bloom nor Byatt has read the books, so their opinions (which I might otherwise respect are worthless on this topic. Bloom's article contained an outright lie:
As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs." I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing.
The phrase "stretched his legs" appears just ONCE in the first Potter book. Not "several dozen times." Bloom is a lying asshat. Byatt is jealous and snobby, and also has obviously not read the books. Many of her claims have some merit, and I'm the last to say Rowling is a greatly skilled or original author, but the hatred? That's just bitterness of old snobs.
>>8221962
Romantic-era music is the most exciting because it's extremely diverse without being a bunch of clamorous nonsense
>>8221976
lame
>>8221970
you're too late man, we're onto jazz and classical music now
>>8221963
>>8221968
You really are the white man's burden, I don't know why you aren't kept in chains still when you are such barbarians and philistines.
>>8221970
People keep getting so fucking butthurt over this. That's not from the article on Harry Potter, but from one on Stephen King winning some major American literary award a year later, likely long after he had forgotten the content of the book. In the original article, he simply says that the book is filled with cliches of the "stretched his legs" variety, which is true. But you haven't even read the article, so you're just being a retarded hypocrite.
>>8222006
HAHAHA I'M WHITE YOU DUMB FAGGOT HAHA
>>8222007
pleb. you forget that Harold Bloom says he remembers everthing he reads.
>>8221919
>Tchaikovsky is overrated
pseud
>>8222017
So you say but I very much doubt it. Even if your skin would happen to be unusually pale for a negro know that it would not matter because you have the soul of a negro and I would not be fooled.
>>8222007
He specifically says that he marked a tally every time the phrase was used and gave up after a few chapters because it was so frequent.
>>8222007
He's very specific and I quoted the fucking article I was referring to, so I'm not sure how you think I was discussing another one, It's not being "butthurt" when you call out a critic on obvious factual errors in the claims that they're basing their contempt on, you witless child. It destroys his argument and credibility.
