Different Evaluations of Literature

A thesis is a literary tool used to permit both the reader and the author to achieve their way in a maze of thoughts by pursuing a gist of notions and ideas. Many critics use this tool as a means of understanding the material that the composer writes.

The writer, Harold Bloom criticizes Stephen King's work by focusing the entire piece as a complete waste to the cultural community. "The publishing industry has stooped terribly low to bestow on King a lifetime award..." "...another low in the shocking process of dumbing down our cultural life." Moreover, Bloom directs further denigration towards Rowling's "Sorcerer’s Stone as a dreadful piece of work that encompasses so many clichés and lifeless metaphors that the book presents no intuitive writing style at all. "The writing was dreadful; the book was terrible." "Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing." Furthermore, Bloom continues with referring to several other awful writers that receive more credit than they should and a few personal authors of his own that should have received more recognition for their own talents in composition. "But today they are Felicia Hemans, Charlotte Smith, Mary Tighe, Laetitia Landon, and others who just can't write." "Today there are four living American novelists I know of who are still at work and who deserve our praise." Concluding, Mr. Bloom addresses that several individuals today that achieved praise for their own work lack the fundamental literary focus of writing from the historic contributors in the past and from this the present understanding of literature is beginning to deteriorate.

The critic, Steve Almond contrasts Bloom's ideas and statements by claiming them to be farfetched and outrageous. "Like most everything that makes the e–rounds, the piece is both trenchant and ridiculous." Moreover, Almond is convinced that Bloom takes too much of an interest in attacking anyone that he considers as an unskilled flop than to appraise the writers and such that he treasures. "... is why Bloom feels it necessary to sound off against writers he deems inferior, as opposed to celebrating the writers (and the ideas) he admires." Nevertheless, the writer issues out that Bloom knows nothing about how many great writers there consists of and simply just beckons more slander to talented composers. "Bloom, on the other hand, can do little more than holler insults from the sidelines." "What cave is this guy living in? Does he expect to be taken seriously by anyone other than the charter members of his faculty club?" Concluding, Mr. Almond obvious describes Bloom's work as a critic to be a disgraceful and a constant butcher to the esteem of modern literature.

As a particular take of interest, I prefer to agree with Almond's point of view. No one can particularly be as bad of an author that Bloom expresses. "By awarding it to King they recognize nothing but the commercial value of his books..." In addition, I do concur that Bloom exaggerates his own opinions with too much a biased and affirmative tone. "This isn't even good nonsense. It's insufferable." "I said, "I fear that something of great value has ended forever."" If Bloom wants individuals such as me to agree with his views then he should address more openly about the particular portions he finds atrocious and present more logical than emotional highlight to what he is talking about.


Bloom, Harold. "Dumbing down American readers", boston.com news. 24 September 2003. <"http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2003/09/24/dumbing_down_american_readers/">.

Almond, Steve. "THE BLOOM IS OFF THE MARK", MOBYlives. 29 September 2003. <"http://www.mobylives.com/Almond_Bloom.html">.