A typical example of Bloom. I read Plato, Machiavelli, Rousseau and Nietzsche in a social scinece class (he wasn't a member of the PSci dept) with him in '89. He was the most brilliant man I ever met and indescribably funny. His lectures on Rousseau's Emile were mindshaking. He was kind of an outcast among the departments. Wound up on the Commitee on Social Thought, nobody else wanted to deal with him. He was too independent in thought. No robot of progressive silliness. RIP Allan.
@traccan I disagree, Allan had a vicious experience once he became "somebody". But many people of the left and right engaged him as someone with a perspective worthy of challenge and reflection (Chris Lehmann-Haupt, Conor Cruise O'Brien, Walker Percy et al). Today, he'd be considered a loon by both sides, unworthy of confrontation. That's good for the new class of technorati too since he was a powerful debater and would eviscerate them without relent or care.
It's interesting that he was attacked mainly from the left, because as I understand what he's saying, TODAY, he would be attacked much more viciously from the right (at least in terms of the 'public', 'popular', right..the news media, religious groups, etc. There would be, of course, 'right-wing' academics who'd support his views. The call for a 'place' for thinking, relatively undisturbed by the pragmatic necessities of business-think: this is Slavoj Zizek, not Rush Limbaugh.
I disagree, aes229. I was fortunate enough to have fabulous philosophy professors at college here in Atlanta. They were to the left, but they laid the foundation for my own journey into an academic career. The problem, as I see it, is our loss of tradition. We have grown suspicious of anything old. Our professors are just products of these times, really.
![Bloom interviewed 1 - "I am not a snob" [1987]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-15fOEovI0o/mqdefault.jpg)
![Bloom interviewed 2 - "I said economic OR political!" [1987]](/img/n.gif)
thank you for posting this. Jesus. Bloom was a strange character, which i love. and his clarity was frightening.
A typical example of Bloom. I read Plato, Machiavelli, Rousseau and Nietzsche in a social scinece class (he wasn't a member of the PSci dept) with him in '89. He was the most brilliant man I ever met and indescribably funny. His lectures on Rousseau's Emile were mindshaking. He was kind of an outcast among the departments. Wound up on the Commitee on Social Thought, nobody else wanted to deal with him. He was too independent in thought. No robot of progressive silliness. RIP Allan.
@traccan I disagree, Allan had a vicious experience once he became "somebody". But many people of the left and right engaged him as someone with a perspective worthy of challenge and reflection (Chris Lehmann-Haupt, Conor Cruise O'Brien, Walker Percy et al). Today, he'd be considered a loon by both sides, unworthy of confrontation. That's good for the new class of technorati too since he was a powerful debater and would eviscerate them without relent or care.
so far ahead of his time- "it stopped being a question"
It's interesting that he was attacked mainly from the left, because as I understand what he's saying, TODAY, he would be attacked much more viciously from the right (at least in terms of the 'public', 'popular', right..the news media, religious groups, etc. There would be, of course, 'right-wing' academics who'd support his views.
The call for a 'place' for thinking, relatively undisturbed by the pragmatic necessities of business-think: this is Slavoj Zizek, not Rush Limbaugh.
I disagree, aes229. I was fortunate enough to have fabulous philosophy professors at college here in Atlanta. They were to the left, but they laid the foundation for my own journey into an academic career. The problem, as I see it, is our loss of tradition. We have grown suspicious of anything old. Our professors are just products of these times, really.
@vinnynumbnuts Lol