April 12, 1975

23

(there are many more of the same sort):

"his perverse and negative stance . . . a
turning against the self . . . a quest for
failure is a synecdoche for suicide . . . its
'realism' a pure self-imposition . . . an
inward impulse [suicidal selfpunishment] . . . yielding to instinctual
demands that his ego-ideal finds objectionable . . . we feel, as readers, that
death must be at hand . . . to accept his
place in the company of the ruined . . .
sacrificed, not to the energies of art, but
to the near-solipsist's tragic victory over
himself . . . Childe Roland dies, if he
dies" (a reference particularly worth
considering in the light of the traditional
association between death and sexual
orgasm).
Add now such considerations as these:
Bloom has already quoted Freud's
notion that writing, "which consists in
Let me reduce my argument to the
allowing a fluid to flow out upon a piece
hopelessly simplistic; poems, I am saying,
All literary tradition has been necessarily
are neither about "subjects" nor about
elitist, in every period, if only because the of white paper," has "acquired the symbolic meaning of coitus," hence "is as
"themselves." They are necessarily about
Scene of Instruction always depends upon
though forbidden sexual behavior were
other poems; a poem is a response to a
a primal choosing and a being chosen,
thereby being indulged in." But we
poem, as a poet is a response to a poet, or a
which is what "lite" means. . . . No
should recall that usually in our tradiperson to his parent. Trying to write a
teacher, however impartial he or she
tion the conscience-stricken poetic
poem takes the poet back to the origins of
attempts to be, can avoid choosing among
"ephebe" (an adolescent just before
what a poem first was for him, and so
students, or being chosen by them, for this
manhood) such as Browning was,
takes the poet back beyond the pleasure
is the very nature of teaching. Literary
chooses his calling as a writer prior to
principle to the decisive initial encounter
teaching is precisely like literature itself;
and response that began him.. . . Only a
no strong writer can choose his precursors the conveniences of coitus, though an
independent form of indulgence was
poet challenges a poet as poet, and so
until first he is chosen by them, and no
only a poet makes a poet. To the poet-in-astrong student can fail to be chosen by his available. Add also the thought that,
going Freud one better (or one worse)
poet a poem is always the other man, the
teachers. . . . What is the particular
there is the proverbial expression, "As I
precursor, and so a poem is always a
inescapability of literary tradition for the
take pen in hand." And recall Bloom's
person, always the father of one's Second
teacher who must go out to find himself as
own assurance that "The poet-in-a-poet
Birth. To live, the poet must misintera voice in the wilderness? Is he to teach
cannot marry, whatever the person-in-apret, the father, by the crucial act of
Paradise Lost in preference to the Imamu
poet chooses to have done." In the light
misprision, which is the re-writing of the
Amiri Baraka?
of all that, go back and read the previous
father.
Bloom turns up with an ingenious bit paragraphand surely Bloom was proPrimarily, it seems to me, the stress is of diplomacy here when he proposes to viding all we needed for the suggestion
upon the relation between the poet's feature Milton's Satan as "representa- that this wayward poem by a mature
poetic "precursor" and the poet as an tive of the entire canon when he monologue-artist is a fantasy of onan"ephebe" who resents being "belated" challenges us to challenge Heaven with ism (for Bloom also stresses the fact that
with reference to his origins. But just as him." But how about the precursors of poets are forever going back to their
the dead precursor lives on in him, so his teachers? When, for instance, we think origins, and most such vocations origipoems in turn are "refusals of mortality. of Matthew Arnold's deference to his nate during the lonesome passionate
Every poem therefore has two makers: own distinguished academic father, severities of adolescence).
Of course 1 could quote many similar
the precursor, and the ephebe's rejected what of its relation to Sohrab and
Rustum, where father and son engage in lines from the poem itself, including
mortality."
Bloom plays down a concern with the combat unaware ("unconscious"?) of above all the stanza in which the poet
kinds of "anxiety" deriving from the fact their identity, and the father slays the even signs his name, as the "Childe"
that, in many cases, the poet's choice of son? In brief I'd like to read more about nears the squat "brown" turret where
vocation involves a quite painful and the ways in which the poetic genealogy of he "came," as announced in what Bloom
conscious break with his actual parents "influence" relates to the motives of calls "Roland's final act of blowing his
who, at the very least, were grieved by actual biological genealogy. For the most slughorn." But I would not agree to
his alternative lineage. However this part, it seems to me. Bloom' keeps the interpret the Childe's ruined "Band" as
"precursors" in Bloom's sense. They,
turn is considered near the end of the two lines too distinct.
In particular 1 am puzzled about his along with the "ominous tract" (that will
book in the case of Whitman's "Sea
Drift," which amounts to a reconcilia- comments on Browning's grotesque ' stand for what Bloom brilliantly calls the
tion with his deceased father (in a poem fantasy, "Childe Roland to the Dark Childe's "ordeal, his trial by landscape")
that reflected anxiety over the threat- Tower Came." Let me quote a few and the many incidental gnarled figures,
ened loss of the "inspiration" character- brilliantly impressionistic descriptions are all tautologies, embodying the
istic of the poetic posturing in, say, the
"Song of Myself"). And the problems to
do with poetic breakaway trends in
general are not given the constant
attention that, it seems to me, any
radical rejection of one's parental judgments requires.
Just how such problems of "ancestry"
A Map of Misreading
relate to the forbears of critics is not an
by Harold Bloom
issue in this book. It seems to me that
such things are left dangling by this kind
(Oxford University Press; $8.95)
of summarizing sentence: "As literary
This is an exceptionally subtle and history lengthens, all poetry necessarily
complex work which, it seems to me, is becomes verse-criticism, just as all
doing several things at once. Whatever 1 criticism becomes prose-poetry"
pick as a quotation to start from seems whereat we dare assume that, on many
to give a wrong impression of the book's occasions. Bloom would like his criticism
tenor. But on the author's own authori- to be viewed thus, and rightly so.
ty, I'll try this:
Another line enters from the pedagogic angle:

24

The New Republic

rhetorical principle of amplification, creation, as it were, of the non- able of using the sinews of his powerful
various repetitions of the same sinister absoluteis the fundamental postulate office for ends inimical to the democratic
processhas clearly confronted the
theme that is, in sum, a highly drama- of the moral history of man."
Bloom announces that he intends to author and other members of the school
tized exaggeration (or '[hyperbole," to
use a term that Bloom does exceptional- do more with Luria's visionary ways. I for strong presidencies with a doctrinal
ly well by) for this temporary fanciful am sure that the job of following him dilemma.
Sorensen acknowledges that problem,
"return" to the exacting conditions will be well worth the effort of any
under which his "poetic ancestry" took reader who, along with both poetry and at a personal level, in his preface:
form. Here is another notable respect in poetics, also loves criticism in general for
/ helped write John Kennedy's speeches
which the motivations of the poetic its own sake.
on a strong Presidency and helped him
breakaway are not dealt with throughKenneth Burke forge the legal tools of a stronger
out; yet one can't deny that they are
Presidency in the mistaken belief that
there.
Kenneth Burke, distinguished American
what
was good for the Presidency would
Two other major fields should still be critic, is author of Philosophy of Literary
inevitably be good for the country.
considered. Having glancingly noted Form, A Grammar of Motives, The
that Vico and I stress the four "major Rhetoric of Religion (University of CaliThe style is reminiscent: New Frontropes" (metaphor, metonymy, synec- fornia Press), a novel, short stories and
tier,
playing off the simplism of Engine
doche and irony). Bloom adds hyperbole poetry.
Charlie Wilson. Or, again: "Nixon kept
and metalepsis (or transumption). And
saying that the charges against him
he does wonders by them all. I started
raised fundamental questions about our
this review on that theme. But I
whole
concept of the Presidency; and in
abandoned that start because it involves
my heart I know he's right." This is
issues too specifically literary for a
vintage Sorensen, of the turning phrase,
general approach to the book. As I
familiar to all who recall his contribution
understand Bloom's added emphasis,
to those dazzling exercises in presidenatop the stylistic exaggeration (hypertial persuasion of the early 1960s.
bole) of the "Childe's" temporary imagiCentral to this exercise is Sorensen's
nary return to guilt-laden origins (esslaundry list of suggested institutional
entially experienced as a relationship to Watchmen in the Night
reforms to make the presidency more
his actual parents as vs. his new poetic
by
Theodore
C.
Sorensen
"accountable"
without diminishing its
unnaturalization), I'd take it that metapower. He believes Congress must show
lepsis, or transumption, would involve (MIT Press; $8.95)
more "guts" in carrying out its constituconsiderations of this sort.
The Phaedrus takes us from seed in the "Wa'tergate is like a Rorschach," Aaron tional role; that the press must remain
sense of sheer sperm to the heights of Wildavsky observed at a Washington vigilant (his defense of leaks-inthe Socratic erotic, as transcendently seminar last year. "If you want to know government is the liveliest section of the
embodied in the idea of doctrinal insemi- what anyone thinks is wrong with the book); and that the judiciary must assert
nation. And similarly, via hyperbole and country, ask him what Watergate has to itself more vigorously as a check against
executive authority.
metalepsis, we'd advance from an teach us."
Yet, too often, the author's stylistic
Theodore
Sorensen
bears
out
that
ephebe's sheer physical release to a
poetically ejaculatory analogue, implicit thesis: it was not that Richard Nixon whorls and semantic inversions posed
in the imagery of Childe Roland's horn- was too strong a President that led to the problems for this reviewernot unlike
Watergate abuses, argues John Kenne- those I sometimes encountered on
blow.
dy's
White House special counsel; on the reexamining the presidential speeches
There is at least one more major
strand that should be mentioned in a contrary it was that he was too weak, i.e., he helped craft, after their initial dazzle
review (the "news") of this exceptionally "he was not in the mold of Jefferson, had faded.
"No doubt," Sorensen confesses at
and admirably subtle and complex work. Jackson, Lincoln, the two Roosevelts,
and
others."
one
point, "my view of the Nixon
Whereas, in my Rhetoric of Religion, for
That he was not. Nor was he in the Presidency is distorted by bias." He does
the start of things I had been content to
borrow secular "logological" analogies mold of Millard Fillmore and Calvin admit he was "mistaken" in his simplistic
from the opening chapters of Genesis, Coolidge. But Sorensen has a point to faith regarding the absolute virtue of
Bloom prefers a "logocentric" version by make, and he does it in the way Ben presidential power. Given that fresh
Isaac Luria, "a sixteenth-century master Sonnenberg once described the art of insight, a pre-Nixon White House aide
of theosophical speculation," who "for- successful public relations: "First, throw of his ability and experience might
mulated a repressive theory . . . in a your dart. Next, draw a circle around it. provide instruction far more valuable
than anything a Dean or Magruder
revision of the earlier Kabbalistic ema- That was the target."
Sorensen is not without strategic could impart at this advanced stage of
nation theory." In any case we coincide
to the extent that his "Lurianic story" purpose in this treatise, the outgrowth the public's post-Watergate education.
The Nixon presidency has been anatcontains "a vision of creation-as- of lectures given last fall at MIT. He
came
to
political
maturity
in
the
school
omized
as has no presidency gone
catastrophe," and mine builds around
the orthodox biblical account that that holds that there has never been before. But if we know the Nixon White
integrally connects the "Creation" with anything wrong with the country that a House better than any other, what of its
the "Fall." Maybe we could settle for this good strong President couldn't set right. predecessors? If a lawyer (as distinquotation from Coleridge's Table Talk; The accession of a not-so-good guished from a journalist like George
"A Fall of some sort or otherthe 'President- but one nevertheless cap- Reedy) of Sorensen's unique back-