Harold Bloom Dies

[_Philo Sofee]

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... 02019_has/

I remember his book "The American Religion" and how thrilled I was as an apologist to finally have someone none Mormon who defended Mormonism, and I was more than positive this was going to put Mormonism on the map with several millions of converts.....I mean, ya gotta love the youthful naïvété eh?

[_honorentheos]

I heard this yesterday. Bloom's The Book of J was one of my earliest exposures to the Documentary Hypothesis and was an enjoyable read as well as informative at an accessible level. I don't recall it being authoritative on the subject, and it's not a source I point to when discussing the DH. As a point of entry it was a comfortable, first class ride into a shocking subject. Well, shocking for someone raised to believe the Pentateuch was literally written by Moses anyway.

He was certainly gifted, and it gave Mormonism a certain amount of legitimacy that he took it on, not as an object of criticism but as one to be explored and accepted. In some ways, he laid out a map showing that Mormonism doesn't have to be true to be valued which has been followed and added upon by certain branches of LDS apologists and thinkers.

[Guest]

Naomi Wolf published a very sad and disturbing piece about Harold Bloom's drunken hand on her inner thigh and all of the other damage he did to young, aspiring female scholars. Yale never seems to have done a damn thing about it, and those responsible can go to hell.

[_Symmachus]

I heard this yesterday. Bloom's The Book of J was one of my earliest exposures to the Documentary Hypothesis and was an enjoyable read as well as informative at an accessible level. I don't recall it being authoritative on the subject, and it's not a source I point to when discussing the DH. As a point of entry it was a comfortable, first class ride into a shocking subject. Well, shocking for someone raised to believe the Pentateuch was literally written by Moses anyway.

He was certainly gifted, and it gave Mormonism a certain amount of legitimacy that he took it on, not as an object of criticism but as one to be explored and accepted. In some ways, he laid out a map showing that Mormonism doesn't have to be true to be valued which has been followed and added upon by certain branches of LDS apologists and thinkers.

As I recall, though earlier welcoming his respect of certain Gnostic features of Joseph Smith's religion, some apologists later decided he was an anti-Mormon when he criticized Thomas S. Monson, in the typical bloat of Bloomian idiom, as one of the "oligarchic plutocrats" (or was it "plutocratic oligarchs"?) of the Church in his rhetorical attack on Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.

One need not accept the Church's claim to ongoing revelation that is continually perfecting its understanding of truth and the nature of a god who progresses, but one must never tarnish or demean the present and unalterable state of perfection in which the Church's leaders repose now and forever. In sinning thus, Prof. Bloom gave a cold shoulder to the apologists of Sunbeam Mormonism and put his warm hand firmly on the thigh of the rejuvenated Maxwell Institute.

[_honorentheos]

It's a difficult mind that can remark reading Tolkien would sometimes remind him of the Book of Mormon.

[_huckelberry]

I heard this yesterday. Bloom's The Book of J was one of my earliest exposures to the Documentary Hypothesis and was an enjoyable read as well as informative at an accessible level. I don't recall it being authoritative on the subject, and it's not a source I point to when discussing the my husband. As a point of entry it was a comfortable, first class ride into a shocking subject. Well, shocking for someone raised to believe the Pentateuch was literally written by Moses anyway.

He was certainly gifted, and it gave Mormonism a certain amount of legitimacy that he took it on, not as an object of criticism but as one to be explored and accepted. In some ways, he laid out a map showing that Mormonism doesn't have to be true to be valued which has been followed and added upon by certain branches of LDS apologists and thinkers.

As I recall, though earlier welcoming his respect of certain Gnostic features of Joseph Smith's religion, some apologists later decided he was an anti-Mormon when he criticized Thomas S. Monson, in the typical bloat of Bloomian idiom, as one of the "oligarchic plutocrats" (or was it "plutocratic oligarchs"?) of the Church in his rhetorical attack on Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.

One need not accept the Church's claim to ongoing revelation that is continually perfecting its understanding of truth and the nature of a god who progresses, but one must never tarnish or demean the present and unalterable state of perfection in which the Church's leaders repose now and forever. In sinning thus, Prof. Bloom gave a cold shoulder to the apologists of Sunbeam Mormonism and put his warm hand firmly on the thigh of the rejuvenated Maxwell Institute.

I am wondering if anybody would like to approach the question of how Mormons would read Blooms book as supporting LDS church as it actually exists. What I remember is that Bloom thought Joseph Smith had an interesting imagination and the subsequent church does not. I remember being interested in the observation of a sort of Gnosticism pervading American religion. I agree and suspect that is the origin of Trumpist churchianity. I gathered that Blooms gnosticism is more self aware and passionate.

I need to say I read American Religion when it came out and have done some serious forgetting of it since. I have only been able to dig up a thin and spotty outilne from my memory( and that after hunting reminders online).