Rating: 
Summary: One of the most useless books
Review: Bloom's opinion on the state of American education is certainly accurate, however, his "cures" for the problems are at the very least exclusive and ultimately useless. He claims that the focus should be placed on those who are in the upper level of intelligence, yet he provides only a superficial means for assessing the capability of students. I think it is unfortunate that this book has been purchased by so many people, and I shudder at the thought that someone may actually try to adjust education according to Bloom's obtuse view.
Rating: 
Summary: Criticise - or praise - this book at your peril.
Review: Few books are as dangerous, as provocative, or as important.If you disagree with this book, then it is almost certainly because you are guilty as charged. Either that or you must respond, and I cannot wait to read your response. If you agree with this book, then you shoulder the burden: you must act now! Either way, there is nothing that can be said about higher education and higher thinking that is not founded upon the analysis and commentary of Allan Bloom. Agree or disagree, you simply cannot ignore him.
Rating:
Summary: Faulty Logic
Review: I've had the same experience with many books, particularly it seems in social theory and commentary-- I will just start to get in sync with their way of thinking, and then like a brick wall the author's sexist views will raise up and stop me in my tracks. Bloom's comments on the promiscuity of female college students are inappropriate, as well as sexist, considering there is no mention of like behavior in corresponding males (which, it is presumed, is acceptable). As an intellectual and a female, I find the faulty logic displayed by this attitude reason enough to view subsequent theoretical positing with skepticism. Aside from this, the connections Bloom attempts to make are often weak, and there is a distinct undertone of peevish wistfulness, as he longs for a return to a nebulous ideal that would define him *personally* as the model of academic eminence, if such ever in fact existed. Added 01/15/03: I failed to make clear that I AM in favor of traditional methods of teaching-- I am a philosophy student and personally feel that critical thinking should be a required course at various levels of education, from perhaps junior high level through undergraduate, perhaps even beyond (it's interesting that in the current system one can get a Ph.D. without ever taking basic logic-- no wonder lawyers make so much money). The fact that I have strong opinions concerning the subject of feminism does not make me a feminazi or an emotional extremist, any more than a non-European would be less rational for being sensitive to racial issues. It's simply in my best interest. That aside, I do believe that Bloom's basic view, that postmodernism has ruined American education, and hamstrung academia in general, is correct. However to lump women's sexual liberation together with a basic loss of respect for traditional educational traditions is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. In my opinion this makes him lose a tremendous amount of credibility, and I don't believe I'm invoking a straw man argument when it is clear that he has incorporated his views of sexuality into his overall argument. For anyone who would argue that my views make me "part of the problem", I would ask if they would feel that same way if their own sexuality was pulled into the argument, as evidence and partial source of "the problem". Liberal education is not about relativism, or solipsism. It is about dialectics-- the continual search for the best possible answer. It is a huge step backward to try to connect woman's sexual liberation with the current ills of the academic intitution. Plus, at the most basic level, it just doesn't make sense.
Rating: 
Summary: Aspiring to Platonic Perfection
Review: I was surprised at how compelling the arguments of this book were-in part because I had dismissed it, when it first came out, as Reaganite conservative propaganda. As Saul Bellow chronicles in Ravelstien, a fictional account of Bloom in his dying days, Bloom's students, who often went on to positions in high places such as government, loved him. Well, this book is conservative in a way but don't confuse it with Pat Buchanan's ravings or shouting yuppies in bars: Bloom's book is a masterful interpretation of Plato's emphasis on three ideals key to ancient Greece and the greatness of America: the good, the beautiful, and the true. As illustrated by the woman who stands up in the subterranean feminist meeting in Fellini's City of Women that all women are beautiful, all women are young, all women are twenty years old-it is simply wishful thinking-and ultimately deeply character-debilitating self-deception, if not a Naziesque form of thought control-to persuade oneself (or try to convince others) that everyone and everything is equally beautiful, good, or true. The greatness of the United States, Bloom points out eloquently and repeatedly, is that we have inherited and (at least in our earlier days) instantiated these Greek ideal of the true, the beautiful, and the good. Part of what has confused us as a nation is our other great inheritance of ideals, from France of the French revolution. Here the ideals were liberty, fraternity, and equality. Kurt Vonnegut has a wonderful short story where, to make all citizens equal, people who are significantly smarter are brought into line with special helmets than bang on their head continuously so they can't think straight-a fictional example, exaggerated for clarity, of all that is wrong with the enforcement of diversity for diversity's sake, political correctness, and what another Bloom (Harold) calls "the politics of resentment." Allan Bloom shows that what is superior about the United States as a nation devolves upon its integration of the Greek ideals-not to accept all cultures as equal, but to scour them, taking what is best from all. He gives the example of the pre-colonial British practise in India of burning wives of the deceased husband (similar practises have existed in Japan-floating widows down the river-and elsewhere). Not all cultural practises are equally good. For example, women are treated better in countries like Turkey and the United States than in places like Saudi Arabia and Japan. That doesn't mean, however, that Alice Walker is Shakespeare. Although this book does not negate deconstruction or cultural relativism (to be used for purposes of comparison, not mere levelling) it shows the strength of a once-great country that has lost sight of the ideals of excellence articulated in the Platonic search for the true, the beautiful, and the good. There are, of course, other interpretations of Platonism. But this book is a hard-hitting tour-de-force, a great example of applied Platonism, showin-good-heartedly and amusingly-not only what is wrong with America but what needs to be done to fix it. An eloquent defense of the dying core of western civilization.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating and Frightening
Review: This former ivy-league prof's thoughts on how America has changed as viewed through 3 decades of students is fascinating and frightening. His analysis of what has gone wrong in student's dating lives is particularly fascinating. Bloom shows us how a lack of sexual roles has led to a lack of respect for the opposite sexes --- and thereby to a lack of romance or excitement in sexual relationships. Now, with roles and respect gone, sex is just sex -- a casual thing to be partaken by all. The mystery is gone and so is much of the fun. This is a fascinating book -- and it parallels many of the thoughts found in "The Abolition of Man" by C.S. Lewis and "Return to Modesty" by Wendy Shalit -- also great books. The Closing of the American Mind is a must-read for those who are interested in how our country's society has changed and is changing.
Rating:
Summary: Perhaps the most important book ever written in English
Review: A revealing, penetrating, inspiring text on the state of education and the modern American mind. It was Bloom's life work - his profession at the University Of Chicago - to compare human eras and their standards. Through his research no one has so completely uncovered the ills of our time, or affirmed what is positive. His courage to face modern dogma made Bloom hated by those adhering to new orthodoxies and open to their character assassinations, but Bloom wrote anyway. Contrary to relativism of the new movements and their extinguishing of deep education - which in the end is a search for the right answers - Bloom claims there are indeed answers to questions concerning the human condition (thus the inspiration), and that "not obvious" does not mean "unavailable". "The liberally educated person," he writes, "is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers, not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration." Today's social relativism is considered "not a theoretical insight" but a "moral postulate of a free society", and hence the current totalitarianism we experience from the Fundamentalist Left as one dare not oppose such rule. (The Left is no different from the intolerant Right, excepting that the Left, hypocritically, advertises themselves as tolerant, while the Right never bothered.) How did America reach its current state of intolerance to ideas without agreement on first principles? Bloom takes us on a lively tour toward an answer, engagingly written. As example, early on in America, religion was demoted from the level of "knowledge" to that of "opinion" in order to defuse dangerous elements of its passion we still see today in the Levant, but, importantly, the right to religious belief was not lost. This demotion was possible if society were to shrink its claims to moral certainty, subordinating old ways (but not abandoning them) to Enlightenment's Natural Rights. Today this process of "value shrinkage" is taken to such extreme that the original ideas providing its basis are attacked, claiming each period has its "preferences". None are superior, as that would be, by modern perspectives, discrimination. Today, "subordination" is equivalent to suppression. This radical democracy claims limits on anything to be arbitrary (since truth is now relative), all the while emphasizing how mad the white Eurocentric past was, confirmed by body counts of the most lethal century in the record of our species. "The point is not to correct the mistakes and really be right," says Bloom, "rather it is not to think you are right at all." Add to this our fashionable characterization that America's historical progenitors were racist, then subordination to Enlightenment's promise is easily jettisoned in favor of embracing any or all ideologies (except those we came from), abandoning fundamental agreement on first principles that form a social contract to begin with. In this example we see how a kind of generalization of issues allows for the indictment of anything associated with them in order to pervert the old for a new political order, i.e. dethroning Enlightenment for political correctness and postmodernism. In short, we see a stock theme of a civilization's initial spirit and values becoming their opposite. Though Bloom never comes out to say so, one may wonder if this is a marker of a civilization's fall forewarned by Spengler. Bloom clarifies that "passion" and "commitment" have become the new political validations replacing reason and critical thinking. What the Founders worked so hard to balance (faction) due to its inherent opposition to the common good, is now promoted as a central role of government with its fondness for "groups". With "common good" abandoned, factions are no longer problematic. What the Founders never imagined has set in - not a tyranny of the majority they strived to counterbalance, but a tyranny of passionate, committed minority. Concerning multiculturalism in education Bloom notes that Greeks searched out other cultures too (as we still should), but for wholly different reasons - to learn what they had to teach about the human condition, not to nullify their own society as we now do. Moderns maintain America's Constitution is the white man's corrupt document designed to suppress, and that Western ways are a bias to be cleansed by exposure to other cultures through multicultural studies. But this is not to learn what they have to teach so much as it is a political maneuver to dismantle the West, its values, standards and science. Intellectual openness used to invite a quest for knowledge and certitude, while the opposite is now true. Open-mindedness means closing ones mind to our very roots. As though to deny them will settle a score with our history for having done so much evil, while conveniently dismissing the good. While Fundamentalists assumed that removing reason from the mind would remove bias and prejudice, all they have done is vanquished our best tool for correction. Such is the state of the American mind. Though American education is in crisis, Bloom has given us the gift of knowing there is hope on our own.
Rating: 
Summary: Not the best critique of relativism
Review: For a vastly superior critique of relativism turn to C.S. Lewis'
The Abolition of Man. "Men without chests" abound, a species which Lewis hoped the world would never see. Lewis is an astonishingly powerful thinker, far more intelligent than any room full of the fundamentalists who seem to worship him. A couple of other superior critiques of the foundations of "MTV/MBA-World" are: Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine; Jose Ortega y Gasset, The Revolt of the Masses, Man and Crisis. Of course, when you have to spend page after page targeting popular culture, as Bloom does, one feels that it is really too late. I agree with Bloom's premise, it's just that the analysis has been done so much better elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: A great book
Review: This is a great book for one simple reason - it makes you really think. As evidence, I need merely look at some of the other reviews here, which are some of the most well written I've seen anywhere. I can open it, turn to pretty much any page at random, and find material that will stimulate my mind, and cause me to use my best mental faculties to determine whether or not I agree or disagree with the author on a particular point or issue, and why. Sure, Bloom may come across as stuffy, elitist, and a bit of an old grump, but only those who've never learned to think beyond a purely superficial level will use that as an excuse to dismiss his ideas. I could cite any number of examples, but there simply isn't the space, so let me limit it to just one - music. On a purely superficial level, he sounds like a more highbrow version of every parent from the Sixties who yelled "Stop listening to that noise from those damn long haired freaks" at their kids. Clearly he has little regard for rock music of any kind, and seems to look at it as mostly hormone driven junk compared to classical music. At first glance, one might think - so what? And that's probably what most people will think, at first. Including myself, after all, I mostly listen to rock, and rarely classical. But let's be honest. Aside from a handful of genuine talents, most rock music basically IS junk. Those parents in the 60's were, for the most part, right. Sure, there were occasional exceptions like the aforementioned Beatles (and even their early stuff was mostly bubblegum) but most of the music of the era was more like the Monkees, i.e., eminently forgettable. On the other hand, classical music is called classical for one reason - it's the best that's ever been made, and that probably ever will be. So, does that mean the good professor is correct? Not necessarily. The principal reason that classical music isn't very popular (I was going to say "with young people" but the truth is, it applies to pretty much everyone now) is because the best of it is all in the past. Judged purely by quality, music simply hit its peak in the 18th and 19th centuries. Jazz is inferior to classical, and rock inferior to jazz. But rock has one quality neither of the others do - it's still fresh. This is the point Bloom simply misses. People don't listen to rock because it's great, but because it's new. Bloom is simply unrealistic to expect a culture like ours that thrives on innovation to live only in the past; in fact, it would be unhealthy because it would lead to stagnation. Another fact that Bloom fails to consider is that, although classical music isn't anywhere near as popular as rock, it still gets a level of respect, not just from the highbrows but the hoi polloi as well, that rock never will. For example, it is still the mainstay of many serious and popular movie soundtracks for the simple reason that it has a gravitas that is necessary to set the mood of the film. Stanley Kubrick's "2001 A Space Odyssey" set to classical music is magnificent. Set to rock, it would have been ridiculous. And, if anything, the lack of popularity of classical may actually be a sign of how esteemed it still is. After all, a night at the symphony is, for most people, a rare event, something to be savored, even treasured. Rock is what we listen to in the car going to work. And that, in a nutshell, is the strength of this book. I found myself disagreeing with Bloom on this particular issue, but in doing so I had to really do a lot of thinking about the evolution of music and what role it plays in our society. And that's just one of many issues he raises in this book. Any educated person could simply pick a chapter at random and then spent hours thinking through the subject from a variety of different angles. Books that can make you do this are rare indeed, and truly deserve to be called great.
Rating: 
Summary: Wait for the Cliffs Notes
Review: This book is enlightening only if you don't mind mucking around all the moralizing, pedantic sophistry Bloom is so full of. The few valuable insights the book has to offer are padded thick with irrelevant and superfluous scholarship. It seems that Bloom not only wants to mouth off but show off as well.
Rating:
Summary: Pompous and devoid of quality research
Review: I had this book assigned in college in the late 80s, I thought it was sophomoric and there was no scholarly research particularly on his bombastic attitude towards music - a read at a local library to truly believe. I recently picked this up out of curiosity and my years since college have completely cement my opinion about this rag of a book. This book lacks meat and is devoid of anything new to say that has not been said by bitter old people of any generation who have complaints about present-day society since the dawn of time. Has America sunk into an abyss since this writing - the 80s - or does America continue to lead the world in technology, medicine, arts (Hollywood and music), fashion (blue jeans, baseball hats, and rap clothing), business, banking, etc? Anyone who does not believe the influence and position of America simply has never traveled. Many hope for America's demise, but it is not likely to happen any time soon, if in our life span. Read this book if you believe America has all the makings of empire failing, ignore this book and read something more thought provoking if you can not be bothered having to listen to an endless drone of your grandfather complaining about today's society - rather tedious.
|
