CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant diagnosis of America's cultural decadence
Review: This book is a cautionary tale for those who consider themselves "educated." Allan Bloom's erudite, fluently written reflection on the parlous state of the American mind laments the intellectual and moral complacency of today's university students. It also outlines the academic trends that have contributed to our country's growing Philistinism and decadence.

Bloom almost entitled this controversial, surprise best-seller Souls Without Longing, and he devotes several chapters to diagnosing the condition of students' inner lives--their vulgar taste in music and other arts, coarse romantic sensibility, immersion in pop culture, and unabashed self-centeredness.

Below is a famous passage--much castigated by the Left--in which Bloom captures the effect of rock music on the young. As you read it, you'll realize that this kind of blithe hedonism permeates the lives of many Americans long after their pubescence and higher education have ended...sometime exsequor exequor:

"Picture a thirteen-year-old boy sitting in the living room of his family home doing his math assignment while wearing his Walkman headphones or watching MTV. He enjoys the liberties hard won over the centuries by the alliance of philosophic genius and political heroism, consecrated by the blood of martyrs; he is provided with comfort and leisure by the most productive economy ever known to mankind; science has penetrated the secrets of nature in order to provide him with the marvelous, lifelike electronic sound and image reproduction he is enjoying. And in what does progress culminate? A pubescent child whose body throbs with orgasmic rhythms; whose feelings are made articulate in hymns to the joys of onanism or the killing of parents; whose ambition is to win fame and wealth in imitating the drag-queen who makes the music. In short, life is made into a nonstop, commercially prepackaged masturbational fantasy."

A noted translator of Plato and Rousseau who witnessed (with disgust) the left-wing student revolts at Cornell and other universities in the late 1960s, Bloom also describes how contemporary "scholarly interests" (black, gay, gender, and "post-colonial" studies) have politicized American academia and undermined the traditionalist pursuit of the best that has been thought and said.

While many conservatives have criticized the decline of literacy, lower test scores, etc., among the general population, Bloom focuses mostly on elite students--our best raw material and most likely candidates for attaining cultural refinement. Beginning in the 1960s, he finds undergraduates at our top universities to be increasingly ignorant--before and after graduation--of the classical learning that is taken for granted among their European counterparts:

"European schoolchildren had a vastly more sophisticated knowledge of the human heart than we were accustomed to in the young or, for that matter, the old...Their books had a substantial existence in everyday life and constituted much of what their society as a whole looked up to. It was commonplace for children of what they called good families to fill their imaginations with the hopes of serious literary or philosophic careers, as do ours with hopes of careers in entertainment or business."

Bloom writes not in a tone of moral outrage but rather with the sardonic disappointment (and occasional disdain) of a sophisticate among naïfs. To him, Americans simply don't know what they're missing by not taking time to understand Plato and Nietzsche, listen attentively to Mozart, or view Raphael. Moreover, they lack heroic ideals:

"...I began to ask students who their heroes are. Again, there is usually silence, and most frequently nothing follows. Why should anyone have heroes?...[I]n America we have only the bourgeoisie, and the love of the heroic is one of the few counterpoises available to us. In us the contempt for the heroic is only an extension of the perversion of the democratic principle that denies greatness and wants everyone to feel comfortable in his skin without having to suffer unpleasant comparisons...Liberation from the heroic only means that [students] have no resource whatsoever against conformity to the current 'role models'...Instead of being overwhelmed by Cyrus, Theseus, Moses or Romulus, they unconsciously act out the roles of the doctors, lawyers, businessmen or TV personalities around them. One can only pity young people without admirations they can respect or avow, who are artificially restrained from the enthusiasm for great virtue."

In Part Two, Bloom expands his argument to explain how German and Austrian thinkers of the 19th and early 20th centuries (Freud, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Weber) first articulated the essential themes that continue to dominate American intellectual discourse. He critiques this phenomenon, as well as the pernicious influence of the culturally Marxist Frankfurt School (Adorno, Marcuse, et al.):

"This popularization of German philosophy in the United States is of particular interest to me because I have watched it occur during my own lifetime...Who in 1920 would have believed that Max Weber's technical sociological terminology would someday be the everyday language of the United States, the land of the Philistines?...The self-understanding of hippies, yippies, panthers, prelates and presidents has unconsciously been formed by German thought of a half-century earlier; Herbert Marcuse's accent has been turned into a Middle Western twang; the echt Deutsch label has been replaced by a Made in America label; and the new American life-style has become a Disneyland version of the Weimar Republic for the whole family."

Bloom goes on to describe, brilliantly, the rise of value relativism, the growth of political extremism in Europe, the concept of the "Last Man" (the bourgeois), the decline of religion among the intelligentsia, and other complex topics that remain vital for all Westerners who want to understand their culture.

Those who enjoy this book will want to track down Bloom's less popular but still superb other works of cultural and literary criticism: Giants and Dwarfs, Love and Friendship, and Shakespeare's Politics (with Harry V. Jaffa). Bloom's translations of Plato's Republic and Rousseau's Emile are also excellent.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant diagnosis of America's cultural decadence
Review: This book is a cautionary tale for those who consider themselves 'educated.' Allan Bloom's erudite, fluently written reflection on the parlous state of the American mind laments the intellectual and moral complacency of today's university students. It also outlines the academic trends that have contributed to our country's growing Philistinism and decadence.

Bloom almost entitled this controversial, surprise best-seller 'Souls Without Longing,' and he devotes several chapters to diagnosing the condition of students' inner lives--their vulgar taste in music and other arts, coarse romantic sensibility, immersion in pop culture, and unabashed self-centeredness.

Below is a famous passage--much castigated by the Left--in which Bloom captures the effect of rock music on the young. As you read it, you'll realize that this kind of blithe hedonism permeates the lives of many Americans long after their pubescence and higher education have ended...sometimes exsequor exequor:

"Picture a thirteen-year-old boy sitting in the living room of his family home doing his math assignment while wearing his Walkman headphones or watching MTV. He enjoys the liberties hard won over the centuries by the alliance of philosophic genius and political heroism, consecrated by the blood of martyrs; he is provided with comfort and leisure by the most productive economy ever known to mankind; science has penetrated the secrets of nature in order to provide him with the marvelous, lifelike electronic sound and image reproduction he is enjoying. And in what does progress culminate? A pubescent child whose body throbs with orgasmic rhythms...life is made into a nonstop, commercially prepackaged masturbational fantasy."

While many conservatives have bemoaned the decline of literacy, lower test scores, etc., among the general population, Bloom focuses mostly on elite students--our best raw material and most likely candidates for attaining cultural refinement. Beginning in the 1960s, he finds undergraduates at our top universities to be increasingly ignorant--before and after graduation--of the classical learning that is taken for granted among their European counterparts:

"European schoolchildren had a vastly more sophisticated knowledge of the human heart than we were accustomed to in the young or, for that matter, the old...Their books had a substantial existence in everyday life and constituted much of what their society as a whole looked up to. It was commonplace for children of what they called good families to fill their imaginations with the hopes of serious literary or philosophic careers, as do ours with hopes of careers in entertainment or business."

Bloom writes not in a tone of moral outrage but rather with the sardonic disappointment (and occasional disdain) of a sophisticate among naïfs. To him, Americans simply don't know what they're missing by not taking time to understand Plato and Nietzsche, listen attentively to Mozart, or view Raphael. Moreover, they lack heroic ideals:

"...I began to ask students who their heroes are. Again, there is usually silence, and most frequently nothing follows. Why should anyone have heroes?...[I]n America we have only the bourgeoisie, and the love of the heroic is one of the few counterpoises available to us. In us the contempt for the heroic is only an extension of the perversion of the democratic principle that denies greatness and wants everyone to feel comfortable in his skin without having to suffer unpleasant comparisons...Liberation from the heroic only means that [students] have no resource whatsoever against conformity to the current 'role models'...Instead of being overwhelmed by Cyrus, Theseus, Moses or Romulus, they unconsciously act out the roles of the doctors, lawyers, businessmen or TV personalities around them. One can only pity young people without admirations they can respect or avow, who are artificially restrained from the enthusiasm for great virtue."

In Part Two, Bloom expands his argument to explain how German and Austrian thinkers of the 19th and early 20th centuries (Freud, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Weber) first articulated the essential themes that continue to dominate American intellectual discourse. He critiques this phenomenon, as well as the pernicious influence of the culturally Marxist Frankfurt School (Adorno, Marcuse, et al.):

"Who in 1920 would have believed that Max Weber's technical sociological terminology would someday be the everyday language of the United States, the land of the Philistines...? The self-understanding of hippies, yippies, panthers, prelates and presidents has unconsciously been formed by German thought of a half-century earlier; Herbert Marcuse's accent has been turned into a Middle Western twang; the 'echt Deutsch' label has been replaced by a 'Made in America label'; and the new American life-style has become a Disneyland version of the Weimar Republic for the whole family."

Bloom goes on to describe, brilliantly, the rise of value relativism, the growth of political extremism in Europe, the concept of the 'Last Man' (the bourgeois), the decline of religion among the intelligentsia, and other complex topics that remain vital for all Westerners who want to understand their culture.

Those who enjoy this book will want to track down Bloom's less popular but still superb other works of cultural and literary criticism: 'Giants and Dwarfs,' 'Love and Friendship,' and 'Shakespeare's Politics' (with Harry V. Jaffa). Bloom's translations of Plato's 'Republic' and Rousseau's 'Emile' are also excellent.

Rating:
Summary: Pure elitism
Review: Looking for a good critique of the ideas in the postmodern books that have recently come to dominate my shelf and that go beyond simplistic conservative diatribes(i.e. Pat Buchanan), I pulled out this old, dusty volume. I have nothing against the late Dr. Bloom and I acknowledge that this is a solid work of scholarship, but I find little here of what I was looking for. The main problem with Dr. Bloom is not his conservatism, which is legitimate, but his outright elitism. His only concern seems to be the quality of education at Ivy League schools. The underlying theme is that his idea of Plato's Republic may not come to reality if America's "best and brightest" are being contaminated with the virus of "egalitarianism" (how dare anyone suggest we are all equal?), rather than adopting the mindset that will turn them into the "philosopher-kings" they are meant to be. For the majority of us who did't go to Ivy League schools, who couldn't afford the luxury of a liberal education but had to go into a practical profession in order to make a living, who are not American, who don't come from Judeo-Christian backgrounds, or who are not white, Bloom seems to have nothing in store. I think this is the undoing of this otherwise good piece of intellectual history, because just as we need a way out of the nihilism he rightfully denounces, any proposed solution needs to embrace democracy and point out ways for people from different cultures to understand each other and live together peacefully. Talking about Culture in reference to classical European culture, as if it was the only one Americans should know about, and dismissing democracy in favor of some sort of aristocracy of the intellect is a cheap, but unacceptable way to deal with the "anything goes" problem.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent work
Review: this book is amazing. as a college freshman, I was taken aback by this work. His style, a combination of erudite learning mixed with an energized, passionate, no bones writing floored me. The book is phenomenal.

Rating:
Summary: Blooms De-Politicized Academy
Review: Well if this book was your first introduction to the Great Thinkers of Greece then Bloom is right there is something seriously wrong with higher education in the west. Bloom believes in a particular kind of education and I don't disagree with the kind of education he has in mind. He of course has nothing against current trends in thought(some good,some bad) but he wants you to have the proper skills as a thinking person to deal with the things of this world intelligently and critically and so be capable of sorting it out on your own. The way he sees most fit to prepare you to do this is to remain fast and true to those first pioneers of western thought, Socrates and Plato. I think I agree with Bloom on many points, especially his assessment of the modern university. It is a mess. Smart people who come out of a university today usually are smart despite their experience at the university not because of it. Its not that professors are bad but there aren't too many with Blooms scope of intelligence. Most remain in very specific areas and teach very specific subjects and do not convey to students a love of learning in the broadest sense. In todays university there is no time to learn how to learn, you just learn. However even without a master plan in place you do sort of catch on after awhile as to what is good thinking and what is bad thinking. I think what really bothers Bloom is that not everyone catches on. And some of those that never caught on have now ended up as university professors. It is obvious the type which he finds to be the worst. The type which write books which apply current or trendy theories, and revisit our intellectual and cultural history with a big red marker, correcting the wests "errors". This approach undermines Blooms approach. In a way both approaches are extreme but given the choice Blooms is certainly preferable and there really is very little room for a middle ground in this debate. I think Bloom is perhaps too conservative for my tastes but I would rather have a prof. who seemed like an old fogey whom I actually learned a sound method of reasoning from than one of the other types which just puts forth the current way of thinking, because current becomes passe very quickly. Blooms method of reasoning might sound very Reagan eighties but it isn't. He uses the same kind of reasoning the old Greeks did and he makes an equally timeless point, urging us to choose reason(and its rewards:the good the true and the beautiful) over mere fashion(no rewards but you may make a big splash in the media). I do think the book is valuable, as well as the books by that other Bloom, Harold. These guys know their stuff. They aren't perfect though and I do disagree with some of their finer points. Both would benefit from having another intelligence in the room when they begin because like many professors they tend to pontificate(which leads to some people misunderstanding them) when another tone would perhaps better suit their ends. Dialogue after all is the Greek way, a dialogue about education by these two like minds would have been interesting. Certainly conservative(in the academic sense)does not mean that there is no room for discussion nor does it imply conservative politically, it just indicates the style of discussion that will occur, a tradition bound one. I have found,perhaps ironically, that a conservative academic often is the more open minded one and (with the ultimate end being learning, not indoctrination) will entertain alternative points of view in conversation more readily than the liberal academic who often adheres rather stringently to a rather narrow agenda and point of view(the liberation of one group or another)and so it is not so much learning that is taking place but something very much resembling a political point being made.

Rating:
Summary: Bloom deserves to be read more carefully
Review: When The Closing of The American Mind was published in 1987, it instantly ignited a firestorm of praise and condemnation. Conservatives hailed it as vindication of their long-ignored criticisms about American culture in general and higher education in particular. Liberals denounced it as elitist and intolerant, and they said Bloom wanted to keep students ignorant of other cultures so he could indoctrinate them with his. Neither side had it right. The Closing of The American Mind is, as Bloom put it in his preface, "a meditation on the state of our souls."

Both sides were wrong about the book because they didn't read it carefully enough. Liberals read Bloom's argument for philosophy as an attempt to purge non-white, non-European writers from the cannon on grounds of cultural purity. Conservatives read his plea as an attempt to run all the liberal professors out of academia and replace them with conservatives. But a careful reading of Bloom would quickly prove both of these interpretations false.

Bloom believed Plato's cave was culture, whether that culture was western or not (after all, it was Plato's description of his own culture that created the idea of the cave). Bloom's argument was that students should be forced to read the works of the great philosophers because those writers are the only ones who dealt with the fundamental question of life: what is man. Bloom believed it was the university's mission to equip students with the tools that would enable them to seek the answer to this question and to lead a philosophical life. Only the great philosophers were capable of introducing students to the deepest and most profound life, and without this introduction, students would forever remain in their respective caves.

Bloom never was a conservative, nor was he one who wished to impose his "culture" on others. Simply put, he was a scholar who wished to make his students think - to truly think - about the nature of their existence and of society. The goal of Bloom's book was to show how Americans of all political persuasions, social backgrounds and economic conditions are debating within a narrow modern world-view and have simply accepted as fact a mushy blend of modern theory that repeatedly contradicts itself and stands in sharp contrast to an almost entirely forgotten world of opposing thought: that of the ancients.

In other words, Americans are incapable of true self-examination and self-understanding because they are ignorant of ancient philosophy, which poses the only alternative to the modern concept of man. What Bloom does with The Closing of The American Mind is expose the great Oz by asking him life's deepest questions. Bloom asks the same questions of today's professors and students that the ancient philosophers asked of themselves and their students. He finds that not only does no one have an answer, but no one even understands the questions.

Bloom's confrontation exposes the modern American university for what it really is: one big self-esteem seminar where students are taught self-validation instead of self-examination. Professors are not forcing students to confront the most serious questions of life, but rather are handing them scrolls of paper certifying that the university has bestowed on them qualities which, in fact, they already possessed, those being "openness" and "tolerance."

Of students, Bloom writes, "The relativity of truth is not a theoretical insight but a moral postulate, the condition of a free society, or so they see it. They have all been equipped with this framework early on, and it is the modern replacement for the inalienable and natural rights that used to be the traditional grounds for a free society."

The university, he shows, does nothing to contest this belief, but feeds it instead. The end result is that there can be no more truth or goodness and no need or even ability to make tough choices. Where the purpose of higher education once was to enable the student to find truth, the modern university teaches that there is no truth, only "lifestyle."

There exist in the world polar opposites. Bloom lists "reason-revelation, freedom-necessity, democracy-aristocracy, good-evil, body-soul, self-other, city-man, eternity-time, being-nothing." Serious thought requires recognition of the existence of these opposites and the choice of one over the other. "A serious life means being fully aware of the alternatives, thinking about them with all the intensity one brings to bear on life-and-death questions, in full recognition that every choice is a great risk with necessary consequences that are hard to bear," Bloom says.

He argues persuasively that the modern university does not force students to confront these alternatives at all, much less seriously think about them. Therefore, the modern university fails in its purpose, which is to create students aware of the vast array of possibilities that life offers and capable of choosing the good life.

Bloom has been harshly, and is still continually, accused of trying to force his own ideology on his students. But even a cursory reading of The Closing of The American Mind will disprove this silly accusation. Bloom simply wanted to make students think, to make them understand that there are different ideas of what man is and that they must confront these ideas if they wish to lead a meaningful life. This, he believed, was the university's purpose because it is there and only there that students would be exposed to alternatives to the prevailing intellectual trends. Life will happen to the students, he said, they don't need the university to provide it for them. They need the university to equip them for making the choices that will lead them to the best, most fulfilling life - the philosophical life. It is precisely for this reason that universities exist, and it is precisely this task that they now fail to accomplish.

Bloom's book remains important fifteen years after its publication because of the depth of Bloom's intellect and the thoroughness of his analysis. Only the last third of The Closing of The American Mind focuses on the modern university. Bloom spends the first two-thirds of the book explaining the modern mind-set and contrasting it with the ancient and the enlightened. He demonstrates the shallowness of the modern mind by repeatedly beating it about the head with Aristotle, Plato, Rousseau, Tocqueville, Hobbes, Locke, Nietzsche, Kant, Hegel and Heidegger. With this tactic, Bloom tears apart the vapid pop psychology that passes as deep thought and holds up the shreds for the reader to see their thinness.

But Bloom's attack is also instruction. Through it he takes the reader on an intellectual history tour in which he tracks the evolution of modern thought. Focusing on key words in today's usage, such as "lifestyle," "relationship" and "commitment," he retraces them through history to discover their origins and their true meanings. He then contrasts these words with the ones they replaced, such as "duty," "honor," "love." The depth and complexity of the ancient concepts overpowers the shallow convenience of the modern ones. Bloom tells how, when he showed this contrast to his students, they didn't care. Worse, they recoiled at the very thought of being bound by duty or honor or love as opposed to being committed to relationships via contract.

This contrast is at the heart of Bloom's book: whether humans are truth-seeking creatures who live for the purpose of pleasing God and discovering the good, or whether they are truth-creating creatures who live only for the purpose of satisfying their animal needs and preventing the bad. Bloom believes the former, modernity the latter. Bloom knew that his book would not solve the question or ennoble America. But it would reintroduce the question, which is all that he wanted the university to do. It is tragic that, as he predicted, the universities would cast him out as a heretic instead of making themselves his disciples.

Rating:
Summary: Eudaimonia
Review: Allan Bloom has written a very profound and provocative book. In the course of a few hundred pages, Bloom skillfully interprets centuries of Western philosophy and makes it relevant to our present situation. For Bloom, Plato and Nietzsche are the two opposing poles of thought in western philosophy. Modern America has turned its back on Plato and embraced Nietzsche. This correlates, roughly, to the rise of ethical relativism and the decline of serious scholarship in universities around the country. Like other conservatives such as Dostoyevsky and Edmund Burke, Bloom believes that political leftists are essentially nihilists, or at least that their belief in ethical relativism leads to nihilism. Bloom attacks nihilism and its theoretical supporters (Nietzsche and Heidegger) and upholds the "philosophical life"-that is, the Socratic quest for objective, reasoned knowledge of truth, justice, the whole, and the good life. Only the old Socratic method of rational examination and argument can defend morality and the philosophical foundations of democracy from the onslaught of nihilism and relativism (but of course, this is of course an enormous simplification of Bloom's argument).

Bloom writes with vigor and force and, consequently, he has a tendency to make really outrageous claims in his attacks on the liberal establishment. He exaggerates and generalizes quite a bit, probably more than he should-like Nietzsche, Allan Bloom philosophizes "with a hammer." Unlike previous reviewers, I think this is part of the appeal of Bloom's book. He manages to integrate esoteric philosophy with contemporary polemics and, in my opinion, this makes the Closing of the American Mind much more exciting to read than most books on political philosophy.

Anyways, I strongly recommend this book, if only because it can really make you think. It had a big impact on me when I first read it a few years ago and continues to have a big effect.

Rating:
Summary: Doctrinaire Neo-Conservative Bilge
Review: "I have seen ... good democratic liberals, lovers of peace and gentleness, struck dumb with admiration for individuals threatening or using the most terrible violence for the slightest and tawdriest reasons. They have a sneaking suspicion that they are face to face with men of real commitment, which they themselves lack."
- Allan Bloom, "The Closing Of The American Mind."

Wonderfully doctrinaire quote by the late right-wing wackademic Allan Bloom, a neo-conservative self-hating homosexual hypocrite who died of AIDS; pontificating like the intellectually constipated fart he was on the insidious contradictions to be found within the liberal milieu, etc.-- while letting the grease-balls of the Right off the hook.

However, I will recommend this "sleeper of a read" as a first-rate door-stop. Another piece of snide Reagan Era agitation-propaganda, blaming the 1960s and progressive alternatives to the dominant culture, for everything in America that has since gone wrong.

It's no wonder he is now even less respected and more irrelevant than when he was alive.

Rating:
Summary: NO-NO Writing par exellence
Review: Bloom has the incredible knack of making you go "No that's just wrong." Some of the things he says are just incorrect. It seems like he has been living in a cave since 1944, the way he sneers at social movements and popular culture. A new reader is drawn to the conclusion that Allan Bloom is motivated by his own unexamined prejudices. He is bigoted and sheltered from the storm of real existence. His ideas on divorce and the children of divorce, for example, smack of a callous, cool detachment and a 'Holier than thou' Papal impracticality. "Who the hell does he think he is?" He may have a degree and great scholastic abilities, but when it comes to the human touch, or psychological insight, he is at best a charlatan. At worst, Allan Bloom is a fool duped into the laziness of only believing in the gravely limited dead old texts that he earned his fat professorial salary from, instead of opening his bald brain to today's brightest discoveries. Nevertheless, what makes this book so vital, almost 15 years since it was first published, is that there comes a second "No!" This "NO" is more powerful then the first wave of consternation and comical exasperation. This "NO" is intensely private and creeps up on you at the most harrowing of moments. IT says "No! HE RIGHT! YOU WRONG!" This is the legacy of a great writer and great thinker. I have found the same effect in the words of Rousseau, Nietszche, even someone as superficially vulgar as William S. Burroughs. These types of writers deserve respect because they prove that language and exposure to it by human beings is the only essential demand of a free society. Being open to the truth of things does not require a particular type of citizen or type of education, it is open to all in their own innocence. I encourage readers to discover this incredible book again.

Rating:
Summary: Even More Relevant After the Sept 11th Attacks
Review: Prof Bloom's book is an outstanding examination of how the 60s generation got us to where we are now. Particularly valuable is his look at value relativism - - - the idea that all philosophies are equally valid and that there is no good or evil. In the wake of the attacks on America, it is crucial that people reexamine the notions rattling around in their heads since their college days. This book is thought provoking. It requires careful reading and thought. The effort is well worth it for those willing and able to think . - - -