Are We Harold Bloom?

6 points by abnercoimbre


kaig

I get despondent pretty regularly about AI art and writing (and software). AI makes things that are "good enough." Is that all we have to hope for, is good enough? Is it elitist to not accept good enough? When the theaters are filled with primarily AI generated films and the bookstores are filled even more with slop fantasy and slop romantasy, will I feel even worse when I reject them out of hand? I really ought to get around to reading Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television.

sunflowerseastar

Hmmm, although I think I understand what you're saying (that although a snob might actually know better, they can sometimes be more persuasive by presenting outcome data instead of just being cruel/dismissive -- did I read you right?), Harold Bloom is a tough one for me just in general because of what he says of David Foster Wallace: "He can’t think, he can’t write. There’s no discernible talent" (link). (As in, I personally find DFW to be so overwhelmingly talented that I could scarcely believe Bloom's words; Bloom's ideas and thoughts and criticisms are less than nothing to me now. I threw out the one book of his (Bloom's) that I had.)

With that being said, a different name that might align with the message could be Theodor Adorno (with the caveat that he comes with his own baggage). In addition to being unapologetically elitist in his criticism, he also connected the commoner's inability to carefully criticize their own consumptions due to motivated financial forces.