Introduction: “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
“The Necessity of Misreading” by Harold Bloom, first appeared in 1975 in the journal The Georgia Review, is a cornerstone of Bloom’s theory of strong poetry, arguing that great poets achieve originality and significance by misreading and reimagining the works of their predecessors. Bloom contends that this process of “misreading” is essential for poets to establish their own unique poetic voice and contribute to the ongoing evolution of the literary tradition. His theory has had a significant impact on literary theory, influencing debates about originality, influence, and the canonization of literary works. Bloom’s emphasis on the importance of misreading has encouraged readers to approach texts with a more critical and interpretive eye, recognizing the dynamic and ongoing nature of literary creation.
Summary of “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
1. The Interplay of Arbitrary and Overdetermined Forces in Reading
- Reading as Life: Bloom highlights that most people read in the same way they live, oscillating between randomness and determinism, “We read seriously…in the same uneasy alternation, between the notion that we choose what we read and the notion that it is chosen for us” (p. 267).
- Literary Tradition and Conventions: Readers follow established literary conventions, often questioning who controls these conventions. “Who or what is the shaper of the shape? How are the phenomena of tradition formed?” (p. 267).
2. Canon Formation and Influence
- Choosing Poets for Posterity: Bloom discusses how academic critics like himself participate in canon formation by selecting which contemporary poets should be read. “However diffidently I give the answer, I am engaged in canon-formation” (p. 268).
- The Role of Influence in Canon: He examines the dynamic of influence, comparing two maxims: “You are or become what you read” versus “That which you are, that only can you read” (p. 268).
3. The Necessity of Misreading
- Misreading as Inevitable: Bloom asserts that misreading is a fundamental part of reading. “Reading is therefore misprision—or misreading—just as writing is falsification” (p. 269).
- Tradition and Hyperbole: He describes tradition as an exaggerated form shaped by misreadings. “Tradition is always a hyperbole, and the images used to describe tradition will tend to be those of height and depth” (p. 269).
4. Revisionism and the Growth of Literary Tradition
- Revisionism Through Misreading: Literature evolves through the misreading and reinterpretation of previous works. “The history of poetry is the history of misreading” (p. 271).
- Canonization as the Final Misreading: Bloom explains that canonization is the final form of misreading, where works become classics through a process of distortion. “Canonization is the most extreme version of what Nietzsche called Interpretation” (p. 270).
5. The Ambivalence of Influence
- Influence as Both Powerful and Distorting: Bloom compares influence to the Kabbalistic concept of Keter, signifying both absence and presence. “Influence…is as complex a trope as language affords” (p. 271).
- Defensive Mechanism in Reading: He proposes that reading is an act of defense against the overwhelming influence of prior texts, comparing it to warfare. “Reading is defensive warfare” (p. 273).
6. The Primacy of Tropes in Literary Interpretation
- Tropes as Defense Mechanisms: Bloom views literary tropes as essential tools in the defensive process of reading. “Poems are apotropaic litanies, systems of defensive tropes and troping defenses” (p. 278).
- Poetry and Perspective: In analyzing Wallace Stevens’ “Anecdote of the Jar,” Bloom argues that metaphors in poetry inevitably shift perspectives. “As soon as you troped your jar you mutilated it, and it took dominion only by self-reduction” (p. 278).
7. Misreading as Creative Necessity
- Strong Poets Must Be Misread: Misreading is not just inevitable but necessary for strong poets, whose works must be misinterpreted to survive. “Strong poets must be mis-read; there are no generous errors to be made in apprehending them” (p. 273).
- Poetry as Schizophrenia: Bloom provocatively suggests that poetry thrives on contradiction, where a poem must force readers into misreading it. “Schizophrenia is disaster in life, and success in poetry” (p. 278).
8. The Fallacy of Fixed Meaning in Texts
- Relational Nature of Meaning: Bloom argues that texts do not have inherent meanings but are understood in relation to other texts. “A single text has only part of a meaning; it is itself a synecdoche for a larger whole” (p. 274).
- Meaning of a Poem is Another Poem: He emphasizes that the meaning of a poem is not contained within itself but in its connection to other works. “The meaning of a poem could only be another poem” (p. 276).
9. Criticism as Autobiography
- Criticism as an Extension of the Critic: Bloom, referencing Oscar Wilde, asserts that criticism is a form of autobiography, where the critic’s interpretation is a reflection of their own perspective. “Criticism, as the record of the critic’s soul, is called by Wilde ‘the only civilized form of autobiography'” (p. 287).
- Misreading in Criticism: Strong criticism, like strong poetry, relies on misreading as a form of revisionism. “A reading, to be strong, must be a misreading, for no strong reading can fail to insist upon itself” (p. 287).
10. The Futility of Seeking Objective Truth in Literature
- Interpretation as Revisionism: In Bloom’s view, all interpretation is inherently revisionist, shaped by the critic’s subjectivity. “Interpretation is revisionism, and the strongest readers so revise as to make every text belated” (p. 287).
- Criticism and Poetic Survival: He concludes that both strong poems and strong criticism must “lie against time” by revising prior interpretations. “A strong poem lies against time, and against the strong poems before it, and a strong criticism must do the same” (p. 287).
Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
| Term/Concept | Definition/Explanation | Reference/Quote |
| Misreading (Misprision) | The act of interpreting a text differently, usually by misunderstanding or willfully altering its meaning. Bloom asserts this is necessary for literary growth. | “Reading is therefore misprision—or misreading—just as writing is falsification” (p. 269). |
| Influence | The impact of earlier works on the creation and interpretation of new literary works. For Bloom, influence is ambivalent, acting both as a guide and an obstacle. | “Influence…is as complex a trope as language affords” (p. 271). |
| Canon Formation | The process by which certain works are selected as classics, determining which authors and texts are given enduring significance. | “I am engaged in canon-formation, in trying to help decide a question that is ultimately of sad importance: ‘Which poet shall live?'” (p. 267). |
| Tradition | The accumulation of literary works and ideas that influence current and future writers, often described as a “hyperbole” or exaggerated idealization. | “Tradition is always hyperbole, and the images used to describe tradition will tend to be those of height and depth” (p. 269). |
| Defensive Reading | The idea that readers and writers protect themselves from being overwhelmed by the influence of previous texts, turning reading into an act of defense. | “Reading is defensive warfare, however generously or joyously we read” (p. 273). |
| Tropes | Figures of speech or symbolic expressions used in literature. In Bloom’s theory, tropes function as defenses that mediate a reader’s or writer’s relationship to tradition. | “Poems are apotropaic litanies, systems of defensive tropes and troping defenses” (p. 278). |
| Belatedness | The sense of coming after influential works or authors, where a writer or reader feels the pressure of preceding achievements. | “Every act of reading is an exercise in belatedness” (p. 268). |
| Revisionism | The reinterpretation of texts or traditions, often involving a creative misreading that alters how a text is understood within its literary context. | “Canonization is the final or transumptive form of literary revisionism” (p. 270). |
| Poetic Influence | The relationship between poets, particularly how newer poets are influenced by and reinterpret the works of their predecessors. Bloom argues that strong poets misread their predecessors to assert their own originality. | “Every strong poet caricatures tradition and every strong poet is then necessarily mis-read by the tradition that he fosters” (p. 273). |
| Schizophrenia in Poetry | A metaphor Bloom uses to describe the inherent contradictions in strong poetry, which forces readers to adopt conflicting interpretations. | “Schizophrenia is disaster in life, and success in poetry” (p. 278). |
| Intertextuality | The interconnectedness of literary texts, where the meaning of one text is influenced by and relates to others. In Bloom’s view, no text stands alone in meaning; it is always part of a network of interpretations. | “Texts don’t have meanings, except in their relations to other texts” (p. 274). |
| Error as Creative Force | The idea that mistakes or misinterpretations in reading are necessary for the evolution of literature. Bloom sees error as a driving force behind the production of new works and interpretations. | “Error about life is necessary for life; error about a poem is necessary if there is to be yet another strong poem” (p. 269). |
| Apotropaic Literature | Literature that functions to ward off or defend against influences or threats. Bloom describes poems as rituals that protect themselves from being fully understood or consumed by prior traditions. | “Poems are apotropaic litanies, systems of defensive tropes and troping defenses” (p. 278). |
| Proleptic Representation | A rhetorical strategy where a future event is represented as if it has already happened. In canon formation, critics often project a work’s future classic status before it has proven itself in posterity. | “Proleptic representation is the inevitable rhetorical resource of all canonizing discourse” (p. 270). |
| Will-to-Power | Nietzschean concept applied to literary interpretation, where reading and writing are seen as exercises of power over texts. Canon formation and misreading become forms of exerting dominance over literary tradition. | “Canonization is the most extreme version of what Nietzsche called Interpretation, or the exercise of the Will-to-Power over texts” (p. 270). |
| Hermeneutic Circle | A concept in literary theory that suggests the meaning of a text is derived from understanding the whole in relation to its parts, and vice versa. Bloom applies this to the relationship between misreading and textual meaning. | “A poem can be about previous poems only by misreading them, which completes our bewilderingly perverse revision of a hermeneutic circle” (p. 278). |
| Metaphor and Perspective | Metaphors, in Bloom’s view, are rhetorical devices that change the perspective of readers, and thus, every metaphor is a failed attempt at unity because it always involves a shift in meaning. | “A jar may be a unity, and you can do with Tennessee what you will, but as soon as you troped your jar you mutilated it” (p. 278). |
Contribution of “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Reader-Response Theory
- Contribution: Bloom emphasizes the role of the reader in creating meaning, positioning the act of reading as central to the interpretive process. He argues that reading is always a misreading and that interpretation is an active, creative process rather than a passive reception of the text.
- Reference: “Every act of reading is an exercise in belatedness, yet every such act is also defensive, and as defense it makes of interpretation a necessary misprision” (p. 268).
- Impact on Theory: Bloom extends Reader-Response Theory by asserting that readers, like poets, are engaged in a process of influence and misreading, and meaning is generated not from the text alone but from the reader’s active reinterpretation.
2. Influence Theory
- Contribution: Bloom’s theory of poetic influence, particularly articulated in his earlier works like The Anxiety of Influence, is further elaborated in The Necessity of Misreading. He contends that strong poets must misread their precursors to assert their originality, and this process is fundamental to literary evolution.
- Reference: “Strong poets must be mis-read; there are no generous errors to be made in apprehending them” (p. 273).
- Impact on Theory: This notion introduces the idea of creative misreading, wherein influence is not simply about imitation but about deliberate distortion and revision, shaping how later poets and critics interpret earlier works.
- Contribution: Bloom argues that texts do not have meanings in isolation but derive meaning through their relationships with other texts, a key element of intertextuality. His view aligns with poststructuralist theories of language and meaning, particularly those of Roland Barthes and Julia Kristeva.
- Reference: “Texts don’t have meanings, except in their relations to other texts, so that there is something uneasily dialectical about literary meaning” (p. 274).
- Impact on Theory: By framing reading as an inherently relational act, Bloom reinforces the intertextual nature of literature, suggesting that every text is a response to and a reworking of prior texts. His work intersects with structuralist and poststructuralist notions of the text as a part of a larger network of meaning.
- Contribution: Bloom’s concept of misreading resonates with deconstructionist theories, particularly in its rejection of fixed meanings and the emphasis on the instability of interpretation. He suggests that interpretation is always revisionist and that texts resist any final, stable meaning.
- Reference: “The history of poetry is also governed by the primacy of the trope, and by the defensive nature of the trope” (p. 285).
- Impact on Theory: This mirrors Jacques Derrida’s assertion that meaning is always deferred and never fully present. Bloom contributes to deconstruction by framing misreading as a necessary and ongoing process of reinterpretation, thereby destabilizing any notion of a definitive reading.
5. Psychoanalytic Literary Criticism
- Contribution: Bloom draws on psychoanalytic concepts, particularly Freud’s ideas of repression and defense mechanisms, to describe the processes of reading and writing. He argues that reading is an act of defense, often akin to the psychoanalytic concept of denial or repression.
- Reference: “Defense is always against influence. But the inter-poetic… is only a trope for the reading-process, and so I propose the unhappy formula that reading is always a defensive process” (p. 273).
- Impact on Theory: Bloom’s use of Freudian psychoanalysis deepens our understanding of how readers and writers psychologically interact with texts, treating literary influence as a kind of Oedipal struggle. His work intersects with psychoanalytic criticism, suggesting that literary creation and interpretation are acts of psychic negotiation with powerful precursors.
6. Poststructuralism and the Death of the Author
- Contribution: Bloom aligns with poststructuralist theories that challenge the notion of a singular, authoritative authorial voice. He argues that poets are not self-begotten and that texts do not originate in a vacuum, thus contributing to the poststructuralist critique of authorial intent.
- Reference: “The more ‘tradition’ is exalted, the more egregious the mistakes become. I will venture the formula that only minor or weak poets… can be read accurately” (p. 273).
- Impact on Theory: Bloom’s insistence that all authors and texts are in conversation with previous works complicates traditional notions of authorship, aligning his work with Roland Barthes’ The Death of the Author and Michel Foucault’s What is an Author?.
7. Hermeneutics
- Contribution: Bloom’s theory of misreading revises traditional hermeneutics, particularly the idea of the hermeneutic circle (understanding a text by relating its parts to the whole). He argues that the interpretation of a text is an inherently flawed and incomplete process, rooted in the reader’s psychological and historical context.
- Reference: “A poem can be about previous poems only by misreading them, which completes our bewilderingly perverse revision of a hermeneutic circle” (p. 278).
- Impact on Theory: Bloom’s contribution to hermeneutics lies in his assertion that interpretation is never neutral or objective but is always shaped by prior texts and misreadings, thus challenging traditional hermeneutic practices that seek coherence and unity in interpretation.
8. Romanticism and Imagination
- Contribution: Bloom explores Romanticism’s concept of imagination but challenges the Romantic ideal of originality. He suggests that even the Romantics were engaged in acts of misreading, over-completing or hyperbolizing nature and their predecessors.
- Reference: “Romanticism being antithetical or contra naturam had to acknowledge that nature retained priority, that nature was the primary” (p. 271).
- Impact on Theory: Bloom contributes to Romantic studies by recasting the role of imagination not as the creation of something entirely new but as an act of revision and re-interpretation of previous texts, adding complexity to Romantic notions of originality.
Examples of Critiques Through “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
| Literary Work | Critique Through “The Necessity of Misreading” | Explanation of Misreading (Bloom’s Concept) | Reference to Bloom’s Theory |
| John Milton’s Paradise Lost | Milton’s Satan has been misread as a heroic figure, especially by Romantic poets like Blake and Shelley, who transformed him into a symbol of rebellion and individuality. | Strong poets like Blake misread Milton by transforming Satan into a symbol of defiance, contrary to Milton’s original moral framework. | “Strong poets must be mis-read; there are no generous errors to be made in apprehending them” (p. 273). |
| William Wordsworth’s The Prelude | Wordsworth has been misread as a nature-healer and a poet of simple pastoral beauty, rather than as a poet deeply engaged with inner psychological struggles and crises. | Romantic readers and critics over-idealized Wordsworth’s connection with nature, missing the deeper psychological and philosophical themes in his work. | “Wordsworth, a wholly antithetical poet, has been read as a primary healer, a nature-thaumaturgist” (p. 273). |
| Wallace Stevens’ The Snow Man | Stevens’ poem is often misread as purely ironic or detached, but Bloom argues that it must be seen as engaging deeply with the romantic sublime and the defense of poetic transcendence. | Critics misread Stevens as an ironist, but Stevens was more concerned with maintaining a transcendental perspective within the constraints of modernity. | “Stevens, a qualified but still incessant Transcendentalist, is being read as an ironist and as an exposer of poetry’s pretensions” (p. 273). |
| T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land | Eliot’s The Waste Land has been misread as a work of despair and disintegration, but Bloom suggests it should be viewed as Eliot’s attempt to misread and outdo his poetic predecessors. | Eliot’s poem reworks literary tradition, not as an act of despair, but as a powerful misreading and revision of earlier texts, creating something new. | “Every strong poet caricatures tradition, and every strong poet is then necessarily misread by the tradition that he fosters” (p. 273). |
Criticism Against “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
Overemphasis on Strong Poets
- Critics argue that Bloom’s focus on “strong poets” marginalizes lesser-known or “weaker” poets, implying that only significant, canonical figures are worthy of critical attention.
- Critique: This hierarchical view reduces the literary field to a few influential figures and dismisses a broader diversity of voices in literature.
Subjective and Elitist Approach
- Bloom’s theory suggests that interpretation and misreading are subjective, which some scholars see as overly elitist because it places too much emphasis on the critic’s interpretive power.
- Critique: This undermines the idea of objective or shared meaning in texts, making literary criticism seem like a closed game only for experts or “strong readers.”
Neglect of Historical and Social Context
- Bloom’s focus on textual misreading and poetic influence often neglects the broader historical, social, and cultural contexts that shape literature.
- Critique: His approach minimizes the importance of external factors like race, gender, class, and historical events in shaping both texts and their interpretation.
Psychoanalytic Determinism
- Bloom’s use of Freudian psychoanalysis, particularly the Oedipal framework, is viewed as reductive and deterministic, with critics arguing that it oversimplifies the complexities of influence and creativity.
- Critique: This narrow psychoanalytic view can limit alternative interpretations of literary influence that do not align with Freudian ideas of rivalry and repression.
Ambiguity in Defining Misreading
- Bloom’s concept of misreading is seen by some as too vague and flexible, leading to concerns that it can justify any interpretation as valid, regardless of textual evidence.
- Critique: This opens the door to interpretive anarchy, where there are no guidelines for what constitutes a valid or invalid reading of a text.
Undermining Authorial Intent
- Some critics feel that Bloom’s theory completely disregards the importance of authorial intent, reducing authors to mere participants in a continuous cycle of misreading.
- Critique: This downplays the significance of what authors themselves aim to express through their works, ignoring their conscious choices and messages.
Excessive Focus on Western Canon
- Bloom’s arguments in “The Necessity of Misreading” heavily favor the Western literary canon, especially Romantic and modernist poets.
- Critique: This emphasis excludes non-Western literary traditions and overlooks the rich diversity of global literary influences and interpretations.
Circular Reasoning
- Critics have pointed out that Bloom’s idea that all interpretation is misreading can lead to circular reasoning, as it assumes that no reading can ever be entirely accurate or correct.
- Critique: This undermines the critical project by negating the possibility of understanding texts on their own terms, leading to an endless loop of reinterpretation without any firm conclusions.
Representative Quotations from “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Every act of reading is an exercise in belatedness, yet every such act is also defensive, and as defense it makes of interpretation a necessary misprision.” (p. 268) | Bloom argues that all readings are influenced by prior texts (belatedness) and involve some form of misreading (misprision), as readers defensively shape their understanding in relation to previous interpretations. |
| “You are or become what you read” and “That which you are, that only can you read.” (p. 267) | These two maxims highlight Bloom’s idea that reading and interpretation are subjective, with the reader’s identity influencing their understanding of a text, and vice versa. Both reader and text transform through this interaction. |
| “Reading is therefore misprision—or misreading—just as writing is falsification, in Oscar Wilde’s sense of ‘lying’.” (p. 268) | Bloom likens the act of reading to misreading, paralleling it with Wilde’s idea that writing is a form of artistic falsification or creative “lying,” meaning that both reading and writing are inherently transformative and interpretive. |
| “Strong poets must be mis-read; there are no generous errors to be made in apprehending them.” (p. 273) | Bloom asserts that powerful poets create such profound work that misreading them is inevitable. The strength of their influence forces readers to misinterpret them in ways that continue their legacy through revision and reinterpretation. |
| “Canonization is the most extreme version of what Nietzsche called Interpretation, or the exercise of the Will-to-Power over texts.” (p. 270) | Bloom compares the process of canon formation to Nietzsche’s idea of interpretation as an act of power, where the elevation of certain texts to “classic” status is itself an act of imposing meaning and authority over literary history. |
| “All canonizing of literary texts is a self-contradictory process, for by canonizing a text you are troping upon it, which means that you are misreading it.” (p. 271) | Canonization involves imposing a fixed meaning on a text, which is a form of misreading because it limits the text’s interpretive possibilities, contradicting the dynamic nature of literary meaning. |
| “Tradition is itself then without a referential aspect, like the Romantic Imagination or like God. Tradition is a daemonic term.” (p. 269) | Bloom argues that literary tradition, like the Romantic notion of the Imagination or the concept of God, is indefinable and operates as a “daemonic” force, shaping texts without any clear origin or reference. |
| “Influence, as I employ it, is not a doctrine of causation. It does not mean that an earlier poem causes a later one.” (p. 280) | Bloom clarifies that his concept of influence is not about direct causation but about a complex relationship between texts, where later works misread and transform the meaning of earlier ones, rather than being simply caused by them. |
| “Poetry begins, always, when someone who is going to become a poet reads a poem.” (p. 275) | Bloom emphasizes the cyclical nature of poetic creation, where a poet’s writing starts from their act of reading and misreading other poets, suggesting that all poetry is born from prior literary engagement. |
| “A strong poem starts out strong by knowing and showing that it must be mis-read, that it must force the reader to take up a stance that he knows to be untrue.” (p. 278) | Bloom suggests that strong poems deliberately invite misreading, as their complexity compels readers to adopt interpretive stances that they know might be flawed, which adds to the ongoing creative dialogue between text and reader. |
Suggested Readings: “The Necessity Of Misreading” By Harold Bloom
- Bloom, Harold. “The Necessity of Misreading.” The Georgia Review, vol. 55/56, 2001, pp. 69–87. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41402122. Accessed 4 Oct. 2024.
- Altevers, Nannette. “The Revisionary Company: Harold Bloom’s ‘Last Romanticism.’” New Literary History, vol. 23, no. 2, 1992, pp. 361–82. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/469241. Accessed 4 Oct. 2024.
- Bloom, Harold. “POETIC CROSSING: RHETORIC AND PSYCHOLOGY.” The Georgia Review, vol. 30, no. 3, 1976, pp. 495–524. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41397273. Accessed 4 Oct. 2024.
- Kaiser, Daniel. Studies in Romanticism, vol. 15, no. 2, 1976, pp. 320–26. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/25600016. Accessed 4 Oct. 2024.