From: h431@quads.uchicago.edu (heather e blair)
Subject: Re: Allan Bloom died
Reply-To: h431@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:04:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.002006.5106@netcom.com> foucault@netcom.com (Howard Arthur Faye) writes:

>I will confirm the rumor. When I was a student at Loyola University
>of Chicago, I participated in a seminar on the late Platonic writings
>under Allan Bloom's direction and after six months I learned that 
>no male student would place Bloom on his doctoral committee in the
>Committee on Social Thought program unless he could tolerate/enjoy
>Bloom's advances. Granted, this was told to me by other graduate
>students and not Bloom himself, but the accounts I had were from several
>sources.

When I arrived at UofC I considered taking courses in the Committee on
Social Thought.  At the time, Chicago had three rival philosophy departments,
Philosophy, Social Thought, and Ideas and Methods.  My friends said,
"ah, the Committee on Social Thought - if you're female watch out for 
Bellow, if you're male watch out for Bloom!"

>[I said:]
>>After the anti-gay rhetoric of the Republican convention, I think it is
>>important for closeted gay conservatives to be outed.  Bloom, like
>>Phyllis Schlafly's son, never said any thing bad about gays, just about
>>the lesbigay movement.  So he wasn't exactly a hypocrite, but still ...
>>
>I disagree. I can only imagine that Bloom was irritated by things
>modern in general. He was not part of the curriculum battles (although
>invoked often by Bill Bennett) and refused to participate in righ wing
>policy efforts. Bloom, I think, fancied himself a Socratic figure who
>saw his male students as potential Alcibiades. It would be sad if
>a somewhat eccentric scholar who didn't really understand political
>activism in general was posthumously subjected to outing. If he
>had acted hypocritically, a case might be made.
>-- 

No, "The Closing of the American Mind" is a kind of political activism.
While you're probably right that Bloom wanted to be Socrates to somebody's
Alcibiades, the book does have a lot to say about "family values" - especially
keeping us double-x-chromosone humans out of intellectual life.  At least
Marilyn Quayle thinks we should get an education although we shouldn't use it.
On the gay issue, Bloom doesn't say much, but he does complain about campus
gay activists, and dismisses homosexuality as applying to a teeny-tiny
percentage of the population. (can you say "elite"?)  The book is much more
conservative than even the Religious Right on how men and women should
get along together.  I think Bloom took Rousseau (the nasty misogynist)
as his model.  

Yes, I debated much with my friends about whether Bloom should be outed.  Of
course, little peons like us probably can't do all that much.  Before the
Republican convention, I felt like nobody should be outed except virulently
homophobic gays, and I didn't think Bloom counted as one of those (although
his misogyny is utterly repulsive).  But the Republican Convention changed
my attitude.

>Howard Arthur Faye * Panglossian Acres * Box 7 * Littlerock, CA   93543
>                         Fax: 805.944.5958
>


-- 

- Heather Blair       h431@midway.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: soc.motss