The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry

196 Pages·1997·5.58 MB·English

by  Harold Bloom

THE
ANXIETY
OF
INFLUENCE
A
THEORY
o
F POE TRY
SecondEdition
HAROLD BLOOM
LITERATUI\~;
"Thc most. signilicant. work that the gift.ed scholar-criric, Hamid
Bloom, has yet written." Commonwcal*
Harold Bloom's TheAnxietyofInfluence has cast its long shadow of
influence since it. was first published in HJ73.Through an insightful
study of Homantic poets, Bloom puts forth his central vision of the
relations between precursor's and the individual artist. Ilis argument
that all literary texts are a strong misreading of those that precede
them had an enOl"1II0US impact on the practice ofcriticism and post
structuralist literary theory.The book remains a central work ofcrit
icism for all students ofliterature.
Written in a moving personal style, anchored by concrete exam
ples,and memorable quotations,this second edition of Bloom's clas
sic work maintains that the anxiety of influence cannot be
cvadcd ncither by poets nor by rosponsihle readers and critics. A
c-
new introduotion, centel'ing upon Shakespeare and Mat-lowe,
explains the genesis of Bloom's thinking, and the subsequent inllu
ence ofthe book on literary criticism ofthe past quarterofa century,
TIleAnxietyofInfluence,SecondEdition provides a new genel'ation
ofscholars, students,and layrcadcrs a welcome addition 10 the Bloom
canon.
"Praise[orthefirstedition:
"Bloom has helped to make the study of Homantic poetry as intellec
tually and spiritually challenging a branch of literary studies as one
lIlay find." TheNewYork Times!fook Review
"This book will asaurcdly come to be valued as a major twentieth
century statement on the subject. of tradition and individual talent."
David .I. Cordon, TheYaleReview
Harold Bloom is Sterling Professor of the Humanities at Yale Uni
vcrsity and Bel'g Professor of English at ewYork University lie is
the author of The Ilbtern Canon, Omens (iflilillennium, A illap of
ilfisre{u!ing,and TheBook ofJ,
90000
COV~;I\ DESIr.NBYK-\TJII.E>;NM.LYNCH
Oxford Paperbacks
9 780195 112214
Oxford niversity Press
ISBN 0-19-511221-0
U.S.$16.95
The Anxiety ofInfluence
A THEORY OF POETRY
SECOND EDITION
Harold Bloom
New York Oxford
OXFORD UNIVERSITYPRESS
1997
The Anxiety ofInfluence
A THEORY OF POETRY
SECOND EDITION
Harold Bloom
New York Oxford
OXFORD UNIVERSITYPRESS
1997
Oxford University Press
Oxford NewYork
Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogota Bombay
BuenosAires Calcutta CapeTown Dares Salaam
Delhi Florence HongKong Istanbul Karachi
KualaLumpur Madras Madrid Melbourne
MexicoCity Nairobi Paris Singapore
Taipei Tokyo Toronto
andassociatedcompaniesin
BerlinIbadan
Copyright© 1973, 1997 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
PublishedbyOxfordUniversityPress,Inc.,
198 MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NewYork 10016
Oxfordisa registeredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress
Allrightsreserved.No partofthis publicationmaybe reproduced,
storedin a retrievalsystem, Ortransmitted,in any form or byany means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording,or otherwise,
withoutthepriorpermissionofOxfordUniversityPress.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Bioom,Harold
Theanxietyofinfluence:a theoryofpoetryI byHaroldBloom.
ended.
p. em.
ISBN-13 978-0-19"511221-4
ISBN0-19"511221-0
I. Poetry. I.Title.
PNI03l.B53 1996
809·I~C20 96-19988
Therewere 18printingsofthefirst editionofthisbook.
Sincethis pagecannotlegibly accommodate theacknowledgments, thefollowing
pageconstitutesan extensionofthecopyrightpage.
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11
Printedin theUnitedStatesofAmerica
For William K. Wimsatt
CONTENTS
PROLOGUE It Was A Great Marvel That TheyWere
In The Father Without Knowing Him 3
INTRODUCTION A Meditation upon Priority, and a
~~~ 5
I Clinemen or Poetic Misprision 19
2 Tessera or Completion and Antithesis 49
3 Kenosis or Repetition and Discontinuity 77
INTERCHAPTER A Manifesto for Antithetical
Criticism 93
4 Daemonization or The Counter-Sublime 99
5 Askesis or Purgation and Solipsism I15
6 Apophrades or The Return ofthe Dead 139
EPILOGUE Reflections upon the Path 157
PREFACE
The Anguish of Contamination
I
Most of the first draft of what became The Anxiety ofIn
fluence was written in the summer of 1967. Revised dur
ing the next five years, the little book was published in
January 1973. For more than twentyyears, I have been be
mused by the book's reception, which remains ambiva
lent. Rather than attempt an explication, this new preface
seeks to clarifyand enlarge my vision ofthe influence pro
cess, which is still a dark ground in most areas, whether in
the high arts, the intellectual disciplines, or the public
sphere. Heidegger, whom I cheerfully abhor, nevertheless
sets me an example when he says that it is necessary to
think one thought and one thought only, and to think it
through to the end. There is no end to "influence,"a word
which Shakespeare used in two differentbutrelated senses.
Just before the second entrance of the Ghost, in the first
scene of Hamlet, the scholar Horatio evokes the world of
Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, where:
xii Preface
Alittle ere the mightiestJulius fell,
The graves stood tenantless and the sheeted dead
Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets.
As stars with trains offire, and dews ofblood,
Disasters in the sun; and the moist star
Upon whose influence Neptune's empire stands
Wassick almost to doomsday with eclipse.
Shakespeare may be thinking back two years, to 1598,
when he was atwork upon Falstaffs last stand in Henry IV,
Part Two, in an England much troubled by the melancholy
ofone solar and two lunar eclipses, prompting prognosti
cations ofdoomsday in 1600. Hamlet, rather than the Last
Judgment, marked thatyearfor Shakespeare, butHoratio,
more an antique Roman than a Dane, still broods on the
"disasters in the sun," reminding us ofthe starry theory of
influence upon those ill-starred, and the moon's (that
moist star) influx upon the waves. The flowing from the
stars upon our fates and our personalities is the prime
meaningof"influence,"a meaning made personal between
Shakespearean characters. Shakespeare also uses the word
"influence" to mean "inspiration,"both in the sonnetsand
in the plays. The sonnet that influenced me in TheAnxiet)
ofInfluence and its sequel, A Map ofMisreading, I deliber
ately refrained from citing in either book:
Farewell, thou art too dear for my possessing,
And like enough thou know'st thy estimate;
The charter ofthy worth gives thee releasing;
Mybonds in thee are all determinate.
For how do I hold thee but by thy granting,
And for that riches where is my deserving?
The cause ofthis fair gift in me iswanting,
And so my patent back again is swerving.
Thyselfthou gav'st, thy own worth then not knowing,
Or me, to whom thou gav'st it, else mistaking,
So thy great gift, upon misprision growing,
Preface xiii
Comes home again, on betterjudgment making.
Thus have I had thee as a dream doth flatter:
In sleep a king, butwaking no such matter.
"Swerving" and "misprision" both depend upon mIS
taking" as an ironical over-esteeming or over-estimation,
here in Sonnet 87. Whether Shakespeare ruefully is la
menting, with a certain urbane reserve, the lossofthe Earl
ofSouthampton as lover, or as patron, or as friend, is not
(fortunately) a matterupon which certitude ispossible. Pal
pably and profoundly an erotic poem, Sonnet 87 (not by
design) also can be read as an allegory ofany writer's (or
person's) relation to tradition, particularly as embodied in
a figure taken as one's own forerunner. The speaker of
Sonnet 87 is aware that he had been made an offer that
he could not refuse, which is a dark insight into the na
ture ofauthentic tradition. "Misprision" for Shakespeare,
as opposed to "mistaking," implied not only a misunder
standing or misreading but tended also to be a punning
word-play suggesting unjust imprisonment. Perhaps "mis
prision" in Shakespeare also means a scornful underesti
mation: either way, he took the legal term and gave it an
auraofdeliberate orwillful misinterpretation. "Swerving,"
in Sonnet 87, is only secondarily a returning; primarily it
indicates an unhappy freedom.
I excluded Shakespeare from The Anxiety ofInfluenceand
its immediate sequels because I was not ready to meditate
upon Shakespeare and originality. One cannot think
through the question ofinfluencewithoutconsidering the
most influential ofall authors during the last four centu
ries. I sometimes suspect thatwe reallydo not listen to one
another because Shakespeare's friends and lovers never
quite hear what the other is saying, which is part of the
ironical truth thatShakespearelargelyinvented us. The in
vention of the human, as we know it, is a mode of influ-