Harold Bloom discusses Walt Whitman and the auto-eroticism at the core of his poetry (May 2, 1983)

Harold Bloom, in a small classroom setting, interprets Walt Whitman's body of work in relationship to its' implied (or perhaps blatant) onanism. I kid you not. Don't miss the last statement he makes, a few seconds before the audio ends. Priceless.

[@username-jc2tp]

Thanks for downloading these, what a gift.

[@whatbrett]

incredible thing to share, thank you

[@loriscunado3607]

Thanks. Very entertaining.

[@charlesedwardandrewlincoln8181]

Can’t believe it’s been almost four years since this was posted.

[@dl5272]

Wonderful resource, I’ve used this lesson as a template and resource for my own classes on Whitman

[@alexcolter612]

Thanks for sharing this, Damir

[@JB-kn2zh]

I like that he told the girl in the end whose interpretation he disagreed with that he liked her stubbornness and that she should always resist authority lol.

[@SteveRunciman]

wonder what happened to her? she's had almost 40 years to follow Bloom's advice.

[@noheroespublishing1907]

The Deacon of the religion of the endless revelation, Harold Bloom, preaching the truest most universal human religion; Art.

[@harperwelch5147]

Really hard to understand, mumbling narration. Wish it was easier to listen to.

[@damirstrmel9930]

Sorry about the sound quality. Not the ideal mic placement or equipment. Have you tried listening with headphones or buds?

[@pmaher63]

a graduate student who doesn't know how to spell "interesting"?

[@damirstrmel9930]

Perhaps the grad student is a lousy editor (actually my typing has been deteriorating as my PD progresses). I should be more thorough but if one makes errors on things that don't really effect the content of the video, does it matter. If the word "intersting" was interpreted by the reader to be the word "interesting" then the intended communication was successful. However, if the word spelled "intersting" was intended to mean something else, then the observation and interpretation becomes more of a Freudian puzzle. Thanks for pointing out the error.