For the record, Grice calls Bosanquet a 'relatively minor figure' (p. 66 of
"Prejudices and Predilections, which become the life and opinions of Paul
Grice") and he is just saying that in such a case introjection into
Bosanquet's shoes may not be rewarding.
When I mentioned the praise by a literary critic of Housman (A. E., not
his brother) as a 'minor' poet, I was thinking that the implicature, by the
one who praises him, may still be that "minor to some, but not to me", so
one has to be careful. It is of course possible that one praises Housman
_qua_ minor poet, and that was the point of the piece I read, but it it is
also
possible that it is not.
If Bloom focusing on the greats, and the greatness, isn't he dismissing
the 'myopic' as we may call him, literary critic, who rather relishes on
'relatively minor, but yet pleasing' figures in the literary spectrum?
Just for curiosity, I googled "myopic literary critic" and came up with --
first hit -- "Justice Munir sounds like a myopic literary critic of a
provincial weekly" -- i.e. such as a member of the Housman Society reviewing
an
erratum in the Journal of the Housman Society published in Worcestershire!
And I LOVE Bosanquet!
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
