This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
SURELY* there has been criticism of this work since it came out in 1994; however there is no mention of that.
I would really like to see "the other side of the story."
In my opinion Bloom's thesis essentially boils down to, "everybody SAYS it's good, so it MUST be good if it's in the Western Canon. I mean . . . it's SHAKESPEARE, for crying out loud!!!" What do anti-canonizers say in *response* to that? Some of the answers to Bloom (1994) may be obvious but some may be more subtle and complex, and it would be nice to see what they are. There *must* have been a discussion stimulated by this work; and yet there is no mention of that.