Expanding the Canon . . . tends to drive out the better writers, sometimes even the best, because pragmatically none of us (whoever we are) ever had time to read absolutely everything . . . inadequate authors will consume the energies that would be better invested in stronger writers. (Harold Bloom)

is this traditional?

As times have changed and as our culture continues to evolve, the concerns of teenagers have changed as well. Let's face it, a teenager's attention span for literature is short; few have the patience, determination, or energy to wade through a Dickens novel in search of an epiphany." (Matt Copeland)

progressive?

Yes.

There is no 'essence' of literature whatsoever . . . any writing may be read 'poetically'. If I pore over the railway timetable not to discover a train connection but to stimulate in myself general reflections on the speed and complexity of modern existence, then I might be said to be reading it as literature. (Terry Eagleton)

traditional?

That sounds more progressive to me.

To determine whether this view expressed by Harold Bloom is traditional, we need to understand what he means by "expanding the canon." In literary studies, the term "canon" refers to a body of works considered to be of enduring value and influence. Traditionally, the canon has consisted of works written by well-known and highly regarded authors.

Bloom's argument suggests that when the canon is expanded to include works by lesser-known or inadequate authors, it may lead to the neglect of established, skilled writers. He suggests that the limited time available for reading means that the attention and energy spent on works of lesser quality could be better invested in those considered stronger.

Regarding the question of whether this view is traditional, it depends on what is meant by "traditional." Bloom's perspective can be seen as a reaction against the modern tendency to broaden the canon by incorporating previously marginalized voices and expanding the diversity of literary representation. In that sense, his view aligns with a more traditional understanding of the canon.

However, it is important to note that literary canons have been a subject of ongoing debate and change throughout history. Different societies and literary communities have had varying notions of what should be included in the canon. Therefore, it is essential to consider different perspectives and arguments when discussing the expansion or preservation of the canon in contemporary literary studies.