Unfortunately it seems that this effort was the equivalent of a single rainstorm on the dry and infertile soil that our universities attempt to cultivate. It is my assertion that though they are well intentioned, Blooms' goals are much too small to have any permanent effect. There must be active steps towards rejuvenating and replenishing the wastelands of the American educational system if there is any hope for a change in the bleak landscape. Of this hope Bloom says "One cannot and should not hope for a general reform. The hope is that the embers do not die out- (380). It is this attitude which virtually ensures failure. Without proactive steps towards educational reform the embers will die out, as will the few remaining trees, and finally the possibility of a worthwhile liberal education will be merely a relic of the past.
Bloom's prescription for salvation of the university system is to revive the dialogue within the system, about the system. For a while he was successful in this revival. His book instigated wide controversy, heated debate and thoughtful inquiry into the American universities. But now the novelty has worn off. Granted the book is still read, and subsequently discussed by the odd graduate or undergraduate student, and most likely there is some memory of the book in those most affected by it, but that is not enough. The ills which caused the disappearance of philosophic discussion still exist and have only grown stronger. Meanwhile the discussion was not loud enough to stir up any long-lasting impression. It was not even enough to carry it over into the subsequent generations. As a result only a tiny fraction of them have heard of Bloom's book, and even less have read it. The dialogue is most likely maintained by a very few professors but it is in jeopardy once again of falling away completely. This is because his goal is so limited in scope. For the goal of a permanent dialogue to be achieved, thinkers must not only revive that dialogue but find a way to pass it on to their inheritors.
