Bloomsbury Group

related topics
{theory, work, human}
{son, year, death}
{group, member, jewish}
{woman, child, man}
{church, century, christian}
{work, book, publish}
{school, student, university}

The Bloomsbury Group or Bloomsbury Set was a group of writers, intellectuals, philosophers and artists who held informal discussions in Bloomsbury throughout the 20th century.[1] This English collective of friends and relatives lived, worked or studied near Bloomsbury in London during the first half of the twentieth century. Their work deeply influenced literature, aesthetics, criticism, and economics as well as modern attitudes towards feminism, pacifism, and sexuality.[2] Its best known members were Virginia Woolf, John Maynard Keynes, E. M. Forster and Lytton Strachey.

Contents

Description

Almost everything about Bloomsbury appears to be controversial, including its membership and name.[citation needed] The group did not hold formal or informal discussions on particular topics, but talked about a range of topics at all times. It is now generally accepted,[citation needed] however, that the Group originally consisted of the novelists and essayists Virginia Woolf, E. M. Forster, and Mary (Molly) MacCarthy, the biographer and essayist Lytton Strachey, the economist John Maynard Keynes, the painters Duncan Grant, Vanessa Bell, and Roger Fry, and the critics of literature, art, and politics, Strachey, Fry, Desmond MacCarthy, Clive Bell, and Leonard Woolf.[3]

Vanessa Bell and Virginia Woolf were sisters, and their brothers, the older Thoby and the younger Adrian, were also original members of the group, as were some other Cambridge figures such as Saxon Sydney-Turner. Lytton Strachey and Duncan Grant – later Vanessa’s partner – were cousins. During the earlier years of the group’s history there were various affairs among the individuals. Most of the members lived for considerable periods of time in the West Central 1 district of London known as Bloomsbury, and "group" seems to be the best general term to describe the nature of their association, which was not merely social as the terms "circle" or "set" may imply.[citation needed]

Full article ▸

related documents
Franz Xaver von Baader
Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
Herbert Marcuse
The Ego and Its Own
Loaded question
Guanxi
Gradualism
No true Scotsman
Evolution of an idea
Evolutionism
Proper name
Ascribed characteristics
Environmental skepticism
Persuasion
Semiotic literary criticism
Popular psychology
Millenarianism
Fallacies of definition
Jared Diamond
Esotericism
Orwellian
Cultural bias
Surrealist automatism
Amos Bronson Alcott
Individual differences psychology
Liane Gabora
False dilemma
Gemara
Egolessness
Fritjof Capra