/lit/ - Literature

>plebeians don't know about regginbrows and aquafaces.

Why does this get asked every day?

Nobody on /lit/ has actually read let alone understood Finnegans Wake. They only claim to for the hipster cred.

http://www.finnegansweb.com/wiki/index.php/Regginbrow

>>2240980
I read it. Didn't "understand" it. "Understanding" it isn't really crucial to being able to enjoy it though. It's not a regular novel.

>>2240994
be careful, a bunch of nerds who think reading is all about gathering and interpreting information as easily and efficiently as possible might jump down your throat

>>2240991
i think it's a reference to beloved US president ronald reggin, what do u think?

It's not really that bad, just like the Dunciad or Waste Land in amount of allusions plus he makes some words up.

The meaning of the sentence you quoted might not be immediately obvious but some analysis of the linguistic and syntactical games Joyce plays, and the allusions that are probably going to be present will let you get the gist.

Look at it like a puzzle book and its sort of fun, if your doing a lit degree and you like that kinda thing.

Dunno why I replied to this thread, probably a troll, i'm pretty new here

Which one is it that Joyce admitted to writing fo' the money?

Anyway, Finnegan's Wake is a good read. I think Joyce himself released something like a sparknotes for it which clears it up, even if it probably reads as smoothly as the Silmarillion.

It's like a Lynch movie. You don't have to get it, but you can admire it for the stunning piece of art it is.

>>2241222
>Stunning piece of art

Bleh. Forgive me for that, just read it. Didn't mean to be so vague and flowery at the same time. You get my point.

Finnegan's Wake is about the beauty of language. It's musical to read. I didn't entirely understand it, but I sure as fuck enjoyed reading it.

>>2240932

It's just college professor masturbation fodder. Nothing to be taken seriously.

>Reading Finnegan's wake

Thats your problem OP. You're supposed to burn it for warmth.

>>2241227
enjoyed it so much you apparently never read the title properly

does Finnegans Wake have any discernable themes or is it literally just a mishmash of intertextual references and wordplay?

Every board has its intellectual tryhards, you shouldn't listen to them.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean that it's of any less value.

Physics is hard to read. It doesn't devalue it that you can't understand it.

Yes I'm comparing Finnegans Wake to physics. Deal with it.

>>2241256
you meant quantum physics
god you douche, get it right

>>2241258
I was insulting him you creampie twat.

>>2241256
The goal of physics is to describe reality.


The goal of a novel is to entertain and express a message. So, it DOES devalue it if you cant understand it.

Thats like me writing a story thats just random strings of letters 'sadewrtwe we rw evf wefr we fw ' and saying 'its the best work ever, if you can't understand it, that doesnt devalue the work'

well, yea, it does.

>>2241261
This Deist is right. If you understand as much of Joyce as you do of "sqrtrabbletrabble but but tliggjtkbmn", it's nonsense to you, and therefore looses value to you.

What most people are trying to say, is, that when you DO understand authors like Joyce, it's much deeper than J.K. Hookerowling.

Like Also Sprach Zarathustra, much more exciting to read, but harder to understand thoroughly, than for example that Eragon cycle.

I must admit though, that Finnegans Wake is in the category of nul-comprehension possible.

>>2241269
>looses value

>>2241269
>What most people are trying to say, is, that when you DO understand authors like Joyce, it's much deeper than J.K. Hookerowling.

I don't think depth of meaning comes from artificial obfuscation of the point and story.

I'm sure that if you DO understand finnegan's wake you will feel a sense of accomplishment, much like someone who de-codes a secret message.

I do not think difficulty alone makes a work good, or impressive.Which seems to be the main argument for those who like this book.

>>2241261
>The goal of a novel is to entertain and express a message. So, it DOES devalue it if you cant understand it.
>express a message
Even my high-school english department thought that was a misapprehension. What 'message' can a novel express, pray tell? What do you even mean by 'message'? This sort of thinking displays a deep misunderstanding of what text can provide its audience.

>>2241303
a novel does not necessarily convey a specific message but it conveys something that some people might call a message (though that something may be different depending on the person)

>>2241303
>What 'message' can a novel express, pray tell?

Depends on the novel. 1984 was anti fascist for example.

'message' could also mean 'emotional content related to the content of the work and actions of the characters' its a very broad term.

>This sort of thinking displays a deep misunderstanding of what text can provide its audience.

no.

>>2241314

>>2241314
Everything Is Subjective.

>>2241326
is that objectively true?

>>2241328
it'ts truthiness is not necessarily specifically objective, but it maybe something that some people might call objective (though that something may be different depending on the person)

>>2241314
What I think you mean by a 'message,' is a sort of exercise or working of certain cognitive aspects in our minds, ones particularly emotional and aesthetic in character. This is a passive relationship, we give ourselves up to this.

I don't think you can really call this 'a message;' we aren't told anything particularly, we don't learn anything. We're just left, as we were.

>>2241315
1984 is a particularly 'didactic' novel. This, in case you didn't know, is a bit of a slur on its merits as a literary work, a criticism and probably one of the reasons why it's a perennial YA favourite but not read by mature and educated readers with any enthusiasm. What makes it literary is, as you rightly go on to express, its emotional qualities: the feeling of oppression, the doomed romance, etc, etc.

>>2241347
>not read by mature and educated readers with any enthusiasm.

Read: the pretentious don't read it

Which I'm fine with. Orwell hated pretension.

>a bit of a slur on its merits as a literary work, a criticism and probably one of the reasons why it's a perennial YA favourite

Its not a YA favorite, its taught in high school. I guess that makes the pretentious devalue it.

>>2241315
1984 was not anti-fascist, the society presented was not fascist in nature. Fascism is nationalistic in nature, 1984 dissolves national identities "airstrip one". Fascism appeals to the past for its validation, 1984 destroys the past, and reinvents even the language. Fascism was a discrete movement that arose in the early 20th century mainly in europe, with Franco, Mussolini and Hitler amongst others. It came to power largely in opposition to socialism and communism, whereas 1984 was socialist in nature.

>>2241326
If an objective exists it is unknowable, ineffable, and unjustifiable.

>>2241361
1984 was pretty antifascist.

>>2241357
>>2241357
>Calls others pretentious but flaunts woefully misguided opinions on literature, i.e. ironically pretentious himself because he pretends to know something about literature

Anyone else think this Deist kid's not worth our time?

>>2241363
it'ts not necessarily specifically unknowable, ineffable, and unjustifiable, but it maybe something that some people might call unknowable, ineffable, and unjustifiable (though that something may be different depending on the person)

>>2241366
I know my opinions on literature, which is all that matters, because thats all literary criticism is.

'knowing something' about literature just consists of having read literature.

Literature just means 'books'

I've read books. Moving on.

>>2241365
1984 had nothing to do with fascism.

>>2241361
yeah, this, also.

it's more about totalitarianism which we can assume was mainly inspired by Stalinism seeing as his were probably the most egregious cultural reforms and manipulations (although I concede that Hitler was terrible for this in his own, less ambitious way)

>>2241373
fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/
Noun:

1. An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
2. (in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

1984 seemed pretty anti-that.

>>2241370
Nah, it is necessarily.

>>2241371
There has to be some sort of value to those opinions (which so far have shown themselves to be pretty worthless). Why aren't you a world expert Joyce scholar, or Orwellian, if this is not the case?

It's weird and impossible, but there is actually meaning behind the garbled word-salad. People have written entire books on it. People STUDY it; they make it their field of study. And if you post any given passage on /lit/, you're likely to get some startlingly-lucid responses about what this twist of phrase means or that one.

It's essentially like writing a book in meme-speak, which only people on 4chan would be able to decipher.

IE
> I dropped to the floor to do the dinosaur before THIS FUCKING DOG could herp a derp and imply he could into literature. "Yo dawg. I heard you like dawgs in your spaghetti."

I'm still not sure I "get it", if indeed there's anything to be gotten. It's almost more of a "book as performance piece" than a book in itself.

>>2241374
Yes when read in conjunction with Homage to Catalonia and Animal Farm its pretty clear that Orwell, a long time commie, was more concerned about the perils of Stalinism that he had begun to see when fighting in the Spanish Civil war.

>>2241377
it'ts not necessarily specifically necessarily, but it maybe something that some people might call necessary (though that something may be different depending on the person)

>>2240980
If Finnegans Wake is meant to simulate a world of dreams then perhaps you aren't supposed to "understand" it, just stare passively at all the images and events that it presents. Unless you want to play the part of dream interpreter, but that would require you to know something about the person having the dream.

>>2241303
lol, novels don't just have a message; they have many, many messages some of which may be unintended by the author. It's true that not every novel has to have a simple moral or have to be some kind of political or religious propaganda.

>>2241378
>hurr durr, if i disagree with what someone says it means their opinions are worthless

no.

>>2241380

>People have written entire books on it. People STUDY it; they make it their field of study

Well we know now why academics in the ivory tower love it. They can read as much bullshit into the book as they want. Academics love bullshit. They decide to say an indecipherable text is 'a classic' because only they can 'really understand' it.

>>2241382
whatever, now the syntax is getting confusing

>>2241380
Its not really that esoteric, its just a lot of nonce words, dialect and onomatopoeia.

>>2241384
>Well we know now why academics in the ivory tower love it. They can read as much bullshit into the book as they want. Academics love bullshit. They decide to say an indecipherable text is 'a classic' because only they can 'really understand' it.
What an interesting opinion, Deist. Please, tell us more.

>>2241382
I might concede that point

>>2241386
some of which is somewhat esoteric

>>2241391
Yes, but the constructions are not really of any specialized literary argot

>>2241389
thanks, i barely understood what I just typed, I had three goddamn adverbs in a row

they were yung and easily freudened

>>2241388
People like to create arbitrary distinctions to make them feel superior. Kind of like /lit/ does in rejecting vast swaths of literature. The higher up the 'intellectual' ladder you go, the more people need to feel like they're better than others.

What do you expect the people up at the top to do? Are they going to be intelligent consumers of media, with broad tastes who understand that most works are thematically interesting and you can gain a lot personally from reading them, not to mention the enjoyment you get from the story?

No. They're super exclusive. They pick a work, that by any conventional measure, is terrible. Ridiculous, and nonsensical. Because of their essentially pretentious nature, they claim its a great work of literature, and that only they, academics, can really understand it. Then they proceed to read a bunch of non existent bullshit into the story, which is easy because so much of it makes so little sense.

I might actually write that novel thats just a random string of words. professors everywhere will love it.

>>2240932
Joyce is big on the sounds of words. In all his novels, he puts a large emphasis on the sounds words make.

The beauty of it is that it leaves itself open to the interpretation of significance. There IS NO significance without the reader attaching it so...

For instance, I had a classmate that completed her term paper on Finnegan's Wake, and completed her term paper on the literary biblical significances of FW.

Joyce loved to stuff all of his Catholic traditions, Latin, Classical Philosophy and literature, and Ireland into his works, along with allusions to all other great English literary traditions.

It makes attaching meaning that much harder, as there is just such an ample feast in the work itself.

has deist posted his youtubes

>>2241404
god, i wish he would, theyre probably fucking hilarious

>>2241384
Is this what I said? Didn't I earlier show how thinking that a book should have 'a message,' a single, definable moral, was a pretty idiot opinion? Hasn't your facile interpretation of 1984 already been debunked? I suspect you're 15 years old, hormonal and have a long way to go. Grow up fast is all I urge.

>>2241383
This is a little more interesting. Adherents to the 'New Criticism' have that autonomous principle, that a work of art is always stand alone, autonomous from the world it inhabits. We shouldn't ever be as radical as the New Criticists, because it's simply senseless, but where I kind of stand is that a piece of literature should often reflect, correspond or comment on a real and contemporary issue and should in general be well integrated into its context (I think, it's hard for a novel or poem or whatever else to not be like this). I don't think novels should answer questions or lead people places or encourage them to think a certain way. The way Joyce deals with Irish nationalism is interesting way of illustrating this: he does nothing for it, has no opinion on it, simply portrays the way it ramifies throughout his culture when the fancy takes him.

All the pipehole oin this tread are nebuloux boobs. Oy canned bereave how muchness yew make of Jinnegans Jake. Portentous poppycock. "Birds of a feather," says I.

>>2241398
Oh grow up.
You're just butthurt that you can't into Ulysses.

itt: caracalla gets beat up by a god-believing monkey

>>2241412
I thought /lit/ had forgotten~~~~~~~

>>2241408
That was just you doing a cockney accent.

>>2241416
I had a dream about doing a cockney accent

At least I think it was a dream...

>>2241410

No, i'm not. I'm just fairly anti academia and have no patience for bullshit.

>>2241404

>>2241405
If you don't tell anyone
http://www.youtube.com/user/FukPhysics?feature=mhee


>>2241406
>idn't I earlier show how thinking that a book should have 'a message,' a single, definable moral, was a pretty idiot opinion?

>use a different definition of message than I did
>refute that definition

strawmen, strawmen everywhere

>Hasn't your facile interpretation of 1984 already been debunked?

No, i debunked the debunking.
Read the damn thread.
AND HOW CAN YOU DEBUNK AN INTERPRETATION?
Literature doesnt really work like that for you.

>I suspect you're 15 years old, hormonal and have a long way to go. Grow up fast is all I urge.

Now you begin insulting, because you're so immature and intellectual. /sarcasm

>>2241416
finnegans wake isn't nearly as impenetrable as cockney slang. wtf maetes

Name:
Jon
Channel Views:
4,182
Total Upload Views:
1,674
Age:
18
Joined:
Mar 26, 2009
Latest Activity:
1 hour ago
Subscribers:
20
Website:
http://twitter.com/#!/FukPhysics
I am a troll. Not a very good troll but i do try.
About Me:

I'm an internet troll in a human's body. I want to be the new Brett Keane.


http://jongreenranger.tumbl......
Country:
United States
Occupation:
Cart Mobility Professional
Interests:
Video games, Children's literature, Internet culture, Philosophy, Psychology, Religion
Movies:
Superbad, Soylent Green, Merlin, Ready to Rumble, Fight club,
Music:
I honestly have not heard music I didn't appreciate on some level.
Books:
I don't read books, they're a dead medium. I'm going through a chart and graph phase right now, they're the future man.

>>2241419
>No, i'm not. I'm just fairly anti academia and have no patience for bullshit.
Yes, I'd say all of your posts have the distinctive tang of a frustrated psuedo-intellectual.

>>2241419
How are these strawmen? Substantiate...

http://jongreenranger.tumblr.com/
>—>Today in chemistry class, I spent my day thinking up offensive pickup lines to try on this muslim girl in my class.

ahahahahahaha this nigga has a twitter

http://twitter.com/#!/FukPhysics

jonathan cashman is his name

>>2241428
WHAT HAVE I DONE

by the way

The lines were

Baby are you a 747? Because I just fell for you.
Hi, you can JACK me any time.
This isn’t a pipebomb in my pants!
My dick is an improvised explosive device.
Fuck 72 virgins. I’d rather have one whore. You.
I’m not saying I’ll stone you to death if you don’t suck my dick, but there are all these rocks around!
I notice your head is uncovered. I wish the rest of you would follow suit.
You know, the American stereotype is that muslim chicks are bad lays. You owe it to your culture to prove the white devil wrong.
They say the Quran can never be accurately interpreted by a human being. So I mean, you cant PROVE your religion doesn’t require you to fuck me.
I claim this pussy in the name of Christendom!
Show me your fertile crescent.
I wanna ride you like a camel!

all his videos are really boring, just some gaming bullshit.

most important things we've learned here: deist is an idiot atheist gamer internet teenager. deist is explicitly a troll. deist is really dumb.

maybe someone else can find something more interesting.

>>2241422
wasn't brett keane that southern wife beater who made a youtube vid of him burning the bible

>>2241408

Primer:

> All the pipehole oin this tread are nebuloux boobs
Pipehole refers to roofing architecture related to large structural organs, as are found in churches. "Nebuloux boobs" refers to the blue-footed booby, of course; "nebuloux" being a transposition of the word "nebulous" and the scientific name for the species, "Sula nebouxii". By referring to ALL OF THE PIPEHOLES on "this tread" (the text itself), the author is asserting an identity upon the reader -- specifically, that of a bird.
"Oin", paradoxically, is an onomatopoeia transposition of "oink". This will become important.

> Oy canned bereave how muchness yew make of Jinnegans Jake.
Oy denotes the Hebrew tradition foregoing pork. Canned denotes canned foot; paired with the pig puns and assertions of fowl-dom, it compares the reader to canned foodstuffs, and according 'bereaves' that heterogeneity. "Muchness" is a play upon "much of a muchness", alluding to both Shakespeare and Lewis Carrol, suggesting dually that the text could be a work of either literary genius, or droll farce. "Muchness yew make" therefore equates to the drawing of yew from the bones of pig and fowl, likening the literary critique of the work to a production process intended to make a useable material. Jinnegan's Jake is obviously "Finnegans Wake" transposed with "James Joyce", and is just the writer being silly.

> Portentous poppycock. "Birds of a feather," says I.
I have no idea what this means. Possibly an idiom of the writer's regional dialect.

>>2241433
>dat gameing voice
If that is Deist, then it matches the voice that I've been reading all of his posts in.

>>2241408
>>2241435

>>2241435

so the line basically says 'this is bullshit'

>>2241450

To one extreme, it likens supporters of Joyce and Finnegans wake to canned foods (one wonders at the absence of an allusion to sardines? perhaps intentional?).

To the other, however, it draws images of aeries in pipe organ lofts and an earthy realness to be found in the wind-on-meat sounds of domestic livestock; likening the readers to humble creatures of the earth, or perhaps those who keep them -- and inviting to "make a muchness" of their flesh and bone, as from the text itself, in a way that glorifies both.

hey I heard you could substitute random paragraphs in finnegans wake with your own words and no one would notice, is this true???

finnegans wake : winter '11 /lit/ :: the stranger : summer and fall '11 /lit/

Of course, no one criticising Finnegans Wake in this thread has actually read any critical works about it.

Perhaps the best example of what is being done in the novel comes from the title, which so many of you get consistently wrong. It's Finnegans Wake without the apostrophe, you see.

Why no apostrophe? It introduces a double meaning, it makes a pun:

The title at once implies both 'Finnegan's Wake' as in the party held after the funeral of someone named Finnegan, as well as 'Finnegans Wake' as in all people named Finnegan 'Waking'. It manages to encapsulate in two words the whole circularity of life and death.

>>2241530

It can only imply one of these things if there is no apostrophe.

>>2241384
Please leave this board forever. I just recently discovered /lit/ and have found it a place where intelligent conversation CAN take place, where I can speak and expect a courteous and reasonable response (sometimes), and when those things don't't happen you sometimes end up with fun and content-filled conversations anyway.

However, you find a way to spoil every thread I see you in, and it annoys me. please leave.

Also
>deist.

opinions invalidated.

Say what you will about the book or Joyce's success/failure but this is a god-tier phrase:

Beside the rivering waters of, hitherandthithering waters of. Night!

>>2241408
>>2241419
>>2241423

Deist, if you knew anything about literary criticism you would know that interpretations can be debunked.

of course i now begin to suspect that your stupidity isn't actual stupidity but troll stupidity, and therefore impossible to correct. I will now stop trying. Enjoy your butthurt.

>>2241582
he's explicitly a troll, ignore him

>>2241593
yep. just pretend that deist never makes posts.

okay.

why though? who would spend so much time engaged in such a fruitless endeavor to piss people off?

gaaah such is the nature of trolldom. whatever. I've got better things to do n' better people to talk to so i will just get on with that, and will hopefully be more discerning of trollage in the future...

at least he's more entertaining and thorough in his thinking than you guys

>lol just stop trolling, finnegans wkae so good^^

why even post at all if you have absolutely nothing to communicate?

>>2241597
That's the great thing about trip fags, they give a handy heads up at the top of the post if you should ignore them or not.

>>2241247
>does Finnegans Wake have any discernable overarching themes or is it literally just a mishmash of intertextual references and clever wordplay?

Anyone?

I have a question:

is Finnegan's Wake translated into other languages?

if so: how?

>>2241626
In spirit. The theme of each pun is achieved, whether historical, sexual; phonetic or orthographic. Eco has an essay on it, which shows English, French and Italian versions of several specific portions. He then points out all the similar puns in each portion. The translators did well. Eco's publication is called Dire Quasi La Stessa Cosa (12.2 Il caso Joyce). In the same book, Eco claims that translation is the art of failure.

>>2241645
>>2241626
http://www.tetrameter.com/nabokov.htm

>>2241625
There's definitely an argument about some sort of cyclic structure of man, almost a Blakean personal fall thing, and it occurs many times in many forms. I'd say that's the main one. There's also some sorts of statements on religion (the four masters), art (ALP's letter going through Shem/Shaun), education (the night lessons section), but I can't really say for sure what exactly they're trying to say. But I'd say most of the subject matter that is discussed in Ulysses is presented as a theme in some regard in the Wake.

>>2241625
I haven't read Finnegans Wake but people whose opinions I respect think that it has shit that it deals with seriously. Like Guy Davenport.

>>2241597
>yep. just pretend that deist never makes posts.
Yeah, but then he goes and posts anonymously, starts threads under new trips and responds to them, etc. Trolling 101, pretty much. Just pay attention and his style is pretty obvious.

>>2241650
The best line in that poem:
I analyze alliterations
That grace your feasts and haunt the great
Fourth stanza of your Canto Eight.

Thanks for that!

>>2241626
there was this french dude who was a part of the roman nouveau movement who planned on translating it into french, i dont know if he actually followed through though.

marshall mcluhan was influenced by finnegans wake, i remember reading some of his stuff and seeing the "abcedminded" line in it, which was to do with the way alphabet determines the way you think.. "the medium is the message". i think language philosophy is probably the key to 'understanding' the 'meaning's of FW.

>>2241652
I guess the awakening of the title is kinda about like finding or questing after a way of living without the entrapment of your immediate context, of knowing kinda extra-perspective knowledge: which is I suppose a lot to do with the cycling of history and event in the narrative and the sort of hidden perversity that dogs HCE and the literary 'criminality,' significant or otherwise, of Shem/Sham/that son of his. These are the sort of snares I suppose these characters have to negotiate, successfully or otherwise, and maybe we all do too. The ALP section is maybe a female perspective on the matter, passive and indifferent to it in quite a liberating way, which sort of embeds the narrative of the work in a larger sort of paradigm of the contention between Masculine violent attempts to dominate and control and feminine peaceful integration into nature.

>>2241693
how you doing, hakas?

haven't spoken in a while since the tc went to shit

>>2241698
pretty good, you? haven't been watching many movies lately either lol you know we're on /litx now right?

>>2241710
yeah, it doesn't get much traffic though, shit kinda sucks. does 3rd know about it? who started it? timmy?

I saw Thin Red Line today. Was pretty cool. Dancer in the Dark kinda made sense of Von Trier for me: he's a great stylist but apart from a few moments of genius, he's pretty shit on the conceptual front. It's definitely the best I've seen by him.

>>2241714
> Dancer in the Dark kinda made sense of Von Trier for me: he's a great stylist but apart from a few moments of genius, he's pretty shit on the conceptual front. It's definitely the best I've seen by him.

10/10 statement right here.

>>2241726
Glad you feel the same way.

What directors do you like?

>>2241732
Currently I'm big on Alain Resnais and Abbas Kiarostami.

Have you seen Malick's Tree of Life? I think it's very overrated. Would like to know what you think.

>>2241741
pffft

>>2241741
also what kiarostomi do i watch after the wind will carry us

>>2241741
Tree of Life is underrated in the sense that no-one kind of gets it and the people that do are unfair about it, sort of seeing its Christian mysticism as a sort of flaw. Otherwise, it's very much a failure and was overhyped by the press pre-release to an unfortunate extent. Basically, Malick tries to do things you can't do with film, y'know trying to create this mystic/religious experience and all it's all too abstruse. Days of Heaven I think was his high-point and is just astoundingly brilliant I can't think of much that can rival it, but after it he sort of swapped visual for spiritual emphases and lost the plot as a result.

Kiarostami is pretty great, interesting that he doesn't use a lot of the high-tech stuff most film-makers use. very interesting perspective as well. Resnais likewise, within that sort of continuum of great existential auteurs he's probably the best; much more daring than Antinioni and Bresson.

>>2241754
Taste of Cherry, but that's basically the same film as The Wind Will Carry Us in too many respects. Maybe, Ten?

Anon will know better

>>2241754
Check out Close-Up and Through the Olive Trees, Life and Nothing More and Certified Copy. I'd say check out the first two first.

>>2241764
Interesting. I'm with you on Days of Heaven being his best. Tree of Life also has some great moments but it just seemed a little empty to me. I don't really mind the Christian mysticism, but it was all too relentless and overbearing. The whole family dynamic was a little too Freudian, a little too reductive for a film that is constantly telling you it's trying to address the BIG questions.

Maybe I'm missing some Kabbalist/Heideggerian aspects of the film? I don't know.

>>2241764
>>2241775
>implying Badlands isn't Malick's best

>>2241765
Ten is good too. The Wind Will Carry Us might be my favourite of his. It's interesting because it kind of appropriates all his prior films into one. Certified Copy is neat because it's Kiarostami trying to not be Kiarostami while still being inescapably Kiarostami. Jean-Luc Nancy has written a book on him that I must read soon.

>>2241669

you'd have to be an idiot to think I do that.


but wait, you guys think joyce is worth your time.
I guess there is no level of stupidity you won't stoop to. By the way, there ARE people who agree with me. Example:

>in literary reviews of the 1920s. Initial response, to both its serialised and final published forms, was almost universally negative.
>Joyce's brother Stanislaus "rebuk[ing] him for writing an incomprehensible night-book"
>Oliver Gogarty believing the book to be a joke, pulled by Joyce on the literary community, referring to it as "the most colossal leg pull in literature since Macpherson's Ossian"
This one is really good
>Vladimir Nabokov, who had also admired Ulysses, described Finnegans Wake as "nothing but a formless and dull mass of phony folklore, a cold pudding of a book, a persistent snore in the next room [...] and only the infrequent snatches of heavenly intonations redeem it from utter insipidity."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnegans_Wake#Literary_significance_and_criticism

So suck my dick. I side with Narbokov. You're all pretentious fucks

>>2241802
tryhard detected

>>2241802
yer a nigger, shut the fuck up

>>2241802
How's Ulysses coming along, Deist?

>>2241819

Finals next week, i've had to put it off. Will finish it over my winter break. Shouldnt only take like, 2 days

>>2241870
>
>
>

>>2241870
Obviously I mean

*should

Fun Fact: Jhem and shem is an allusion to a brewing company in Ireland as well as an allusion to the fact that a partner of him was a man by the name James Stephen, and originally was said to be authored by J and S.

>>2241626
there's also an excelletn japanese translation apparently

http://www.mediamatic.net/page/5855/en

>>2241714
What do you mean by Von truer being shit on the conceptual front?

>mix up parts of different languages
>make puns
>people who can barely read Dr. Seuss suddenly act like they are blind men trying to read words projected onto a wall

>>2241802
>Narbokov

lolololololol???

And a handful of contemporary critics - reputable as they are - does little to discredit decades of fruitful study.

>>2241802
Oh I read that interview with Nabokov on JSTOR. He's kind of grumpy about a lot of experimental things. I fucking loved this part, though:

Appel: One often hears from writers talk of how a character takes hold of them and in a sense dictates the course of the action. Has this ever been your experience?
Nabokov: I have never experienced this. What a preposterous experience! Writers who have had it must be very minor or insane.

>in the reflection of rippling water, you see one of two twins brewing beer beside a blurry end of a rainbow
idiot.

"Rot a peck of pa's malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface."

...10 translations later Bing gives us:

"Rigenbroo ringsomi werori arklait malt beer or c PA digging the appearance of the Aqua interface by the end of the Red God."

>>2241315
>anti-fascist

No you fucking imbecile, it was anti-totalitarian.

It wasn't even anti-communist (alright, it was KINDA anti-commie); yes, there is a difference.

>>2240932

I just had stunning revelation. The word 'rot' refers to 'mouth'. And I know this because in A Clockwork Orange Anthony Burgress, who was an avid reader of Joyce, also uses the word 'rot' in Nadsat to refer to mouth.

Oh Joyous Day! I'm making such happy connections this morning! This can only bode well for my near future.