[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 36 KB, 800x458, james-joyce-life-works.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13331643 No.13331643 [Reply] [Original]

>he pretends to like Joyce even though he isn't nearly well-read enough to properly understand his works
Why do people do this?

>> No.13331651

>>13331643
I personally refuse to read Joyce on principle.

>> No.13331655

>his appreciation of joyce inspires him to further explore the literary canon so as to better understand joyce, developing a deeper and deeper love for and understanding of joyce and literature as a whole

so happy people do this

>> No.13331667

>>13331643
>thinking you need to read anything prior to reading Ulysses
Imagine being such a pleb that you don’t know how to read at face value. It’s literally just a book about two dudes wandering around Dublin

>> No.13331676

>>13331667
I agree but I'd recommend Finnegans Wake for a more straightforward page turner.

>> No.13331684

He admitted himself that he enjoyed the sounds of prose over their meaning

>> No.13331700

You can go into Dubliners blind. Ulysses only needs you to have read Homer, and all FW demands of you is a thesaurus.

>> No.13331706

>>13331684
Link?

>> No.13331727

>>13331700
Joyce literally makes up words every sentence, a thesaurus will not help you. As for Ulysses, every sentence is a puzzle and if you think Homer alone is enough to adequately understand it, then you did not understand it.

>> No.13331744

>>13331727
They are multilingual portmanteaus of other words usually

>> No.13331787

>>13331727
There are online thesauruses literally dedicated to Joyce and Finnegan’s Wake.

Also, Ulysses is like 60% recontextualizing Homer and 35% Victorian/Edwardian/Romantic aping. The fact that you consider “every sentence” an opaque puzzle really does betray your brainletism. It’s a great work, but it is still every bit as self-contained as, say, War and Peace.

Protip, when reading Joyce, instead of digging for meaning, you should be digging for leitmotif.

>> No.13331838

>>13331676
But what about Chapter Two where each paragraph/section is just a long list of names and descriptions for the principal characters?

>> No.13331846
File: 3.55 MB, 3024x4032, 236FA002-2B4C-496C-8965-821EA8A8166F.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13331846

>>13331684
He also admitted that he could explain the intention and meaning of any of his passages if asked. He also said he hated empty modernist art.

>> No.13331850

>>13331787
Shhhh, let the pseud think he is the intelligent gatekeeper. It would be a tragedy for all if he gained a modicum of self-awareness.

>> No.13331866

>>13331846
>trusting what authors say about their own art
There can be great authors and artists who lack self-awareness. Joyce also said that all of Ulysses was written as a joke, that he was amused at people looking for deep meanings in it, and that there wasn’t a single serious line in it.

>> No.13331937

>>13331866
Still doesn't negate what he said.

>> No.13332007

>>13331787
I'm sorry you didn't understand it. Maybe try reading more before going back to it. The fact that there are thesauruses that exist solely for Joyce proves my point.
>>13331846
>>13331850
Imagine not thinking subtext is a thing and everyone must be read at face value. How can you hold this view whilst claiming to enjoy Joyce's works?

Ulysses is not that kind of book. It's not a very good story, and it doesn't really have any kind of lesson or philosophical point. Reading it that way is kind of like filling in the letters of a crossword puzzle by "feeling". I doubt whether it will be very satisfying, or a good use of time. It is like a brilliantly-designed lock, of primary interest to locksmiths and engineers, not like a beautifully-sculpted door.

>> No.13332034

>>13332007
No one is disagreeing with you about subtext you troglodyte. We are trying to point out to your pea-sized brain that to enjoy a book you don't have to perform an academic exegesis. You don't have to read a book with the mindset of writing a critical essay. You don't have to read a book trying to understand every little thing, every literary allusion, and all the socio-political contexts. You are arguing you can't like Joyce unless you are one of the top Joyce scholars. You are an absolute retard.

>> No.13332044

>>13332007
I’m sorry you mistake aesthetic styling for hidden meaning. Seeing a Rothko must be a paralytic experience for you.

>> No.13332057
File: 73 KB, 1012x1012, finnegans wake.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13332057

>>13331643
>he pretends to like Joyce

>> No.13332061

>>13331846
>t. Jinbad the Jailer

>> No.13332073

>>13332057
>>13332061
based

>> No.13332200
File: 423 KB, 704x968, 1559496448869.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13332200

Excuse me while I parasitically attach my thread to your thread:
>>13332134
Anyway, how are you supposed to become well-read enough to enjoy a particular reading other than by reading? An incomplete first pass prepares a person for later forays.

>> No.13332244

>>13332200
Have fun pretending to enjoy something you're reading solely so you can say you read it and pretend you're an intellectual. Even worse, have fun creating a group of precisely this type of insufferable pseud, each one of you attempting to out-pseud one another in your chat.

>> No.13332255

>>13332244
>Even worse, have fun creating a group of precisely this type of insufferable pseud, each one of you attempting to out-pseud one another in your chat.
Imagine not knowing how to relax. Sad!

>> No.13332268

>highly educated, easily one of the most well-versed authors ever to write
>doesn't know farting with lust isn't a thing human beings do

>> No.13332273

>>13332255
Ulysses is not a 'relaxing' read though, it is one that challenges you at every turn. You have already failed. At least this exchange between us has produced some good digits.

>> No.13332296

>>13332244
Jesus, lighten up you piece of shit. Imagine being THIS wound up at the idea that somehow, somewhere, people are reading and discussing a book. Who hurt you?

>> No.13332334

>>13332273
>Ulysses is not a 'relaxing' read though, it is one that challenges you at every turn.
Just because it is difficult does not mean that it must be strenuous.

>> No.13332480

>>13332296
I apologize. I've spent too much time on this website recently and it is bringing out the worst in me.

>> No.13332495

I only liked the dead and a handful of stories in dubliners, but basically hated portrait. Should I even bother with Ulysses?

>> No.13332537

>>13332495
which versions of Dubliners is recommendable?

>> No.13332552

>>13332537
I read the oxford press one and thought it was fine if yoi dont mind end notes

>> No.13332559

>>13332480
>anon apologises on 4chan for saying dumb shit
You'll do alright dude, its good that you're aware of how this site can totally warp your perspective. Maybe 90% of the people posting here are so lobotomised by this site that they'd never in a million years be able to achieve what you've just done

>> No.13332668
File: 70 KB, 852x944, walk.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13332668

I'm on Dubliners now in my quest to read up to Ulysses, wish me luck frens!

>> No.13332677

>>13332559
>>13332480
(you) two! Get out and get a room!

>> No.13332753

>>13332034
>troglodyte
kek'd

>> No.13332779

>>13332668
Pay attention to the character names in Dubliners, some of them end up wandering into Ulysses of their own accord (see: wandering rocks).

>> No.13332858

Currently at Ulysses Part II beginning. Tips or introduction from you guys?

>> No.13332862

>>13332668
Great craig, frendo!

>> No.13333614

bump