[ 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: 228 KB, 882x1330, ulysses.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14121816 No.14121816 [Reply] [Original]

Is this the one I want? If not which one then?

>> No.14121825

None of them. James Joyce is a hack fraud

>> No.14121955

>>14121825
>>>/co/

>> No.14122446

There are different texts? Ok, I'm interested too. Which one, /lit/? I was planning to order a copy

>> No.14122602

>>14122446
The only difference would be in the introduction and annotations. You'll especially be needing the annotations if you're going to read this

>inb4 imagine being such a brain let that you need annotations

>> No.14122610

I read the modern library without annotations and I was fine. You're only setting yourself up for difficulties if you're trying to catch EVERY allusive subtlety in the text.
The book is beautiful; that, and the variety of style alone will get you through it.

>> No.14123400

I spent some time researching and it is too tedious to type out what the differences are and why they are important but my conclusion is that yes Oxford World's Classics is the best text for Ulysses, although the introduction is garbage and the notes are OK but if you're going to deep dive you're going to get a seperate book for annotations and commentary anyway.

>> No.14123412

>>14122602
>The only difference would be in the introduction and annotations. You'll especially be needing the annotations if you're going to read this
I read it fine without any annotations. I referred to one online occasionally, but you're kind of missing the point of the novel if you autistically need to understand every reference.

>> No.14123417

>>14122610
This. Understanding everything cheapens the novel. It's very enjoyable if you just read it and look up a word or phrase every now and then. Of course normies and idiots won't like this book

>> No.14123473

>>14122602
>The only difference would be in the introduction and annotations
No, don't spread misinformation. Ulysses has presented textual problems since its publication. The Oxford edition reproduces de text of the first edition of 1922, which was plagued with misprints. Here's a link on the textual history of Ulysses. http://www.antwerpjamesjoycecenter.com/GJS4/GJS4%20Herbert.htm

The issue of the text of Ulysses is more fascinating than one could imagine, and choosing between different editions becomes more than a mere annotations/no annotations issue.

>> No.14123476

How is the everymans?