[ 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: 174 KB, 800x1214, 800px-James_Joyce_by_Alex_Ehrenzweig,_1915_cropped.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22006392 No.22006392 [Reply] [Original]

There is nothing impressive or thought provoking about Ulysses. It is a silly book, which is filled with endless references of historical minutia, and bunk science/religion/philosophy in a select few chapters. People just think that reading it makes them smart because the prose is stream of consciousness and a little more muddled than usual.

>> No.22006411

>>22006392
for a moment I thought that was pessoa kek

>> No.22006426

It is the finest English prose of the 20th Century and it is not even close, and it comes closer to actually capturing the interior thinking process than any other book I know of, and surpasses every other stream-of-consciousness work in this regard. The characterization is magnificent and unforgettable. It is true that there is an endless parade of literary references analogous to the rate of pop culture references in family guy, but this triggering you doesn’t detract from what makes the work great and is in fact not why the work is great. Dante and Milton also use a constant stream of allusions to other literature

>> No.22006437

>Catholics bad
>jews good
Him and that zionist faggot Arthur Griffith can rot in hell.

>> No.22006446

>>22006426
What of intellectual substance does the book actually offer? It doesn't seem like a book which actually makes intellectual points as much as it makes references to pop culture and bunk ideas.

>> No.22006461

>>22006446
Are you asking what the themes of the book are, or are you asking if it is arguing for some sort of philosophy ?

>> No.22006490

>>22006461
I'm asking if there's anything of intellectual value, philosophical or literary.

>> No.22006530

>>22006490
Artistic value is generally considered intellectual if of an extremely higher order like Bach or Van Gogh. If however you consider artistic merit to be of no intellectual value then you would be better off avoiding the work

>> No.22006538
File: 6 KB, 201x251, headshot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22006538

Sorry, Joycee ol' pal, but you got Pynched! Just absolutely mogged in every way by the ol' Pynchmeister himself. It's ok though, nothing wrong with being second best.

>> No.22006557

>>22006538
>sorry, Joyce m’lad but I haven’t read ye, and therefore someone who will be forgotten in a hundred years is better because I have read him

>> No.22006571

>>22006530
So in other words you are unable to put into words what you have to say about the book.

>> No.22006576
File: 9 KB, 150x226, 150px-Thomas_Pynchon,_Navy_Sailor.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22006576

>>22006557
nah, Pynchon will never be forgotten. He's part of the Holy Trinity (along with Homer and Billy Shakes). At best Joyce will be remembered for presaging Pynchon, a John the Baptist to the Christlike Pynchon. Ulysses will be a footnote to Gravity's Rainbow.

>> No.22006580

>>22006530
Art for art's sake is for incel subhumans

>> No.22006584

>>22006580
go back to your christcuck containment thread you incel midwit

>> No.22006595

>>22006584
I'm an atheist just like my parents, schizo nigger

>> No.22006609

>>22006595
not an argument, not that you're smart enough to make one. now get back to bible study or whatever it is you tradcaths larp as

>> No.22006628

>>22006576
t. Just picked up GR from his local library but is too afraid to start Ulysses

>> No.22006663

>>22006609
>>22006595
The dividers divide and the wicked fight themselves. A man who thinks he's a monkey is fighting another man who thinks the Truth is a lie - alert the presses, modernity is in full and its gloriously rotten display.
>>22006392
Agreed. Joyce is a hack.

>> No.22006671

>>22006392
lmao maybe stick to dosto kid, leave the big books for the big boys

>> No.22006701

>>22006392
Do you retards not understand that he wrote FW and Ulysses with the explicit motive of having academics talk about his works? So all he did was fill it with obscure references which have no real relevance, pure pseudointelectualism. If you find some value in it, good for you.

>> No.22006720

>>22006446
you dont see how style is what its offering? You dilettante

>> No.22006783

>>22006701
He did that with FW but not Ulysses.

>> No.22006811

>>22006663
Define monkey. Better yet, define animal.

>> No.22006850

>>22006720
the majority on this board seems to hate words

>> No.22006893

>>22006392
Read philosophy

>> No.22006896

>>22006580
Retard
>>22006663
You dont even know what a hack is.

>> No.22006903

>>22006850
I pity them.

>> No.22006967

>>22006571
I put some words into in my first post
>>22006426

If you want me to make more of an effortpost than that, I would need some sign of effort on your end. As it stands you are not very articulate nor, I fear, very smart

>> No.22007007

>>22006530
Van Gogh is the high art equivalent of Game of Thrones. You people are so fatuous.

>> No.22007030

>>22006392
what else would you expect from this monty python looking nigga

>> No.22007075

>>22007007
that's just you being a pseud

>> No.22007076

>>22007007
Not unless you’re a tradtard.

>> No.22007087

>>22006437
>>Catholics bad
yes
>>jews good
eh

>> No.22007106

>>22006437
He never says Catholics are bad and if you had actually read the book you would see it in no way suggests that.

>> No.22007283

Very rarely people who have actually read and finished Ulysses bash the book or Joyce in such a braindead, mindless way.
People who have read it but didn't enjoy it always have something to say about it, be it positive, negative or, often the case, both. People who just shit over it without saying nothing of value likely read a couple of pages, got intimidated and then proceed to bash it in an attempt to seek validation about not liking it and feeling good about giving it up. "It's so shit I don't even need to read it, right bros?".

>>22006701
>So all he did was fill it with obscure references
First of all, reducing the entire work to "obscure references" just tells you haven't read it.
Secondly, many references and likely the most important ones, aren't that obscure at all.
Third, even if a lot or maybe most references go over your head it's still an immensely enjoyable book for several reasons.
As has been said, the prose by itself is reason enough to read it, such a level of mastery is hardly ever reached; it has a great humor with jokes, puns and indencencies; and it has most of all, for me, such an intimate feeling with the characters. The way it is written, the thought process of the characters, the stream of consciousness, I get a feeling of knowing them deeply.

>>22006783
>He did that with FW but not Ulysses.
>If I gave it all up immediately, I'd lose my immortality. I've put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant, and that's the only way of insuring one's immortality
"Joyce's reply for a request for a plan of Ulysses, as quoted in James Joyce (1959) by Richard Ellmann".
The problem is you retards get too hanged over trying to understand it all like you need to stop every couple of words to google references.
That's not how you should read it at all.
At the same time Joyce stated the quote above he also stated this one about Ulysses:
>The pity is the public will demand and find a moral in my book — or worse they may take it in some more serious way, and on the honor of a gentleman, there is not one single serious line in it
Just don't take it so seriously, retards. It's not a textbook. It's a fun, good-humored, entertaining book. Don't be afraid of not "getting it".

>> No.22007341

>>22007283
>Joyce's reply for a request for a plan of Ulysses, as quoted in James Joyce (1959) by Richard Ellmann
My bad. I had thought that quote was in reference to FW. Still, though, I don't think there's anything wrong with taking an artist's work seriously even if the artist himself claims it's nothing serious. Artists lie all the time, especially the more rascally ones like Joyce, and even if he weren't lying I believe it's possible for someone to take a non-serious work seriously. The very idea of it being intended as a non-serious work can paradoxically be viewed as a serious statement on Joyce's part. With that said, I think you're essentially right. People too often think of works of art as puzzles to be solved rather than something to be experienced.

>> No.22007466

>>22007283
>>22007341
I hope you were in last year's Ulysses read-along because I recall a lot of high quality posts like this. I myself am going to reread it again this summer and I can't wait because I know Joyce is going to school me so hard I try to write like him for a month afterwards.

>> No.22007762

>>22007466
I wasn't, unfortunately.
Ulysses is one of my favorite books, I used to read it once every year but stopped doing so in 2019.
I need to re-read it urgently.
Maybe we could try another read-along of it.

>> No.22007782
File: 45 KB, 276x1741, 1659759811709671.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22007782

>>22007762
I made a few threads but it got little traction. By my schedule the readalong begins with Dubliners on May 21st, included Portrait, and then follows this for Ulysses.

>> No.22007789

>>22007782
nice.
I'd definitely follow along.
Been checking /lit/ on and off for the last few years, probably why I didn't see any threads about it.

>> No.22007904

>>22006811
>>22006896
What are words? Yeesh guys, take it easy. Your hatred of Christ and His followers sure doesn't seem to do well against a battering ram of light - perhaps, just maybe, you are wrong.

>> No.22007938

>>22006580
Refuted by Kant.

>> No.22008074

>>22006392
Virigina Woolf didn't like it either and she would know what she's talking about.

>> No.22008095

>>22006392
In general, there are three serious contenders to the greatest novel of the first half of the 20th century, written in the three most important languages of literature: Ulysses, In Search of Lost Time, and the Magic Mountain.

Each of these tomes are encyclopedic and masterfully crafted pieces, encompassing a wide range of knowledge and erudition in all matters of the human spirit. Each of these tomes contain bold, groundbreaking and avant-garde style, and are written in delightful, musical prose in their respective languages.

Each of these tomes also center around cuckolding. Molly gets railed out by Boylan; Marcel is cucked by an endless string of paramours; Chauchat gets fucked by Herr Peeperkorn. These are all integral parts of the narratives of these stories.

What does this tell you about literature?

>> No.22008106

>>22006580
Actually quite the opposite, in general, people who are into art for arts sake have been aristocrats and fucked A LOT.
It's the exact opposite, X for the sake of some utilitarian purpose, that is for incel subhumans.

>> No.22008149

Joyce always wrote an allegorical prose, Ulysses isn't unique in that; Dubliners goes very deep in plenty of moments in essentially every story.

>> No.22008230

>>22007904
Ok schizo

>> No.22008244

>>22007904
u won schizo, can i please suck your dick now

>> No.22008247

aaaaaaaaaaaaaa im jerking off in purple prose and people in dublin like to drink a lot I'm going insane

shit sucks