#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Can anyone here say they've picked up Ulysses, read it, and was like "yeah, I get at least 50% of the literary allusions and know wtf is going on in this book?" [/ QUOTE ] No. Half the people who say they finished it are lying, the other half don't have a clue what anything means beyond what they are told by others (this includes university professors). [/ QUOTE ] I haven't read Ulysses, but this type of attitude always strikes me as more elitist than those who claim to understand Ulysses. It's basically saying, "If I don't understand it, no one else possibly can!" Try Portrait... which I enjoyed a great deal. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
[ QUOTE ]
Lol, try reading this: and then gratefully relapse to the pure readability that is Ulysses. [/ QUOTE ] Don't read it. It's dangerous. Some of my friends in college would read it and make fun of it, but before long they were all babbling idiots. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
I'm in the second section of the book and it's gotten a little easier to follow.
I'm kind of thinking about getting the Cliff's Notes for Ulysses, reading a chapter of Ulysses, reading the accompanying chapters in the Notes, ruminating on that for a bit, and then moving on. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
[ QUOTE ]
Don't read it. It's dangerous. Some of my friends in college would read it and make fun of it, but before long they were all babbling idiots. [/ QUOTE ] Too late, I already have. Except I started as a babbling idiot and ended a drooling one. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
I didn't particularly enjoy Portrait, so I've never bothered moving on to the heavy stuff.
EDIT: [ QUOTE ] I haven't read Ulysses, but this type of attitude always strikes me as more elitist than those who claim to understand Ulysses. It's basically saying, "If I don't understand it, no one else possibly can!" [/ QUOTE ] While there's something to this, a Sklanskyesque Bayesian approach tends to lead me to think that the balance of pretentiousness tips the conventional way. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
The book is in the public domain. Full HTML version is at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/ulyss11h.htm
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
You don't need to understand every single reference and subtle allusion to enjoy Ulysses, but there are plenty of books explaining these if you're interested. If a section gives you trouble, try smoking some pot and re-reading it.
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I haven't read Ulysses, but this type of attitude always strikes me as more elitist than those who claim to understand Ulysses. It's basically saying, "If I don't understand it, no one else possibly can!" [/ QUOTE ] While there's something to this, a Sklanskyesque Bayesian approach tends to lead me to think that the balance of pretentiousness tips the conventional way. [/ QUOTE ] well, like poring over Joyce, I read this sentence 3 times and it makes no sense. I mean, I think you're saying that people who read and understand Ulysses are more pretentious and elitist. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
"Mr. Leopold Bloom consumed with relish the inner organs of beasts and fowl."
I read Ulysses in college. Without the guide and guidance of a prof, I would have missed much of the allusions. It's more of a virtuoso work than a readable one, IMO. The stories in Dubliners are more accessible and contain many of the elements hidden in Ulysses. Dubliners + portrait is enough Joyce for me. Skip Sein und Zeit. L'Etre et le Neant is an easier read. Then plow through Warheit und Methode for a gentle brain [censored]. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Re: James Joyce and Ulysses
[ QUOTE ]
So what, I'm pretty sure James Joyce doesn't have 30,000+ posts. Ulysses by a mile. [/ QUOTE ] *whoosh* over the heads of the newbie OOTiots. This needs more love. |
|
|