Brain Pain discussion
This topic is about
Ulysses
Ulysses - Spine 2012
>
Discussion - Week Two - Ulysses - Episode 4, 5, & 6
Just a couple of quick initial thoughts: given Ulysses's fearsome reputation, I was a bit surprised by how much I like Leopold Bloom so far. I was wondering what other folks thought.Also, since Leopold Bloom is Jewish, I appreciated a Joycean character who can think about Catholicism a bit more dispassionately (especially when he pops by the church in "The Lotus Eaters" and at the funeral mass in "Hades"), Stephen Dedalus having a rather tortured relationship to the church. On a good day.
Mod
Also, since L..."
He is a bit more likable than poor Stephen. Mr. Bloom is very much grounded in the physical world - loves meat, flesh, smells, and the real world he walks through. He, too, has a stream-of-consciousness life, but it is practical and pragmatic. He is a merchant and knows how to assess the goods - on two legs or four...
It is nice to have that outsider's take on the activities of the priests and parishioners. Again, a real world evaluation rather than the tortured struggles of Stephen's soul.
Rachel wrote: "Just a couple of quick initial thoughts: given Ulysses's fearsome reputation, I was a bit surprised by how much I like Leopold Bloom so far. I was wondering what other folks thought.Also, since L..."
Unfortunately, I'm a little behind with the reading this week, but so far I like Leopold Bloom as well. Like Jim said, he's more likable than Stephen, although I don't dislike Stephen myself. But Stephen's much more polarizing, I think, and so cynical. Bloom does seem more pragmatic, making him a little more relatable, perhaps.
Rachel wrote: "Just a couple of quick initial thoughts: given Ulysses's fearsome reputation, I was a bit surprised by how much I like Leopold Bloom so far. I was wondering what other folks thought.Also, since L..."
I will agree with you Rachel, after that weird chap 3 I was worried but then I enjoyed these three chaps and feel connected more with Mr. Bloom than Stephen (maybe because we shared a shit and not just a piss and a nose pick?) hehe
Ashley wrote: "Rachel wrote: "Just a couple of quick initial thoughts: given Ulysses's fearsome reputation, I was a bit surprised by how much I like Leopold Bloom so far. I was wondering what other folks thought...."Bloom seems to me the dufus you love and Stephen has yet to show any personality at all ... jmo so far
Sue wrote: "Bloom seems to me the dufus you love and Stephen has yet to show any personality at all ... jmo so far..."When I first read Ulysses I was a teenager, and Stephen was definitely my preferred character. No doubt it was the callow appeal of the tortured artist and eternally put-upon. Now I am also among those liking Bloom much more, and find myself sympathizing somewhat with Antonius telling Telemachus to cheer the eff up.
...and with those who say the same to Hamlet. For those who haven't heard the 'Cheer up Hamlet' theme song from 'Slings and Arrows':http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvmMt_...
(Apologies for the potential spam, but I kept thinking of this while reading Ulysses.)
Mod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvmMt_...
(Apologies for the po..."
"Cheer up, you melancholy Daaaane!"
I can't wait to work that into a future conversation!
In Stephen's defense, he is an intellectual who has looked behind the curtain one time too many and seen that The Great Oz is just an illusion. He is estranged from his family, confused about his national identity, and surely feels guilt over his final moments with his dead mother. I can understand his crisis.
Jim wrote: "Whitney wrote: "...and with those who say the same to Hamlet. For those who haven't heard the 'Cheer up Hamlet' theme song from 'Slings and Arrows':http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvmMt_...
(Apol..."Yes that can make one see him in a differnt light. why is he estranged from his father? I missed that....
Jim wrote: "In Stephen's defense, he is an intellectual who has looked behind the curtain one time too many and seen that The Great Oz is just an illusion. He is estranged from his family, confused about his national identity, and surely feels guilt over his final moments with his dead mother. I can understand his crisis."Yes, I can understand his crisis as well, which is why I don't dislike him. He's conflicted, and he can't exactly help the fact that he's a little on the depressed side. I haven't decided if I really like him yet though ;)
I first read Ulysses in the mid-70s, read it again more recently, have listened to the audio book and seen a film, Bloom, (with Stephen Rea) and I've been reading explanatory texts over the years. I still have a lot to learn about it though - it rewards years of study!
I love Ulysses and particularly Leopold Bloom - he's the essence of humanity for me. A good but flawed man - something we might all aspire to be. Well, I don't aspire to be a man, as such, but you know what I mean. :-)
I love Ulysses and particularly Leopold Bloom - he's the essence of humanity for me. A good but flawed man - something we might all aspire to be. Well, I don't aspire to be a man, as such, but you know what I mean. :-)
Mod
There are many layers to unpeel, aren't there?
Jim wrote: "Barbara wrote: "I first read Ulysses in the mid-70s, read it again more recently, have listened to the audio book and seen a film, Bloom, (with Stephen Rea) and I've been reading explanatory texts ..."
There certainly are. I'm still unpeeling them!
There certainly are. I'm still unpeeling them!
I don't aspire to being flawed either. I don't have to. I've already achieved it.
I dont know if I am ready to 'unpeel' any layers at this point?? I read the Gilbert book for the 2nd three chapters and was more confused ??? why is that?My mum said that she has been trying to read this book since she was 15! well I said jump in now mummy theres a place for encouragement, maybe I shall send her the recommended book?
Is this book that daunting??? I mean its just a book right?
Mod
I want to say that I'm following the talk and haven't yet done the Week Two-reading.
Thus far I've had fitful reaction to Ulysses -- I've torn into the book, shotgunning the..."
My apologies to your loved ones...
I sense Joyce is not satisfying your expectations for the fictive experience. He appears to have pushed many buttons. Can you articulate specific aspects of your reactions to the text?
I can honestly say my only reaction like James was in the third chapter and after a time I just went on to meet Mr. Bloom and was pleasantly surprised that I liked him so much. But again this is my first read and I am not looking for hidden meanings etc.
Mod
Would you consider this to be metafiction? Or maybe metacreation?
If Stephen is meant to represent an earlier version of Joyce as developing, conflicted, scholar, isn't the overwrought, overwhelming form of episode 3 (Proteus) a reasonable match for his overwhelmed mind?
Will be curious to hear your thoughts about Bloom as we continue on.
@James - Then on the prose, which for today's readers is hefty and thick, oppressive even. Without training, supplementary reading, and a great love of adverbs and other things shunned in contemporary fiction, Ulysses is a sheer hardship.
Ulysses is nearly a century old and is a central work from the Modernist period. Naturally it will be different from contemporary fiction, so why make the comparison?
We are using supplemental materials and reading with a discussion group because this work requires it, just as Shakespeare without footnotes can be incomprehensible. That's the whole point behind the Brain Pain group.
For the question, "Why go on?" I would say that all the members of the group are here voluntarily and to satisfy their curiosity and interest in these books.
If I were speaking to you directly, rather than through the awkward medium of a discussion board, I would say that as a writer, the value you might find in Ulysses would, minimally, be a study of what you wouldn't want to see in your own writing. At this point, it seems as though it will be a long list!
I don't want to spend too much effort apologizing for Joyce, but I do want to suspend my judgment of the book at least until I've read the final page and taken some time to process the experience - especially in relation to contemporary concerns about the writer-reader relationship. No one need finish or continue reading this book, but if you do, I would ask that for the sake of intellectual exploration and the considered discussion of the work, we all give Joyce his day in court.
Lordy, James, you seem to be missing the all the fun in this book. I'm at the beginning of Hades (2 steps behind as ever) and I'm loving it. Didn't you find the scene where Bloom met M'Coy hilarious? How he was one step ahead of M'Coy's suitcase borrowing scam...? And how he kept losing track of the conversation about the dead Paddy Dignam because of the pretty girl on the other side of the road? And the chemist shop, where the "smell (would) almost cure you like the dentist's doorbell"...And the language..how Bloom wants to be near Molly's "ample bedwarmed flesh" or the "warmbubbled milk" he poured from a saucer. And previously, the dog halting "at the lacefringe of the tide"....
Mod
I think so. Now one might slap me with one school's chronology or definition meta-fiction, but I think this work is both founding ..."
Thank you James! Without various viewpoints, discussions can lag. Now we have some good stuff to chew on!
Here's a thought that came to me this morning. Joyce gives us much information about his views of religion, the Irish situation, and what I suppose would be aspects of his personal philosophy. He could have written scholarly, non-fiction books about any of the topics and ideas he included in Ulysses, and likely those books would likely have found quiet obscurity, moldering away on dark shelves in university libraries. Instead, he chose to write an experimental novel and present it as fiction - which surely it can claim to be - and so placed his ideas and beliefs in a more public arena. (Am I making sense?) A history of Irish Politics would have had a limited circulation, but a controversial novel has enjoyed a fairly large audience over the past 90 years. Kind of crafty, I think...
When we get to the end of this book, I hope we will have a lengthy debate to address your questions about "Why" to read this book, his authority, and how/if the book serves our contemporary interests. Whether Joyce and Ulysses can be called 'genius', who can say. One reader's genius is another's poubelle...
@Liz - Yes, there is a lot of humor mixed into the Joycean stew. Mr. Bloom gets my vote as the most lovable of literary cuckolds. He definitely loves his veiled nymph - and his organ meats.
Jim wrote: "He could have written scholarly, non-fiction books about any of the topics and ideas he included in Ulysses, and likely those books would likely have found quiet obscurity, moldering away on dark shelves in university libraries. Instead, he chose to write an experimental novel and present it as fiction - which surely it can claim to be - and so placed his ideas and beliefs in a more public arena. (Am I making sense?) A history of Irish Politics would have had a limited circulation, but a controversial novel has enjoyed a fairly large audience over the past 90 years. Kind of crafty, I think..."Exactly! I think it was crafty of him as well. He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of study. By writing an experimental novel that would keep scholars and readers alike scratching their heads for years, he more effectively and lastingly presented his views. The confusing and difficult nature of the novel only added to the popularity and fame, which in turn gave him exactly what he wanted. Crafty indeed ;)
Ashley wrote: "He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of study. ..."The masses are reading Ulysses and understanding the author's views? More so than Siddhartha, also published in 1922?
Mod
The masses are reading Ulysses and understanding the author's views? More so than Siddhartha, also published in 1922? ..."
We'll have to do a poll about that...
Liz M wrote: "Ashley wrote: "He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of study. ..."The masses are reading Ulysses and understanding the author..."
Ah, I should have made myself clearer. I meant that it had entered the general social discourse more than a field-specific work would have. The public is aware of Ulysses as a work, which at least has the potential to bring the issues to the general public's attention. While obviously most people don't read it and/or understand it, there is a better chance of it being disseminated to various types of people as a novel than a field-specific work.
Jim wrote: "Liz M wrote: "Ashley wrote: "He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of study. ..."The masses are reading Ulysses and understand..."
I would say I would have no idea that he is writing about his hatred for war unless somebody told me ... oh wait somebody did tell me :)
Mod
And also writing 'against' depictions of epic heroism. Stephen and Mr. Bloom aren't exactly heroic alpha males. Mr. Bloom finds a way to live with the fact that Blazes (Paris) has a thing going on with his wife (Helen?), but instead of confronting the situation (laying siege to Troy), he starts a flirtatious correspondence with an anonymous typist (???) and enjoys the occasional burnt kidney for breakfast. An anti-hero, at most.
Mod
Well, that explains everything.
New BP policy: No more asking James about jokes and/or jests.
Hey! Wait a minute! Didn't all that stuff happen to Bloom in the Lotus Eaters episode?!!?
Mod
Could be. "It's got a great beat, but you can't dance to it..."
I don't know where you are in the book, but starting with Episode 5, there is a lot of anecdotal discussion about Irish leaders and politics, which, whether "true" or not, captures what I assume Joyce believes was the flavor of his times. Not history in the academic sense, but a recording of a time and place.
Mod
Once again on style, I'll make an example of the first sentence of section six ("Martin Cunningham, first, poked his silkhatted..."
He's describing how Martin Cunningham entered the carriage.
James wrote: "What is Joyce aiming for with this line?..."Does Joyce have to be aiming for anything more than a description of the gentlemen entering a carriage for the trip to the cemetery? And despite repeated claims of Joycean verbosity, I think this is a good example of economy of language when it comes to description. I get a clear image of a man holding on to the sides of carriage while taking a quick look in, a large silk hat being his most noticeable feature, stepping up into the ‘creaking’ carriage which bounces with his step on the running board, and ‘deftly’ taking a seat despite the motion of the carriage.
Or it might be a reference to some obscure Phoenician god of creaky conveyances.
Mod
Down with his aunt Sally, I suppose, Mr. Dedalus said, The Goulding faction, the drunken little costdrawer and Crissie, papa's little lump of dung, the wise child that knows her own father.
In the Proteus Episode (which also begins at 11 AM) we hear Stephen imagining his father's voice.
His pace slackened. Here. Am I going to Aunt Sara's or not? My consubstantial father's voice. ... Sure he's not down in Strasburg terrace with is aunt Sally? Couldn't he fly a bit higher than that, eh? ... The drunken little costdrawer ... Bathing Crissie, sir. Papa's little bedpal. Lump of love.
Those brief mentions of family connection, even bitter mentions, add to the sadness of Bloom, who lost his only son in infancy and whose father committed suicide. Very much the kind of melancholy thoughts most people have at funerals. Dark meditations on mortality.
James wrote: "...sentences which seem to lack the might to push forth the essence of the story or ripen its themes. I also get a clear image, but its aim stays up for grabs."As a portrait of a day in the life of Dublin, Joyce gives us 3 representative characters (all from previous works, so added resonance). As a story of the wanderings of Leopold Bloom, we see him in contrast to and largely excluded from the fellowship of these characters. In the Homeric parallels, per Gilbert, Cunningham and his marital troubles are equated with Sissyphus.
Mod
You're a funny fellow.
Whitney wrote: "Does Joyce have to be aiming for anything more than ..."
Yes, setting and characte..."
What exactly are you getting at about his "aim". It's a simple descriptive sentence. Does such a sentence have to "unfold the saga"?
Mod
As Whitney mentions, the reading list for this group is built from books that intentionally stray from more traditional narrative techniques. They do tell tales, but for a variety of reasons, the writers have chosen to bend and break the rules - including the one you mention about lines that shouldn't be there. Our project is to pose those kinds of questions and try to answer "then what are they doing there?"
When we finished The Waves last month, I posed these questions:
In the Waves, Woolf minimized plot and essentially excluded direct dialogue. The ‘soliloquies’ become internal monologues which indirectly comment on what is ‘happening’ and who they are ‘addressing’, albeit without actually speaking to one another.
How did this affect your ability to follow the story? Were you able to understand who these characters were? Was there enough information to understand what was happening? Is this experimental form that Woolf chose a reasonable and/or valid method for writing a novel? For exploring character?
As we complete each new book, we will ask and answer similar questions.
The overriding raison d'être of the Brain Pain project is to isolate these books from the mainstream of literature and to examine them as the anomalies which most people perceive them to be. The hope or possible benefit of this effort is to achieve a broader understanding of and appreciation for the craft of writing. More personally, I hope that we can decide for ourselves if these books are literary achievements worthy of their canonization, or if they are notorious simply for their strangeness.
Mod
This is, indeed, good stuff to chew on. Thanks, guys!Liz M wrote: "Ashley wrote: "He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of study. ..."
The masses are reading Ulysses and understanding the author..."
Having read exactly none of Ulysses yet, I happened to be in Dublin for Bloomsday this past summer. With small kids in tow, I was able to go to only one event, which I was surprised to find was neither a bunch of elbow-patched professors gazing deep into their omphaloses nor a vaguely Joycean excuse to get totally wasted. Now there may have been kid-unfriendly parts of Bloomsday like that, but I went to one that was pure joy(ce): people reading their favorite passages, costumes, sing-alongs. In fact, the love that these crowds of people had for Ulysses and their desire to celebrate it inspired me to stop being such a chicken and read the thing already.
So I do think there is something that sets Ulysses apart, quite clearly, from the most riveting nonfiction or, much as I love him, Bill Bryson.
Being in the middle of it now, I think part of that this difference is, as Whitney put it, Joyce's portrait of a day in Dublin. The longer I co-habitate with his crazy pastiche of language, styles, allusions, illusions, literary experiments, theories and adverbs, the more I find that layer-by-layer and texture-by-texture, I can feel Dublin on June 16th, 1904 -- with every sense. And since I think that this was one of Joyce's aims for the book, with me, he has succeeded.
James wrote: "The mirroring of Hamlet, and other great men and things, puffs up the text, whereas all the literature I've found great has shown greatness in something narrow, then poetically gone into even smaller things. Whereas Homer would liken a dying hero a falling dewdrop, Joyce would compare his main character with Christ or the universe, which I think opens up for another talk about the rootlessness of modern literature."
Now this is interesting. I have been feeling that this was an example of literature showing the "greatness in something narrow." It doesn't get much narrower that some people wandering around one place on one day, eating, evacuating and buying soap. And yet, this narrow framework can accommodate pretty much all the things in the universe, and if there are a few things that aren't in there, it wasn't cause Joyce didn't try. Or they are in there, and the annotation people just missed 'em.
What does everyone else think?
Mod
Liz M wrote: "Ashley wrote: "He found a way to express his views to the masses, rather than have them become limited to specific fields of stu..."
I think Ulysses is a wonderful look at life and as you say, does so in the microcosm of a day in the life of a few Dubliners. The more I read about Bloom, the more pre-Ulysses literature comes to mind. A kind of library/encyclopedia/meditation kind of experience.
James wrote: "I'm puzzled still, by all this stilted swank. As soon as I get into it it loses me. I wonder also about this: The mirroring of Hamlet, and other great men and things, puffs up the text, whereas all the literature I've found great has shown greatness in something narrow, then poetically gone into even smaller things. Whereas Homer would liken a dying hero a falling dewdrop, Joyce would compare his main character with Christ or the universe, which I think opens up for another talk about the rootlessness of modern literature. ..."For me, this is one of the many points Joyce IS clearly trying to make... Not the Greatness in something Narrow, but instead the Narrowness in something Great. Shortly after publication of this work, he wrote "In the particular is contained the universal.” In this book the characters quite famously engage in all the details of life we otherwise gloss over. By relating what would otherwise be thought of as the most irrelevant details of a single day to the massive themes of one of the most influential works of the western canon, he's not so much puffing up the day of these Dubliners so much as bringing down the gods themselves.
Regarding the language indeed exemplified by the passage of Martin Cunningham entering the carriage, this is a great deal of the beauty of Joyce for me. He bends prose towards the magnetic pole of poetry. To speak aloud: ".. Martin Cunningham, first, poked his silkhatted head into the creaking carriage and, entering deftly, seated himself." ... The rhythms here are entrancing, between "hatted" and "head", "creaking" and "carriage", and even the rawly syllabic sound (ha, had to make one myself) between "seated" and "himSELF". Were I to find complaint, it's that in episodes 4-6 I get to enjoy somewhat fewer than in 1-3, although I find Stephens to be legato vs. Blooms more staccato poetry.
One great part of every human existence is passed in a state which cannot be rendered sensible by the use of wideawake language, cutanddry grammar and goahead plot.
--About Finnegans Wake; Letter to Harriet Shaw Weaver, 24 November 1926
Yes, Joyce is shouldering our senses in a bid for immortality. Yes, that's a bit crass. However, he clearly succeeded. One last note upon the form, from a far better writer than I, from Trepliov's last speech in Chekov's "The Sea Gull":
"I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that it's a matter not of old forms and not of new forms, but that a man writes, not thinking at all of what form to choose, writes because it comes pouring out from his soul."
I think were we to criticize Joyce, it might easily be simply for the calculated and deliberate effects his potions are designed to effect upon us.
This section read more quickly than the previous one, which was a nice change. I'm quite food obsessed, so from the first line "Mr. Leopold Bloom ate with relish the inner organs of beasts and fowls" I knew I had found a kindred spirit in Bloom. He's certainly the everyman, the one we're supposed to relate to. I was most struck by Joyce's treatment of the church in Lotus Eaters. Because I'm an atheist who was raised Catholic, my view of the church is more similar to Stephan's than Bloom's. It's interesting to see it though his eyes, in a way that's more detached. I loved the section in which Bloom ponders the nature of repentance: "Then out she comes. Repentance skindeep. Lovely shame. Pray at an alter. Hail Mary and Holy Mary." I found this to be a fairly accurate representation, although believers may disagree.
Rachel wrote: "Just a couple of quick initial thoughts: given Ulysses's fearsome reputation, I was a bit surprised by how much I like Leopold Bloom so far. I was wondering what other folks thought.Also, since L..."
Me too, Rachel. I certainly like Mr. Bloom better than Buck Mulligan - well, you could like anybody better than him, the way he was portrayed in the first section.
I believe someone here said we would like Bloom. So I expected to enjoy my first encounter and did.
Bill wrote: "I don't aspire to being flawed either. I don't have to. I've already achieved it."Ha ha! Do you know, when I was a young woman, before marriage and responsibility, I actually craved some conflict, some self-flaw-cultivation.
It just seemed I was a dull character. Didn't even have good fights with a fella, like you see in the movies.
You'll learn, they told me, you'll learn.
Sue wrote: "I can honestly say my only reaction like James was in the third chapter and after a time I just went on to meet Mr. Bloom and was pleasantly surprised that I liked him so much. But again this is my..."I'm wondering if that isn't the best way to read Ulysses the first time. Just go through it, get what you can, put aside the 'study' till another time.
I think I'll always be looking for explanations, opinions, reactions, on this book. I often wondered what people were talking about when they discussed 'Joyce'. It sounded so uckfayin' intellectual, it scared me off.
I do remember seeing a movie about him. And will certainly be looking for it again - after I've finished listening and reading the help texts.
James wrote: This text is great in that it makes me ask: "Is this even literature?" Asking this question gives, at the least, the answer: "What is literature?", which, like many answers I've come across changes the question to be asked. However to the first question, one might suggest that literature is that which a writer writes, or that which readers read, or the artful writing about things of shared cares -- the things which bear upon the essence of human life and show it artfully, and so on. So far I have found little sign that Joyce bothers himself with such. Rather he seems filled with lust for artful writing about writing itself.
"
I couldn't imagine trying to write like that. I doubt it would be acceptable in today's writing/reading world anyway.
People (like me) want our books to be about 'the story' not the opinion of every horse on the street as a segment covers the protag's errand to the store for a quart of milk.
I was lucky in that I wasn't 'landed' with this book as a compulsory read in high school. Gawd knows, I got into enough trouble with less complicated book reports I had to do.
Although I must say, I enjoyed reading and writing in school and still do. I did ok, marks-wise, in comp-lit classes.
Not enough to make my home room teacher, stop slanting horrific looks at me as I fumbled through replies to questions that were directed my way.
As for this question, ‘what is literature’, you’ve explained it well, James. Thank you.I often feel agitated when some high brow at a book discussion puts a book down by saying ‘Oh, it’s NOT literature!’
Somehow, if a book is enjoyable, you learn something of the world from it and the right amount of conflict, plotting, etal is within the book covers – it’s a book – be damned with the ‘literature’ label.
Ohhhh ... I've written so much in the way of responses to all I've read here - I'm afraid you'll find me 'too much' if I put it all down at once.But what the heck - you can't poke me in the nose via the internet.
;-)
Something that strikes me as curious ... if we find it difficult to follow in these our own 'modern' times, how did people take to this writing when it was first published?Or did Joyce not become popular till many years after his publications?
BTW - as for these graphic details from Bloom, sitting on the can moving his bowels - that's nothing new to me.
Wilbur Smith does that on the first page of one of his novels - I've forgotten which.
Jim said:Quote
@Liz - Yes, there is a lot of humor mixed into the Joycean stew. Mr. Bloom gets my vote as the most lovable of literary cuckolds. He definitely loves his veiled nymph - and his organ meats.
Unquote
... Ha ha! Seems to like talking about the ‘movement’ of the organs too.
(I love a good fry-up of kidney – funny how the least expensive parts of the animal are so good to eat, and packed with protein)
…………………
Liz said:Quote
The masses are reading Ulysses and understanding the author's views? More so than Siddhartha, also published in 1922?
Unquote
Here! Here! And isn’t Siddhartha just a little easier to read than Ulysses? I’ve never heard of anybody having to get 5 to 6 books out of the library in order to understand the good old bodhi’s doctrine.
Not to say it isn’t interesting to follow these studies along, but for me, just a coupla’ books and online synopsis/summaries will do.
Life is short.
BTW – if you don’t want to find yourself entranced with Buddhism, don’t read Siddhartha – it’s far too fetching. Not to say that there’s anything ‘sexy’ (nobody’s boobs are hanging out, nor is anybody doing the wild thing) or ‘contraversial’ in there, but when you read anything about the Buddha, you just can’t help reading something else about it.
…………………….
I must say that the issues Joyce brought to light are interesting in themselves. And it’s very clever the way he uses his characters to express individual opinions.
Often a writer would like to express an opinion that may be held against him/her. Using dialogue to give the opinion you’d like to express to one of your characters is a very clever trick indeed. The reader (unless in-on-it) doesn’t really know if the author:
1) felt that way about women getting the vote;
2) did not feel that way
………………………
Jim said:Quote
And also writing 'against' depictions of epic heroism. Stephen and Mr. Bloom aren't exactly heroic alpha males. Mr. Bloom finds a way to live with the fact that Blazes (Paris) has a thing going on with his wife (Helen?), but instead of confronting the situation (laying siege to Troy), he starts a flirtatious correspondence with an anonymous typist (???) and enjoys the occasional burnt kidney for breakfast. An anti-hero, at most.
Unquote
Now isn’t that just like a guy that’s fooling around outside the marriage? To resent knowing that his wife has a lover?
And yes, I guess it could be the other way around.
Some things don’t change, no matter what century you’re in.
…………………
Brain Pain
Books mentioned in this topic
Dubliners (other topics)A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again: Essays and Arguments (other topics)
Oblivion (other topics)
A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again: Essays and Arguments (other topics)
In the Shadow of Young Girls in Flower (other topics)
More...
Part II – The Odyssey
Episode 4, Calypso
Scene: The House
Hour: 8 am
Organ: Kidney
Art: Economics
Symbol: Nymph
Technic: Narrative (mature)
We finally meet our Odysseus, Mr. Leopold Bloom, or ‘Poldy’ as his wife, the veiled nymph, likes to call him when he’s late with her breakfast. We discover Mr. Bloom has a way with the pussens and a big appetite for organ meats and the neighbor’s hams. The missus receives a letter from her lover and Mr. B. has a moment of cuckold’s remorse, though it all seems to pass in the jakes…
Episode 5, Lotus Eaters
Scene: The Bath
Hour: 10 am
Organ: Genitals
Art: Botany, chemistry
Symbol: Eucharist
Technic: Narcissism
Mr. Bloom heads to the office. First, a quick stop at the post where he finds a letter from his pen pal mistress. He has an unwelcome encounter with an acquaintance on the downslide of life before stopping in a local church to ogle some catholic ladies on their knees. Quick stop at the chemist then off to the public bath for a scrub.
Episode 6, Hades
Scene: The Graveyard
Hour: 11 am
Organ: Heart
Art: Religion
Colors: White: Black
Symbol: Caretaker
Technic: Incubism
Mr. Bloom boards a coach with 3 friends (Including Stephen’s father, Simon Dedalus) to escort Paddy Dignam to the land of the dead. They pass Stephen Dedalus and later Blazes Boylan (Molly’s “nooner”) along the way. Morbid talk and recollections by all on their journey to Hades as Bloom remembers his dead father and dead son. A brief service, then into the ground with poor Paddy. A bit more morbidity, then back to the land of the living.
NOTE: In Mr. Bloom’s episodes, Joyce uses as mixture of dialogue, internal monologue, stream-of-consciousness “prose” and third person narration within the same paragraphs. A bit of a confusing mix, but not too hard once you get used to it.