Brain Pain discussion

Ulysses
This topic is about Ulysses
25 views
Ulysses - Spine 2012 > Discussion - Week Nine - Ulysses - Episode 18

Comments Showing 1-9 of 9 (9 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim | 3056 comments Mod
This discussion covers Episode 18 of Ulysses


Episode 18, Penelope
Scene: The bed
Hour: …
Organ: Flesh
Art: …
Symbol: Earth
Technic: Monologue (female)


message 2: by Sam (new) - rated it 5 stars

Sam (aramsamsam) I liked this episode. It felt like an appropriate ending. Through Molly's eyes we get a new and fresh view on Leo and by that can judge differently what we have read about his day.
Although I had a really hard time with this book (I guess I missed most of the action) I am fascinated and I see why it is one of the most important books ever written.


Ashley | 55 comments I'm slowly making my way through this last section. This section is really hard for me to read, due to the entire lack of punctuation. I'm a grammar nut, so this 60+ page run-on is killing me. But I'm motivating myself by the reminder that I've almost made it through the entire book :)


message 4: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim | 3056 comments Mod
Ashley wrote: "I'm slowly making my way through this last section. This section is really hard for me to read, due to the entire lack of punctuation. I'm a grammar nut, so this 60+ page run-on is killing me. Bu..."

First, congrats on making it through the book.

I'm glad you raised the point about the grammar. You'll notice that their is no "Art" for this episode nor is there an "Hour". The Symbol is Earth. Joyce has hung a lot of stereotypical baggage on Ms. Bloom.

The Western tradition assigns reason/logic/intellect to male and nature/intuition/emotion to female. 17 episodes featuring male protagonists flexing their "art" and 1 episode featuring Molly as eternal, timeless earth, beyond art, beyond punctuation. I'm guessing he looked at this as somehow respectful or honoring to the feminine, but it seems chauvinistic to me. It's maybe pointless to judge from a century away, but the underlying message seems false.

However, to give Joyce due credit, the basic contrast of the efforts of humans versus the "is-ness" of nature I can support. What rings untrue is the tired idea of assigning that contrast to male and female.

Okay, so women birth babies. Fact. But women also write books, paint paintings, fire weapons, commit murder, and think thoughts as big as any other human. So enough already with this looking at male and female as opposite/opposing.

BTW, I liked this episode very much, I just think that after all the formal pyrotechnics of the preceding chapters, this seemed somehow an unsatisfying formal choice.


Ashley | 55 comments Jim wrote: "The Western tradition assigns reason/logic/intellect to male and nature/intuition/emotion to female. 17 episodes featuring male protagonists flexing their "art" and 1 episode featuring Molly as eternal, timeless earth, beyond art, beyond punctuation. I'm guessing he looked at this as somehow respectful or honoring to the feminine, but it seems chauvinistic to me. It's maybe pointless to judge from a century away, but the underlying message seems false.

However, to give Joyce due credit, the basic contrast of the efforts of humans versus the "is-ness" of nature I can support. What rings untrue is the tired idea of assigning that contrast to male and female.
"


Yes, exactly! This was the next thing I wanted to address about this episode, as it has been bothering me as well. Like you, I appreciate the contrast he presents here of human versus nature, but the ancient dichotomizing of male and female in terms of essence does not sit well with me at all. Being written 100 years ago, I would not expect anything different, but the sexism still grates on my nerves.

And while I'm on the subject, did anyone else notice that quote in the Gilbert guide from Bennett (a book critic, perhaps?) about this episode? He said it "might in its utterly convincing realism be an actual document, the magical record of inmost thought by a woman that existed. Talk about understanding 'feminine psychology'!" This irked me even more. Okay, I'll stop talking about how annoyed I am now. Carry on. :)


Casey | 17 comments I also found this section difficult to read. I had to read a sentence (paragraph?) at a time, with breaks. Certainly, a major problem with Ulysses is that there aren't any strong female characters in the book. Most female characters are introduced so that Bloom can look up their skirts. Molly is so strangely sexualized, so foreign and (shall I say it) dumb.

I don't think it's right to judge Joyce by the standards of today, but as a feminist passages like this (and quotes about how "women can't understand literature") really irk me.


Whitney | 326 comments Casey wrote: "passages like this (and quotes about how "women can't understand literature") really irk me. ..."

I don't understand why.... ;-)

Agreed. Many book where I've loved the writing have been sorely lowered in my esteem due to the female characters (or even worse, narrative commentary on the nature of women). Jim, I think your analysis is spot on. Molly Bloom as a character is fine, Molly Bloom as a female archetype, not so much.


message 8: by Rachel (last edited Apr 09, 2012 11:13PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Rachel | 81 comments Jim wrote: "Joyce has hung a lot of stereotypical baggage on Ms. Bloom.

The Western tradition assigns reason/logic/intellect to male and nature/intuition/emotion to female. 17 episodes featuring male protagonists flexing their "art" and 1 episode featuring Molly as eternal, timeless earth, beyond art, beyond punctuation. I'm guessing he looked at this as somehow respectful or honoring to the feminine, but it seems chauvinistic to me. It's maybe pointless to judge from a century away, but the underlying message seems false."


Yes, this!

Ashley wrote: "I appreciate the contrast he presents here of human versus nature, but the ancient dichotomizing of male and female in terms of essence does not sit well with me at all. Being written 100 years ago, I would not expect anything different, but the sexism still grates on my nerves. "

Yes, this!

Casey wrote: "Certainly, a major problem with Ulysses is that there aren't any strong female characters in the book. Most female characters are introduced so that Bloom can look up their skirts. Molly is so strangely sexualized, so foreign and (shall I say it) dumb. "

Yes, this!

Whitney wrote: "Agreed. Many book where I've loved the writing have been sorely lowered in my esteem due to the female characters (or even worse, narrative commentary on the nature of women). Jim, I think your analysis is spot on. Molly Bloom as a character is fine, Molly Bloom as a female archetype, not so much. "

Yes, this too!!

I was already agitated by Bloom's thoughts on his wife's "deficient mental development" and the textbook Woman-as-Other moon~woman section in Ithaca. And then after 17 episodes of the intricately wrought art (Stephen)/science (Bloom)tango, to finish up with this fluid-gushing, emotionally logorrheic earth mother thing tacked on for nature here at the end?? I respect Joyce's artistry in creating Molly's individual voice, but his portrayal of women in Ulysses made me fighting mad.

Fine, Joyce was writing within the cultural context of nearly a century ago, but some male writers who preceded him managed to create rational, nuanced, intelligent, capable female characters (like Shakespeare, whom I'm PRETTY SURE Joyce read).


message 9: by Rachel (last edited Apr 09, 2012 11:42PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Rachel | 81 comments OK, so I can give Joyce some points for showing a woman as a sexual being, and not just the old madonna/whore. Seems pretty revolutionary for the time. But that his tour of the archetypal female psyche is so limited in scope -- sex, emotions and getting pretty things -- still really troubles me.


back to top