|
This is a book which you pick up and look at and you cannot help but be amazed at the amazing qualities of the way the words are strung together. It is lyricism that is not depending on any sort of meter. That raises the question what is it, where did it come from?
Most people know that James Joyce is from Ireland because he is one of the most famous authors of the twentieth century. He wrote at the beginning of the 1900s which a quick wikipedia search reveals. Why he is famous?
The book begins with pure childish yabbering about "moocows" "lemon platt?" and "wild roses." One would think that it was written by a colourful and dippy child, if not for the the writing, which has a quality of craftsmanship that brings one back to something like a grandmother's house.
The image "his father looked at him through a glass. He had a hairy face" is not only brilliantly visual language, it also notifies the reader that the narrator is a kid. The way that the narrator speaks reveals that he has a clear crisp vision of life, but the simplicity of the sentences have a child-like quality. He says things seemingly related to nothing.
He talks about random people as if we are supposed to care, but do we care? The setting is Ireland and the language about grey skies and "greasy leather orbs" and "glowing lights" and Catholic prefects serve as an interesting setting, but is this little "Stephen Dedalus" worth following?
The answer is no. Theres not really much going on. He just walks around Ireland and talks about what kind of smells he likes. Most of the action is really pointless. All he is doing is being a Catholic at a "reformatory." Everything seems to turn into an argument or a big deal for no apparent reason. The positive side of this is that everyone is also kind of light hearted in Ireland.
At the end he decides he doesn't want to be an artist. By this time the prose has way more big words and is has a quality of gravity and weightiness that makes us slow down and be "stronger" in our physical presence.
Overall this book is a story of a twerp who triumphs through bravery and has a slick perception of the world. He experiences lots of weird trials just in his everyday life because everything is so effing weird if you are "Stephen Dedalus." His brothers and sisters "sing" and his parents seem to get really weird and emotional and too drunk. It's not very pleasant.
He triumphs by standing up for himself and proving to the school that he is not a "foxing idle schemer" he triumphs by being different from the pack but living up to his problems with a sober lack of naivity.
Some things about this book cannot be denied. The writing ranges from sheer silliness and mockery of random human behaviour and vocal patterns to sheer deep poetic language as he talks about lust. He eventually decides not to be a Catholic Jesuit which he was raised to be. That's the point I guess. That he realizes he wants to be a writer and that makes him less unhappy?
Still unsure why I read this book. It made me wonder if I even like books.
|
"Writing in English is the most ingenious torture ever devised for sins committed in previous lives. The English reading public explains the reason why."-James Joyce
|
I'm not well acquainted with Joyce but it seems that he is more on the side of novelty in language use (i.e. style), rather than complexity of story. Ulysses may disagree. Perhaps there is more than one way to be a successful writer: some tell stories, some tell characters, others tell language and the soul of the earth.
I still want to read Finnegan's Wake (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthur — nuk!)
Edit: Not to derail into FW, but here's a video describing it by someone who is good at stuff like that.
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rVlPwKfGOw&t=23m08s
Major interesting part starts at 24:45
Reading starts at 27:32
Discussion starts 29:40
Just watch a couple minutes from each section, if it holds your interest. There's no need to watch the entire video.
|
On March 01 2014 02:00 farvacola wrote:
"Writing in English is the most ingenious torture ever devised for sins committed in previous lives. The English reading public explains the reason why."-James Joyce
cool. So maybe my opinion was one of the intended effects.
On March 01 2014 02:55 hp.Shell wrote:I'm not well acquainted with Joyce but it seems that he is more on the side of novelty in language use (i.e. style), rather than complexity of story. Ulysses may disagree. Perhaps there is more than one way to be a successful writer: some tell stories, some tell characters, others tell language and the soul of the earth. I still want to read Finnegan's Wake (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthur — nuk!) Edit: Not to derail into FW, but here's a video describing it by someone who is good at stuff like that. + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rVlPwKfGOw&t=23m08s
Major interesting part starts at 24:45
Reading starts at 27:32
Discussion starts 29:40
Just watch a couple minutes from each section, if it holds your interest. There's no need to watch the entire video.
I'm familiar with Terrence McKenna actually. He's really smart and i'm reading about the stages of the fall of man bit in Northrop Frye's "Fearful Symmetry" (which is about William Blake's poetry)
It's very jokes when Mckenna reads the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossalia in a witch doctor voice! lol joyce used that in Portrait as well. I think for myself... I will stay away from this type of stuff. It's a lot of work but no money!
edit- I forgot about the first part. Yeah I think you nailed it with the "soul of the earth" through style. Definitely check out Portrait if you're interested. I acted like this was a "nonchalant" reading but truthfully I took some Joyce in college and I've been peaking at the book on and off for over two years. And I don't like Ulysses. That's just a huge commitment for someone who works slowly and lazily.
|
I imagine it would be difficult to understand books of this nature without a solid foundation of historical context. I think you do a discredit by simplifying the book so much and taking too broad and general a perspective.
I identify a lot with the feelings of the modernist movement, so books of this era are very engrossing for me. I think so many of the things that concerned them are still things that should concern us today though we have tucked them under the rug.
|
Baa?21248 Posts
Joyce is a god among men.
|
On March 01 2014 09:23 Chef wrote:
I imagine it would be difficult to understand books of this nature without a solid foundation of historical context. I think you do a discredit by simplifying the book so much and taking too broad and general a perspective.
I identify a lot with the feelings of the modernist movement, so books of this era are very engrossing for me. I think so many of the things that concerned them are still things that should concern us today though we have tucked them under the rug.
Great point. Thanks for your input. I had completely overlooked that.. WIth that in mind this blog has no purpose but I felt like writing something.
|
On March 01 2014 09:46 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
Joyce is a god among men.
aha a good writer if not a major influence in books, prose and poetry
|
Joyce is god. I've only read Dubliners, but I intend on picking up Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man at some point when I can find a cheap good looking copy at the bookstore near my dorm (there probably is one, but I'm reading through a few other books right now).
I basically spent Dubliners engrossed in the language and how amazingly Joyce strings simple words into beautiful sentences. I then realized I didn't understand a lot of what was going on, and so I need to reread it at some point. Too bad I left it back home. T__T;;;; Biggest mistake
|
On March 01 2014 10:43 Zergneedsfood wrote:
Joyce is god. I've only read Dubliners, but I intend on picking up Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man at some point when I can find a cheap good looking copy at the bookstore near my dorm (there probably is one, but I'm reading through a few other books right now).
I basically spent Dubliners engrossed in the language and how amazingly Joyce strings simple words into beautiful sentences. I then realized I didn't understand a lot of what was going on, and so I need to reread it at some point. Too bad I left it back home. T__T;;;; Biggest mistake
I've only read Portrait of the Artist and one of the short stories from Dubliners, Araby.It's definitely rewarding to get some of the biggest meanings but also time consuming, for me anyways. and that's funny about your Dubliners.
|
Araby is by far the easiest to understand of all the short stories in Dubliners. :[
|
On March 01 2014 12:07 Zergneedsfood wrote:
Araby is by far the easiest to understand of all the short stories in Dubliners. :[
I'd say Eveline was easier for me to pick up, I actually struggled a lot with Araby in particular.
|
I think I just felt like Araby had more of an...easy to follow story as opposed to some of the other short stories.
I will say that "easiest" doesn't really mean much though. I struggled with all the Joyce stories trying to understand all the details that were going on. During my readthrough of Dubliners each story I was rereading passages well over three-four times. I only read Araby twice as opposed to some of the other short stories. ><
|
On March 01 2014 12:35 Zergneedsfood wrote:
I think I just felt like Araby had more of an...easy to follow story as opposed to some of the other short stories.
I will say that "easiest" doesn't really mean much though. I struggled with all the Joyce stories trying to understand all the details that were going on. During my readthrough of Dubliners each story I was rereading passages well over three-four times. I only read Araby twice as opposed to some of the other short stories. ><
For more difficult lines, I highly recommend subvocalizing as though you were Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes.
|
For me with Araby I was just missing some context. My old lit, professor taught me that the english people at the bazaar would be bad news to an irishman, It was more just the way he was extracting information from objects and their associations and some of the stuff I didn't really know the "associations" of.
I think to really simplify it, it's just an innocence about some things that turns into anger and shame.
@ hp.shell hah I think I will actually watch that movie for the first time. I'm a terrible voice actor though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
