
What to Make of Finnegans Wake? (2012) - jasim
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2012/07/12/what-make-finnegans-wake/
======
kens
After an earlier HN discussion extolling Finnegans Wake, I read the book (and
read several guide books, and listened to it on several versions of audio),
and I have to say that for me it was an epic waste of time. I hate to brand
myself a philistine, but want to provide a counterpoint to people who say the
book is _so funny_ and a _grand experience_.

I recommend reading a couple pages [1] to get a feeling for Finnegans Wake -
it's amazing the density of concepts Joyce crams into words, with multiple
meanings in almost every word. I kept thinking the book would make more sense
if I kept reading, but no, it's like this the whole way through. A few things
get better, for instance, the initials HCE constantly appear, so in the first
sentence you should get an aha feeling from "Howth Castle and Environs". But
that's a pretty small payoff.

If you enjoyed the book and found it hilarious, more power to you. But as
someone who likes challenging books and put a lot of time into Finnegans Wake,
the book didn't do it for me.

[1] Finnegans Wake is online at
[http://finwake.com/1024chapter1/1024finn1.htm](http://finwake.com/1024chapter1/1024finn1.htm)
along with detailed notes, but unlike Shakespeare, looking up mystery words
doesn't make things any clearer.

~~~
spacecop
There's always something on Earth to remind me that I'm an idiot. The first
page of this is a disaster.

------
grabcocque
I like to think that Finnehans Wake was an elaborate practical joke aimed at
the literary establishment.

Can imagine Joyce chuckling to himself as he imagined generation of literary
critics and bedevilled students trying to make sense from its fractured
dreamscape.

I love the book, though. It's words come closest to capturing in words what it
is like to dream. Glimpsed fragments of meaning, locations and people and
ideas that shift and stir in and out of existence. A lingering sense that
there was some kind of narrative there, but there's no way you could ever
describe in words what it was.

~~~
zzalpha
So you'd subscribe to (g) in his list of possible interpretations:

 _(g) The reliable readiness of critics, doctoral candidates, and know-it-alls
to enshrine difficulty for its own sake, to rise to the bait of erudite
obscurity that Joyce laid for us in this, the greatest literary prank ever
played (outside of revealed religion)._

------
f_allwein
Came across this nice quote by Kafka recently, which seems relevant:

"I think we ought to read only the kind of books that wound or stab us. If the
book we're reading doesn't wake us up with a blow to the head, what are we
reading for? So that it will make us happy, as you write? Good Lord, we would
be happy precisely if we had no books, and the kind of books that make us
happy are the kind we could write ourselves if we had to. But we need books
that affect us like a disaster, that grieve us deeply, like the death of
someone we loved more than ourselves, like being banished into forests far
from everyone, like a suicide. A book must be the axe for the frozen sea
within us."

~~~
lintiness
i think everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want. what's with
pretentious assholes always telling everybody what they should and shouldn't
do?

~~~
Scarblac
He isn't telling you what to do. He is struggling with the question of what
the best way to live is, he assumes you are doing the same, and he's offering
his opinion on one aspect of it.

"Everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want" isn't that useful as
an intellectual opinion. Yes, fine, but what kind of books should we want to
read if we want to lead our lives the best way possible? Why read at all?

~~~
sanderjd
Honest question: what is the philosophical basis for the trend I seem to often
see (expressed here as "Why read at all?") that pure entertainment is not a
valid part of "the best way to live"?

~~~
mikestew
Just off the top of my head, some schools of Buddhism come to mind. Then after
a few more seconds it occurs to me that most major religions have some form of
ascetic system that frowns upon indulgences such as pure entertainment. In
other words, you can have your choice of philosophical bases.

That addresses the "where does it come from?" but not the "why", which I would
generalize as entertainment distracts from the pursuit of a better way of
living.

~~~
sanderjd
Thanks for the answer! I was hoping for more specifics than "some schools of
Buddhism" and "ascetic systems from most major religions", but on hindsight I
see that asking people to do that level of research for me on a forum like
this is too big an ask.

~~~
mikestew
There aren't any specifics, because asceticism is everywhere. From the Zen
Buddhist writings of Dogen in the 1200s to modern U. S. Christian Baptists,
there's going to be someone standing nearby telling you music and dancing are
not good things (one example common to both Dogen and some Baptists).

So where did it originally come from? Who did it or said it first? I have
absolutely no idea, nor do I care. So, yeah, you're on your own. :-)

------
fhood
"At times the book would wash up on the beach of my life and I would hear the
bottled voice of its djinn, promising everlasting bliss to puzzle hermits,
inexhaustible cred to know-it-alls. I always forebore."

I may be in the minority, but when I read someone's thoughts on Joyce I don't
particularly want to decipher a new metaphor or two per sentence. If that was
my intention I would just pick up the original.

~~~
jasim
For me it was a supremely enjoyable sentence. The article itself is complex,
and what it had to say it could've said in simpler words. But brevity need
always not be the soul of wit; at least for some, these flourishes, this
showmanship of language, they are a gift to savour.

------
barking
I'd recommend John Huston's film 'The Dead' to anyone who would like
experience something by Joyce. I did read a bit of 'A portrait of the artist
as a young man'. He really got into the head of a small boy who was being
bullied in one part. I never finished it though, I can't remember why. I don't
think that I could ever read Ulysses, I did listen to a reading of it on the
BBC's book at bedtime many years ago and liked parts of it. Finnegan's Wake
would drive me insane, I'm certain.

~~~
twoodfin
If you want to try tackling _Ulysses_ again, I have two recommendations:

First, Frank Delaney is doing a wonderful podcast, "Re: Joyce"[1], unpacking
the novel in short segments. The original episodes cover just a few sentences
each; lately the format has expanded to a whole page, in the hope that he'll
finish before 2040! Currently, he's just started in on "Scylla and Charybdis",
the ninth chapter. His enthusiasm for Joyce and _Ulysses_ is deep and
delightful.

Second, in 1982, the Irish radio station RTE produced an essentially
unabridged dramatic reading of the novel. Besides being a terrific way to
experience the book, it nicely counters one of the major difficulties for
newcomers to _Ulysses_ : Distinguishing dialog and internal monologue from
narration, and deciding who, exactly, is saying what! It's available for free
on archive.org[2].

[1] [http://blog.frankdelaney.com/re-joyce/](http://blog.frankdelaney.com/re-
joyce/)

[2] [https://archive.org/details/Ulysses-
Audiobook](https://archive.org/details/Ulysses-Audiobook)

~~~
barking
That's an amazing resource. I remember frank delaney from bbc radio years ago,
I had no idea he was still around, looks like he's moved to america and
reinvented himself. Thanks for the info.

------
csanch4
"bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk"
Oh the sweet sound of lightning that only Joyce could've understood. Finnegans
Wake's concept is great in terms of challenging language and structure, but
the unfinished result is a disaster. If anyone dedicates time to analyze FW,
then they misspent years trying to understand gibberish.

~~~
ojbyrne
I would characterize it as "an Ulysses too far." Ulysses was great, Finnegan's
Wake incomprehensible.

~~~
fhood
you mean a Ulysses. Hard vowel and all that.

------
user51442
There is a rather fine (abridged) audio book of Finnegans Wake by Jim Norton
(Bishop Brennan in Father Ted), some of which is on Youtube:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ks60VrtJ4Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ks60VrtJ4Y)

------
sago
Ulysses is one of, if not my absolute, favourite books. And I don't share the
post's dislike of Portrait, either.

But Finnegan's Wake, yeah. Too much for me. There are moments in Ulysses that
touch that, but then reign back into focus, but Wake is just beyond me.

~~~
HenryTheHorse
"Portrait" is a little masterpiece. There are sentences and passages in it
that make me want to stand up and applaud the genius that is Joyce.

------
guybrushT
"Dubliners there was the unlovable A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man,
which starts well, charting bold, clear routes, like “Araby,” through the
trackless waters of childhood, then fouls its rotors in a dense kelpy snarl of
cathected horniness, late-Victorian aesthetics, and the Jesuitical cleverness
that, even in Ulysses, wearies the most true-hearted lover of Joyce."

Do others also find this article very hard to read? (Esp sentences like the
one above)

~~~
leephillips
I found the writing beautiful. I enjoyed the essay very much, including the
sentence you quote.

------
shams93
its actually the kind of novel you can generate from ai, the methods he used
created a result that reminds me of neural network generated text.

------
DavidTNcl
Nobody cares.

