Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
James Joyce was a complicated man (thefitzwilliam.com)
99 points by apollinaire 9 months ago | hide | past | favorite | 47 comments



For anyone who want get into James Joyce, but finds reading him intimidating, I highly recommend the RTE (Irish national radio) recording of Ulysses: https://www.rte.ie/radio/podcasts/series/32198-ulysses/

Not only do they have a fantastic full cast reading of the book, but for each chapter they have a companion episode where they talk to a Joyce scholar about the chapter. I went through it by alternating listening to a chapter then listing to the episode about the chapter, and I finally really got Joyce and understood why he is considered great.


Portrait of the Artist is also a good starting point

It's way more approachable than Ulysses, the hard parts of it are more self-contained, and if the reader decides to go on to Ulysses they'll have a good understanding of Stephen as a character

Really in hindsight I think I liked Portrait more just because you don't have to do as much homework to understand it. It's somewhere in between the general appeal of Dubliners and the masturbatory, literary stuff in Ulysses


Thank you so much for this recommendation! I tried an audiobook version once before but felt like I was missing a lot of context. This looks very promising (and is on spotify)!


This is an awesome recommendation. I've tried reading him several times but I can never get into it. Definitely going to try this out.


Excellent essay! Really loved it.

For Finnegan's Wake - I find it's best to open it up at random and shout it out as you pace around. Maybe peer at yourself now and again in a mirror. If you can work it up to a roar, then you'll really be flying, but it'd depend on what you had for breakfast.


All joking aside, there is a lot of literature that really needs to be spoken to be grasped.

I learned this in college taking a middle English literature course. The Canterbury tales really need to be read out loud. They have a cadence that needs to be spoken.

I would actually argue that Joyce is in the same category. His work isn't meant to be internal. It's storytelling in a group and meant to be spoken. It helps understand the DENSE writing.


A lot of literature and pretty much all poetry imo.


So many (snooty) people treat audiobooks like a cheap substitute for reading, when in reality, reading is the cheap substitute for oral storytelling. Sure, you've got Infinite Jest where page structure and end notes are part of the aesthetic design, but I think more people would consume more literature if audiobooks were more normalized.


Most literature we have today was written with a reader in mind, not a listener.

I don't even think audiobooks are necessarily bad, it's people consuming them like a hamburger while they multitask so they aren't even really engaging with the text. Let alone not really having the ability to stop, think and relisten very easily. With a text you do it basically automatically if necessary, with an audiobook you've got to fumble around for your device and hope you get back to the right spot and not break your train of thought in the process.


Audiobooks are a cheap excuse for oral storytelling. People listen to audiobooks as they sculpt their muscles in the gym, as they walk to the shop to get groceries averting the eyes of all strangers who pass by, as they fold laundry, alone.

Oral storytelling used to happen in small intimate groups around fires with a couple of lamps lit, total silence, wind howling, drinks and sometimes other delights, with no conceivable distractions. Even saying "no distractions" isn't accurate, as it was moreso the case that they'd a completely different conception of time. The stories would be told live by another human, with their voice and body and eyes looking at you.

Reading is different than oral storytelling - it doesn't pretend to be the same thing, at least not anymore. Creating a hierarchy between the three is, I find, a bit odd, in general.


This is also true of Homer, whose stories were meant to be shouted out to a large crowd.

A much later and much more obscure American writer, R. A. Lafferty, was deeply influenced by ancient Greek poetry and philosophy, and his prose is better understood if you think of it as being read loud to a large crowd.


I wasn't joking at all (but if I had been I'd nonetheless be very tempted now to refuse to put it aside).


The Wake didn't really click with me until I heard the recording of Joyce reading the episode with the two washerwomen. I realized the references, puns, and in-jokes are basically just bonus material for me. It's the dream images and the sound of the words that engage me and make me want to learn about the rest of it.

I wish we had a recording of him reading it cover to cover.


Loved the essay and this practical and funny approach to the Finnegian dreamscape.

For me it will be back to Dubliners—should not have skipped it.


Right when you're starting to think it's just nonsense, you catch some hint that there might be some sense behind it

And it sucks because sometimes I really just want to write it up as nonsense and put it down, but is seems like there is some kind of system there


The entertainment value of James Joyce’s letters to Nora cannot be overstated.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/james-joyce-love-letters-nor...


I didn't have to click the link to know that it would immediately go to the farts. But I clicked, and it did.


I am currently reading Ulysses, so this was a nice surprise on hn. Great historical context. Thank you! After many years of false starts, I stopped trying to understand everything and just let the prose wash over me. And now I’m enjoying it.

“ I feel I need not worry so much about “misreading” Joyce. Every reading of Ulysses is a misreading, a faulty but revealing translation, a way of drawing the novel into new and perhaps unintended relationships. All that matters to me is finding a way to read the book that is interesting: that opens out instead of closing down.” [1]

[1] https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2022/12/07/misreading-ul...


I am reading it now as well! I always felt like I wasn't ready, but last week I just decided to go for it. It's been on my list ever since finishing "A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man". The only other prep I did was reading Hamlet... which so far seems to have not been necessary (but am only up to Lestrygonians).

I actually have to credit Joseph Heller for the nudge to start, I had recently remembered a quote in Catch-22 that stuck with me:

"He knew everything there was to know about literature, except how to enjoy it."


Yes this is the way! I finished it a few years back in the same way and am both smug and glad that I did. Exceptional writing.


Keep pushing, it really starts to pick up after oxen in the sun

Circe definitely makes it worth it. Even though that chapter is huge, it feels very short


Gabriel Garcia Marquez is another example of a writer who lived outside their country of birth but whose writing was still set there (born and raised in Colombia but lived in Mexico City for most of their adult life). Others?


Mistakes are the portals of discovery. --James Joyce


Ezra Pound worried his high art had become “arsthitic”.

Is this a misspelling? I can not find a definition of "arsthitic".


Mentioned in another article:

  the 'arsthitic' tendency of Ulysses, as Pound called it, suggesting in his pun that Joyce's artistic integrity was being compromised by his attention to lower matters.


Probably a Poundism for arse and aesthetic?


This is actually one of the best summaries of Ulysses I've ever seen, and I took an extension course at Stanford on the book. We also had an approved commentary book.

I don't remember most of these themes being raised. I remember the teacher saying with awe, "He can do whatever he wants with the English language!" and me thinking, "Who cares?"

He also went on and on about Joyce's stream-of-consciousness writing, and how that was a real reflection of how we think. Again, I thought, "So what? It's old hat now."

As for the fragmentary style: sorry, this didn't impress me either, at the time.

Good article.


I did similar, in university 20 years ago. Your post brought up hidden memory of the same excitement by the prof, and my reaction, as I was already pretty exposed to postmodernism. Maybe its a Big Deal because it was an early break-out from Modernism (as this essay goes in to detail on its membership within) and into Post-.


Yes, his "innovations" aren't particularly interesting now. The things in this article are though, and I wish the prof had dwelt on those instead.


>I remember the teacher saying with awe, "He can do whatever he wants with the English language!" and me thinking, "Who cares?

I would normally think that saying someone can do anything they want with (X) would be an assertion of absolute mastery, and one should care if someone is an absolute master in something.

This candidate can do whatever he wants with our main programming language, yeah but I'm still going to hire this one guy who said graduating code camp last week was super cool!

The chef at this restaurant can achieve whatever effect they want with food, sure, but me and the band are going to eat these delicious street dogs!

it would be easy to make more absurd examples..


> it would be easy to make more absurd examples

Like, for example, "this man can do whatever he wants with flipping a coffee cup!" (that's a real example, btw)

"this woman is an absolute master of beer pong."

The skill has to be valuable.


I really like Joyce but the one complaint I do have is his harder works require a bunch of homework

Like if you're going to read Ulysses, there are a bunch of companion books that are entirely footnotes for the thousands of unexplained references. Ofc you don't have to read every footnote, but there's considerable overhead involved in reading him

Ditto for the Wake, most people just give up and assume it's nonsense. But there is some general story behind it and it too has a bunch of homework

Portrait is more approachable and I got more out of it per ounce of labor involved

It's nice to be able to just pick up a book and read it, no? Like if you know basic Russian history you can pick up a Dostoevsky and read through it without too much hassle

I'm not sure what changed in the literary world that made authors prioritize showing off over being understood by anyone


A) Great article, thanks for posting! I would say the headline is a little bit of clickbait (the "complication" implied there is that he had complicated feelings about Ireland, plus maybe some sexual kink stuff), but in 2024 I can't complain. After all, as an ex-Adsense employee, it's more my fault than theirs!

B) "From then on, Joyce lived in Europe." Isn't Ireland in Europe...?

C)

  “Just as ancient Egypt is dead,” he wrote, “so is ancient Ireland.” His aim was not to become bound to a romanticised notion of the Irish past, but to show modern Ireland to itself and to make an Irish literature that was truly European."
A beautiful notion... Will definitely be rattling around in my head as I think about modern nationalism and the extent to which its ever okay to talk about "western civilization" or "athenian legacy" and such with a straight face. Ditto for the "founding fathers" of the USA, really... I'm hopeful we can build a truly global American culture, and hopefully with a bit less bloodshed than secularism cost Europe.

D) If this essay interested you and you haven't read The Hyperion Cantos, I highly highly recommend it! Simmons employs Joyce as a central motif throughout the series, which I recall being somewhat confounding at the time, but likely eye-opening if you're familiar with the man's work!


just a thought on B - being an island in Europe, it’s common for people in Ireland to refer to the rest of Europe as ‘the continent’. It feels like Irish people see ourselves as definitely part of the EU but less so as a geographic part of Europe. Or something


B) "From then on, Joyce lived in Europe." Isn't Ireland in Europe...?

- If someone told me they were from Europe, I'd assume they meant the continent.


This is how many people from the British isles think of it.


"Continental Breakfast" is exclusionary of the isles.


B) "From then on, Joyce lived in Europe." Isn't Ireland in Europe...?

-- technically yes, of course. In reality? Eh, it's complicated. There's probably a few reasons, but if you told an Irish person they were European, people would be bemused, at least.


Ireland tends to top the list of countries happy to be part of the EU. Which would be an odd position if European was a touchy identifier. It’s also not unheard of for people to refer to the mainland as if it were the whole continent.


> Which would be an odd position if European was a touchy identifier

They said "bemused", not that it was touchy. The comment seems to imply that Ireland sees itself as a very non-central example of the category "European".

Sort of like ostriches and birds. If you told me that there was a bird nearby, and I rounded a corner to find an ostrich, you'd be technically correct, but I'd still be surprised and probably not trust your warnings nearly as much as I had 10 minutes before.


Regardless of this analysis, the claim you’re respond to is true. Depends on context.


I don’t think we would be bemused. We generally consider ourselves European


But… if they’re not European… what are they? Sea Peoples? Are you actually proposing that we should designate a north-Atlantic version of Oceania??

Because I’m not entirely anti, to be honest!


Not this Irishman…


Nor I.


TL;DR accepting intellectually that we are technically Europeans has very little to do with feeling like European-ness is a part of one's identity.

I thought it'd be obvious that I didn't mean every Irish person would be bemused, but I should have been more explicit.

There's a difference between accepting Ireland as legally and bureaucratically part of Europe, or thinking it's politically or culturally useful to be in the E.U., and feeling that European-ness - however you choose to define it - is a part of our identity as a people.

My anecdotal experience (have lived in two European countries and one non-European country, learning the local languages and diving deep) is that European countries are about as "foreign" to Irish people as any other countries. There are exceptions, and it depends on the country, e.g., we're closer to the Poles now, and have a few fun stories about crates of Prazsky at the wedding in Gdansk.

Try out the experiment - ask an Irish friend or relation of yours if they feel like them and a Finnish / Belgian / Romanian person have something in common, or what they know about that country. My experience is that a lot of people (not everyone, and again, anecdotally) are very uncomfortable even with the idea of imagining that other places really exist.


[flagged]


Assuming this is sarcastic, it will never be realistic to pursue less bloodshed by allowing bloodthirsty conquerors to go about their business without opposition.

So, yes, unironically: slava ukraini




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: