Thread replies: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: ulysses.jpg (16KB, 411x504px) Image search:
[Google]
16KB, 411x504px
Does any other writer have a conflicted relationship with Ulysses?
I studied it for an entire semester in graduate school, so I have, I hope, a full appreciation of its brilliance. It is truly a master work of writerly skill by an author at the peak of his powers. Joyce threw everything he had into it, and it shows. I was guided through it by a pretty great professor, who taught my class what Joyce was aiming at in each chapter. I think, when properly instructed, you can see how awesome a work it is.
At the same time, I am a writer myself, and, speaking purely for myself, one of the things I prize in writing is comprehensibility. Or, rather, I prize layers of comprehension, as it were. I think a truly great work ought to leave an impression on anyone who picks it up and reads it for the first time. My hope is that someone would pick up a work and read it, and be awed by it; then they would return to the work later, after reading a little more widely, and discover more things in the work than they saw the first time. Then, maybe, after reading even more widely, and THEN going into academia, they'd return to the work yet again, and fully envelop the magnitude of the author's fullest intent.
So, basically, my worry with Ulysses is that it's impossible for a truly novice reader to get anything from it. I was, again, amazed by the power of Joyce's efforts. But I wonder what would have happened if I had read it outside of an academic setting. What if I'd just picked it up and started in on it? Would I have understood what Joyce was aiming at? Would I have even had a small clue? And if not, is that a problem?
I suppose I wrestle with the approachability of the book, as a writer myself. I worry the book, as brilliant as it is, is only appreciable by academics, and in this regard, I worry that it represents a collapse, a retreat, of the novel as an art form. I worry the novel completely forsakes mass readership, and I worry this is a bad thing.
I'm eager to hear /lit/'s thoughts on the issue.
>>
>>9216227
i liked it, and i'm a complete idiotic novice with no literary talent or context.
>>
>>9216227
If you read Dubliners then Portrait Ulysses has a lot more of that effect
I don't think Joyce cared at all what people got out of his books, I think he wrote them for himself and for history
>>
>>9216227
who cares? plebs have plenty of books to fully comprehend the first time.
>>
>>9216227
I understand the academia-only point, but I think it's just a matter of being more appreciable as you increase your understanding of the western canon. Frank Delaney's podcast Re: Joyce does a great justice explaining every single detail of every sentence and how deep it is, what it's referencing, the multiple meanings, etc. I have no academic background in literature but as he walks you through each sentence and gives you the background, you gain a stronger appreciation for Ulysses.
I also write. As a writer, I am reading it for the prose (it's heaven), and admiring how he puts so much depth into such seemingly mundane activity.
He did not write the book for the intention of entertaining it. He was one of the most well-read authors of all time, and he wrote what he wanted to be the greatest piece of art he could create, to express himself, and he happens to be one of the deepest human beings to ever live.
Thread posts: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1