can you "just" read Finnegans Wake?

>>9293087
Garbage

File: 1482983679936.jpg (47KB, 645x968px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 645x968px

>>9293116
t. to dumb for SSJ3 Joyce

>>9293141
Loser

>>9293087
I agree with Pound's (i think) criticism, that Joyce abandoned the average man in this book.

I'm glad it exists, simply as an enigma and literary experiment, but there's no way I'll ever have the time, patience or need to read this

In the time it would take to fully understand it, I could have read 10 or more different books

Only if you've read Vico first.

>>9293087
You get so much more out of it if you have outside resources to help you understand where Joyce was coming from.

>>9293317
I've read a bit like the Greek classics, the bible, and many others but I'm not literature expert

well you can, but a more thorough reading is required to get something close to plot or meaning out of it.
I've probably spent more time reading FW than Ulysses even though I have finished Ulysses and I've never gone past the first 40 pages or so of FW. It really is fascinating to read, and after reading a page a dozen of times or so you actually start to see what's going on, and you'll start to laugh at the puns. it's hard work but it's definetely worth the effort. try reading Joseph Campbell 'A Skeleton Key to Finnegans Wake'. I have read it personally but a lot of scholars seem to recommend it.

>>9293317
If a novel cannot translate it's concepts/idea/beauty without 'outside resources', it failed as a novel. Obscurity for the sake of obscurity is a pseud domain

>>9293087
Thats the only way *too* read it.

>>9293087
it's perfectly readable
Understanding it is a whole different matter.