Woolf managed to captivate the audience far more successfully

>>9825976
>showed a great deal more good taste in her novels.
Nebulous statement - what do you mean?

They're both alright

>>9826040
stop trynda smart rofl this chik sais nothing about SPACE let alone NEBULA, hey u got skype babe?

>>9826040
Structuring Ulysses so obviously off of the Odyssey strikes me as somewhat gimmicky, and it seems Joyce loved making references without necessarily making those references particularly meaningful. Woolf seems to me to be much more conscientious of these things.

File: 1489398936764.jpg (151KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1920x1080px

>>9825976
>female "writer"

>>9826070
References were a meme of the age and Joyce was aware of that. He didn't give a shit about the parrelels it was just a convenient skeleton to write about modern life and consciousness

You strike me as a superficial reader to even be concerned about this matter

>>9825976
>and showed a great deal more good taste in her novels.

like what? antisemitic Jewish stereotypes?

>>9826077
So basically it was just a prank dude

The Waves was very bad.

Dude, were at a seance, lmao!

>>9826081
That was pretty much late-Joyce's MO

>>9826081
Yeah totally, not even memeing

>>9826070
>Structuring Ulysses so obviously off of the Odyssey strikes me as somewhat gimmicky,
That's the Modernist point, dumbass. There are no such hero nor tales in our world anymore, They have been replaced by the ordinary man and his journeys.

>>9826106
But it's incredibly unsubtle.

>>9826110
Yet you failed to see it...

>>9826113
I saw it you retard

>>9826106
Woah so deep

>>9826116
Then why did you say this:
>Structuring Ulysses so obviously off of the Odyssey strikes me as somewhat gimmicky
You should have known that it's not merely gimmicky.

>>9826118
What is deep for you?

>>9826129
>What is deep for you?
Your mom's pussy

>>9826129
It's a gimmick to make it so fucking obvious. It shows a lack of taste. Most authors, modern and pre-modern, are much more subdued when it comes to referencing former works.

I think about pussy more when I read certain sections of Ulysses than I do anywhere in Woolf's books.
Therefore Joyce is better.

>>9826140
All I can think of is his anal obsession

>>9826134
>lmao ur mum!


The state of /lit/, everyone.

>>9826135
Okay, show me an example of a subdued author who you think references previous works better.

>>9826145
What you too good for your mom jokes your highness?
Get fucked my dude

>>9826150
No, I just made a mistake and expected you'd be intelligent enough to express your thoughts.

>>9826152
How is that not expressing my thoughts?
If you had a brain for subtext you'd read plenty from that

>>9826145
Dostoyevsky, Thomas Mann, and Tolstoy come to mind out of books I've read recently. Arguably Kafka as well.

>>9826070
Why comment on something you haven't read? And no, it's not obviously structured "obviously off of the Odyssey". You wouldn't know it reading Ulysses. He had to explain it to a couple people. You really have no idea what you're talking about and I'm wasting -

>>9826186
I've read it

>>9826157
>How is that not expressing my thoughts?
You said nothing on the subject of literary depth, which was the sole point of the conversation, and started using yo mamma jokes instead. That leads anyone to believe you have no idea what you are talking about.

But I guess I just can't see the '''''subtext'''''.

>>9826158
Well, if you have read things they make use of, you can see that those guys refer to Shakespeare, the BIble, Goethe, Virgil, historical texts, and so on, just as easily you would see those same things in Joyce.

No one even noticed any parallels with Homer until Joyce literally drew charts for people and came up with some shitty names of chapters in Ulysses so that they could draw some conclusions.

The difference between the guys you mentioned and Joyce is that they don't deliberately riddle the text with references all the time and there is no obscure 4th century AD Samoan philosophers who wrote in extinct dialects of Ainu languages.

>>9826195
>they don't deliberately riddle the text with references all the time
that's what I've been calling tasteless this whole time. Joyce seems to treat references as an end unto themselves

>>9826192
Everything you've posted indicates that you haven't. If you have in fact moved your eyes across every line of every page, "kill yourself".

>>9826216
Thanks for the wonderful insight pal

>>9826195
>You said nothing on the subject of literary depth

I said plenty, I can't believe you have the gall to be talking about Joyce when you can't handle fucking internet posts. Maybe have a look at yourself here instead of fixating on how others match your "standards" of expression

why do both of them have such a weird face

>>9826070
>somewhat gimmicky

that's the fucking point

>>9826607
They were actually the same person

>>9826135

what the fuck do you know of taste you fucking pussy lol.

>>9826110
If you got Ulysses into your hands, without knowing about the link to Homer in advance and without the chapter titles (as Joyce originally wanted to publish it), i'd bet my fucking ballsack you wouldn't pick up on it.

>>9826081
Joyce said himself that not a single word in Ulysses is serious. By the way I don't see how this lack of seriousness is a fault per se: it's just an attribute of his art. if you think that this means that he was basically writing random obscure aentences, that would be wrong either, since all those quotes and allusions are deeply interwined (and there's a vast amount of literature to prove that, and we also know for a fact that Joyce planned carefully everything in documents that he never released, mostly tables like pic related), yet behind the, there is no pretense of an higher truth. The secrets all refer to the art their part of, they're not supposed to bring you to a higher plane of understanding a la Ezra Pound.

>>9826078
>antisemitic Jewish stereotypes?
I've never read Woolf, but if she did that I respect her.

>>9826051
10/10

>>9826823
I know I didn't and enjoyed the book a whole lot. I went into it knowing nothing except that it was held in high esteem. Learning about its links with the Odyssey and the thematic "structure" behind it was only a fabulous bonus.

Honestly, every time one of these "lol Joyce was shit Ulises was shit lol" type of threads arise it all seems to boil down to rabid contrarianism and complaining about not finding something on an author that is precisely what that author was not.

It's like complaining about the lack of tits and explosions in Walt Whitman's works.

>>9825976
who the fuck cares about the audience and the writer's taste