Kevin's Watch

Avatar wrote:Pffft, the 'Tank is not exactly immune to or reticent about bias.

Of course, but unless you want to take heavy gunfire it's best to don the necessary camouflage before entering

u.

Makes me think of Iain M Banks psychedelic solipsist camo.

--A

Avatar wrote:Makes me think of Iain M Banks psychedelic solipsist camo.

I thought I knew my M. Banks, which book is that, Excession?

u.

Against a Dark Background.

My favourite actually, for all it's not a culture book. The Solipsist mercenaries are hilarious, and the Lazy Gun is pretty awesome.

--A

There seems to be a difference between modernity and modernism, then. I say this because I absolutely refuse to place the works of James Joyce in the same group as Keeping Up with the Kardashians. Refuse to! Though I agree that such drivel is even beneath post-modernism.

It's odd...I don't know that my understanding of Joyce is necessarily the most profound, but what I have read of him (Portrait and some of Dubliners) I don't understand why people seem to single him out as one of the authors who's so complex as to be worthless.

I know I used to at least have a good grasp of what modernism in literature is, but I think now I only have a grasp of what modernism in the practical sense is.

while the last frames morality in circumstantial frames.

In a good/bad sense, I think it's in question whether good is good in many circumstances, and in the sense of a morals as a personal code (you know, "the moral of the story is"), not for living a kind/just life, but a life that fits and is consistent, I think Martin actually has frequently been emphasizing their importance.

Holsety wrote:I don't understand why people seem to single him out as one of the authors who's so complex as to be worthless.

Because of Finnegan's Wake.

About which he apparently said people would argue for a thousand years.

Also, I believe that the number of books analysing Ulysses is far greater than the total number of books every written by Joyce.

--A

Avatar wrote:

Holsety wrote:I don't understand why people seem to single him out as one of the authors who's so complex as to be worthless.

Because of Finnegan's Wake.

About which he apparently said people would argue for a thousand years.

Also, I believe that the number of books analysing Ulysses is far greater than the total number of books every written by Joyce.

--A

Also remember: normies are stupid

I think a big problem is everything has to somehow mean something to people. With Joyce, there is some symbolism, but a lot of it is technique, often times for the sake of technique. In other words, there is no meaning. That's why people will argue about it forever, because they want it to have a specific meaning, it looks like it was written with purpose, but that purpose was structural.

Wake is a joke. It's Joyce's big joke, at the expense of everybody who reads it. He was taking the piss.

--A

I managed to get through Ulysses. You're right, Orlion, a lot of it is technique for the sake of technique.

Haven't read Finnegan's Wake -- should I give it a go?

IMO, both Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake benefit from using the scholarship that surrounds them.

With Ulysses, Harry Blamires', the new bloomsday book gives an excellent short guide to each chapter that lays out the structural frameworks that Joyce use for each. To paraphrase Joyce, Ulysses is actually overstructured. (I'll repeat my usual advice about reading Ulysses, start on pg. 49 when we first encounter Bloom and treat each of the 18 sections as a novel in itself )

With Finnegan's Wake, John Bishop's, Joyce's Book of the Dark is brilliant in it's gathering of work done on illuminating the book. The illustrations showing how Dublin and its environs are the dream landscape are very helpful in imagining a setting. And the insights into the strange characters that we meet e.g. HCE, ALP and Shem the Penman, allows access to the book that is otherwise nigh on impossible. My advice to anyone trying to read the book without outside aid, read it aloud so that you get the puns and in an Irish accent (preferably a Dublin one ).

u.

aliantha wrote:I managed to get through Ulysses. You're right, Orlion, a lot of it is technique for the sake of technique.

Haven't read Finnegan's Wake -- should I give it a go?

You make it sound like that's a bad thing I mean, take Mervyn Peake... how much of Titus Groan and Gormenghast is him showing off? How long was that knife fight, again?

Of course, a main problem with such style is that you are inevitably writing for a higher, smaller class.

ussusimiel wrote:My advice to anyone trying to read the book without outside aid, read it aloud so that you get the puns and in an Irish accent (preferably a Dublin one ).

That's it, then. When I finally get to Ireland, I'll have to shanghai some guy in a Dublin pub to read Finnegan's Wake aloud to me. Oooh, now there's a great pickup line!

Orlion, the thing I remember most about Gormenghast is the traversing of that endless roof. Oh, and the storeroom that got turned into a playroom. And that scene in the kitchen. And the stuff about the couple who lived in an adjoining building on the grounds -- but that was later. But mainly the endless roof....

ussusimiel wrote:My advice to anyone trying to read the book without outside aid, read it aloud so that you get the puns and in an Irish accent (preferably a Dublin one ).

You still won't get them. Even the the analysts see multiple allusions in practically everything in it. Like the "white boyce" for example. Did he mean every one of those possible allusions? Did he mean any of them? He was messing with the future.

Say Ussusimiel...have you ever told us what it is that you do?

--A

Avatar wrote:

ussusimiel wrote:Say Ussusimiel...have you ever told us what it is that you do?

No! I've kept it dark

Nothing too exciting. I suppose a teacher might be the best description, as I taught English as a foreign language for a number of years. I am also involved in poetry (but not in a to-make-living way ); I write, attend and facilitate peer workshops and help organise occasional salon-style readings.

To earn a living I do whatever comes along: construction, farming, teaching and so on. I'm doing a computer course on database development at the moment (low level) so that's an option for the future. The economy in Ireland continues to be in the toilet (if only Angela Merkel knew about MMT ) so it's not as easy as it was a few years ago.

I have a degree in English during which I studied Ulysses, but I'm bluffing a bit about both books as I haven't read all of Ulysses (15 novels remember!) and I have only dipped into Finnegan's Wake. The books are meant to be enjoyed rather than seen as a chore. I think Joyce would appreciate my light approach

u.

P.S. Say Orlion, are you ready for that Ulysses dissection thread yet?

ussusimiel wrote: P.S. Say Orlion, are you ready for that Ulysses dissection thread yet?

Heh. Forgot about that. I've started the book today, so we'll see when that thread comes out (probably soon).

ussusimiel wrote: Nothing too exciting. I suppose a teacher might be the best description...

Hahaha, I thought that post sounded a bit professorish, hence my question.

--A

Avatar wrote:

ussusimiel wrote: Nothing too exciting. I suppose a teacher might be the best description...

Hahaha, I thought that post sounded a bit professorish, hence my question.

Thought that. More teacherish, but in a good way When people have an unwarranted block or hang-up about something, be it a book or a language, one of the best ways to encourage them around it is to provide the necessary resources. The book is either good or bad, but you must first at least read some of it (with an open mind) to find that out. That's how my professor at college did it, I'm just following the technique that worked for me. The way I see it, if I can read and enjoy Ulysses with the hang-ups I initially had, then just about anyone can.

I see you've already checked out Orlion's Ulysses dissection thread. The ship is launched and we are finally become the literary forum that fulfils all our pretentions

u.

aliantha wrote:That's it, then. When I finally get to Ireland, I'll have to shanghai some guy in a Dublin pub to read Finnegan's Wake aloud to me.

Hi guy's. Ali - this reminds me of the time I was drunk in Dublin on a Friday night and sitting on a park bench in a break between an enless crawl of loud smokey bars. A down and out guy sat on the other end of the bench asked me what the book in my pocket was and I replied 'Down and out in London and Paris'. We had a vigorous discussion on the merits or otherwise of the book and then went our separate ways. It could only happen in Dublin where even the bums are well read!

I am going to give 'Finnagens Wake' a go in the near future and have decided to use it as a meditative tool rather than atempt an understanding of it. Just the act of sometimes reading what is incomprehensible (because it is deliberately written as being beyond the level of any true comprehension) can be in itself a cathartic experience of the 'automatic writing' type. Padgett Powell's 'The Interragotive Mood' - a book that cosists entierly of a string of (almost) unrelated questions for 150 or so pages - has the same effect. It is strangely relaxing to read without having to put in any effort at comprehension, but where the reading matereal just makes enough sense to stop your mind from wandering into unrelated thought.

Welcome back, peter! So I don't have to go into a pub? That's good news, I guess, but I suppose I'd have to buy my erudite Dublin bum a pint anyhow...

u. wrote:we are finally become the literary forum that fulfils all our pretentions

And thank the gods for that!

ussusimiel wrote:...we are finally become the literary forum that fulfils all our pretensions

--A