# James Joyce



## jipsi (Jul 13, 2005)

Dubliners, The Dead, and Portrait of the Artist as Young Man I've been through. Lovely to work through all the imagery and symbols and catholic guilt! Then I discovered Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake... which I have not yet attempted , esp once i read a quote by HG Wells stating what an impossible novel it was and how my university even offered an entire semester course on this book!  So for any of those who have indeed conquered these two cumbersome works of Joyce, please enlighten those of us who have not:  how did you do it!

On another note, the recent issue of Granta magazine offers an exclusive, first-time-in-an-English-publication interview of Joyce by a Czech translator who , i believe, went on to translate Ulysses into Czech after practically begging for permission.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 14, 2005)

Dubliners is best sipped slow. So subtle, especially when one takes the time to look into the backstory behind each piece (ie: the stuff about Parnell). Loved them.

Portrait is the first full length thing I read by Joyce. I absolutely loved it, especially the last quarter. I love the religious thematics.

Aside from Ulysses, which I seem to be perpetually going through, he always has a play, Exodus, and two collections of poetry, if I'm not mistaken, Pomes Pennyeach and Chamber Music. And you already know about the inscrutable F. Wake.


----------



## evadri (Jul 15, 2005)

I am reading Portrait at the moment. It took me a while to get into it, but that might be the fault of my short attention span. I have really enjoyed section 2, and where I'm up to in section 3. Catholic guilt definately. It's interesting, because being a baptist, I had no idea of all this Catholic stuff. The imagery is great. I've already got 2 all time fav quotes out of it! 

Some of it is quite ambiguous as to what exactly, if anything, is happening, and it shifts very quickly. I think that is the difficulty in reading Joyce. But I'm just going with it.


----------



## Viper9 (Jul 15, 2005)

Oh sweet.

Never got into The Dubliners, and I've read Finnegan's Wake in bits and pieces, in random order.  I like it that way.

But Portrait is one of my all time favourite books -- right up there with DeLillo's Underworld and Palahniuk's Fight Club.  If you haven't read it, this is what I suggest: alternate reading it with reading Tolstoy's What Is Art -- day one read a chapter of Portrait, day two read a chapter of What Is Art, day three read a chapter of Portrait, etc.

An enriching experience.  Trust me on this!


----------



## evadri (Aug 20, 2005)

I finished Portrait and I LOVE it!!!!! Wow, how bout that epiphany at the end of ch 4! What a complete turn around of character. Amazing writing. And I just adore the college comraderie! (It actually is the type of banter I'm going for in my screenplay, so it's a very helpful section for me to study). Cranly and Temple had me laughing my head off! And Stephen is just the 'wise' one, sooo cool. I was laughing so much, and also was very interested in the definitions of art, as they are relevant to both my screenplay and the Modernist movement. 

You see, I'm gushing, I like it so much. 'You hate it compared to how much I like it!' (Mort, Madagascar). 

Right up there with 'Of Human Bondage' and 'Jane Eyre' for me. I love the books where you get right into the characters heads. I never expected to like Joyce, but I really do. As a character driven writer, rather than a plot driven writer, I really got into the stream of consciousness style. It is a great form, as it can go anywhere. It was fun to just 'go with the flow', and trust that it would work out in the end (which it did.) The secret is to give up on trying to understand it, and just let the beauty of the language flow over you. I have sooo many fave quotes out of this book. Here is one:

'And, as you remark, if it is thus I ask emphatically whence comes this thusness.' 

And how brilliant is it that they insult each other in dog-latin! Fantastic stuff! 

Shall I cease gushing now? 

In conclusion, I really love this book.


----------



## evadri (Aug 21, 2005)

Ah, interesting.


----------



## Viper9 (Aug 21, 2005)

He might have got that from Buddhism, but since Plato askled the same question and Joyce was educated in the Western system (as were teh characters in Portrait), it's more likely he got it from Plato.  Ah!  Who cares?


----------



## The Evincar (Aug 30, 2005)

I have a dusty copy of Ulysses that I haven't gotten to reading yet, I will eventually...
But I did really love Dubliners, and  Portrait of the Artist as Young Man was great as well.


----------



## evadri (Aug 31, 2005)

Essays, blah blah blah, kunsterleroman, la di da, stream of consciousness, discourses, ephiphanic structures oh look the sun is rising...


----------



## Ralizah (Aug 31, 2005)

Finnegan's Wake... I got about a page into that before I realized that the only way you can enjoy it is to study the damned thing, all of the bizarre puns and etymology that went into making the language of the book, which I can only refer to as 'Joycean'... Ulysses is weird; Finnegan's Wake isn't even written in English (or any other real language, for that matter). There's really no comparison.

 I haven't read Portrait, but I've been wanting to - it actually sounds like it'll be a good novel.


----------



## Stewart (Sep 6, 2005)

Ralizah said:
			
		

> Finnegan's Wake... I got about a page into that before I realized that the only way you can enjoy it is to study the damned thing, all of the bizarre puns and etymology that went into making the language of the book, which I can only refer to as 'Joycean'...



Not having read the complete text of _Finnegans Wake_ (please, _everyone_, note the lack of apostrophe) I must say I'm surprised at some of the reactions. I've skimmed it a few times, never committing to giving it six months out of my life, and have enjoyed what I read. I can get some of the multi-language puns (Joyce used researchers to find the translations of various words in myriad languages, especially when blind) while others elude me.

When I first looked at the text I didn't know where to look - what the hell was _this_? - but, as you read through it, the story begins to come through with select words as we find Finnegan hard at work on the scaffolding before falling off and dying. Study it, by all means, to understand the many layers but I think it's worth reading throught in bits, not paying too much attention to detail, to get the flavour. It's supposed to be a representation of our thoughts in dreams so lose concentration, read it when tired, and see what you think.


----------



## FPSchubert (Sep 14, 2005)

I'm reading Ulysses currently, though it is hard to understand at times (especially the absence of quotation marks), the writing is absolutely brilliant. Joyce really was a student of human nature. His sequences of the characters thinking reflect that of real humans.


----------



## Ralizah (Sep 15, 2005)

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> Not having read the complete text of _Finnegans Wake_ (please, _everyone_, note the lack of apostrophe) I must say I'm surprised at some of the reactions. I've skimmed it a few times, never committing to giving it six months out of my life, and have enjoyed what I read. I can get some of the multi-language puns (Joyce used researchers to find the translations of various words in myriad languages, especially when blind) while others elude me.
> 
> When I first looked at the text I didn't know where to look - what the hell was _this_? - but, as you read through it, the story begins to come through with select words as we find Finnegan hard at work on the scaffolding before falling off and dying. Study it, by all means, to understand the many layers but I think it's worth reading throught in bits, not paying too much attention to detail, to get the flavour. It's supposed to be a representation of our thoughts in dreams so lose concentration, read it when tired, and see what you think.



 Well, I suppose my problem with Finnegans Wake is that it's not a book you can read like you'd read any other book - you have two options, as I had said before, you can study it, or you can just read it without thinking and enjoy the wordplay and clever puns. I have an extremely hard time reading it because for me reading is a logical process of identification and integration... my mind is very rational, so it crunches books up like a machine. So when I encounter a book like this, my first instinct is to call it rubbish and throw it down. I know it isn't rubbish (one can only fathom how much thought went into the creation of this thing), but I still find it difficult to read without thinking. Thinking is something very important to me. It might be much easier to read when tired, though. It'll be easier on my tired mind than Hamlet is (I tend to read Shakespearean tragedies when it's late and I'm tired as hell). If anything, I tried it the other night when I was tired and fell over in hysterical laughter after encountering the word 'Fishygods' in the text.
 How he wrote this when he was nearly blind goes beyond me.

 A RANDOM NOTE: From what I've read, the guy who discovered the Quark was a fan of this novel, and named it after a word he'd found in the book (I'd assume it was 'quark') Not sure if this is true or not, but this is interesting.


----------



## Shepard (Oct 3, 2005)

Dubliners is the only book I never appreciated. Precisely because I never read any commentary on the backstory. Love Ulysses with a sick passion. 

Interesting story about Portrait. I picked up a copy at the library. Someone had written insightful notes in the margins. Turned out to be a girl I met later and developed a crush on.


----------



## strangedaze (Oct 3, 2005)

On the subject of Ulysses, evidently a new draft of one of its chapters has recently been discovered. Read it at school. Too lazy to learn more.


----------



## shinbook (Oct 10, 2005)

I am just starting to get into Joyce, read Dubliners and Artist, starting Ulyses. I love the stream of conciousness style. It just fits the way I think. I have tried, unsuccessfully, to write in that style several times. How did that man do it. I always wind up with 15 pages of rambling hogwash, I don't know, any advice???


----------



## doctor (Oct 10, 2005)

so far i have only read portrait. although i occasionally found the language a bit thick, and draining on my attention span (i have this same problem, to a far greater degree, reading dickens), i still thought it was a beautifully written novel. i found his style of prose original and brilliant. i would love to be able to write with such seeming effortlessness. (although i know that alot of years of work went into many of his novels, it does not seem so as you read it)


----------



## Shepard (Oct 21, 2005)

I found some old notes of mine from when I was a kid written in SOC and I was blown away at how good it was. The plot was crap, but compared to my current complete inability to write in anything but simple sentences I was impressed. SOC isn't that great. It's been rendered to novelty nowadays.


----------



## daisy (Oct 21, 2005)

If you are enjoying Joyce's SOC style, you should read Faulkner and Woolf as well.  Personally, I've had more success with Woolf than Faulkner, but as writers in the "modernist era," they were all influenced by one another and developed some really interesting, personal styles that can still be classified as SOC.


----------



## teflon (Oct 27, 2005)

There is a James Joyce word game thread: http://www.writingforums.com/showthread.php?t=29710&highlight=joyce

Can you contribute your Joycean injuicivity?


----------



## strangedaze (Oct 29, 2005)

though i list woolf as one of my favorite writers, it is more on the basis of her sex life than her novels.


----------



## ThatSmokingGuy (Oct 30, 2005)

The thought of sitting down and spending a good deal of time on Ulysses or Finnegans Wake, both makes my mouth water and my brain hurt. I _want _to, because, even reading a few pages of the book, a few threads like this, and some reviews, you get the feeling that this thing is rich beyond measure. Like tucking into a 7 course meal with all the trimmings and vintage wine, intellectually. 
But dam, I think I'd have to take it slow. I'm the kind of person that would have to know what _everything _on the page meant, both literally and alluded to. I have a feeling it'd be like blundering around in a dark rabbit warren.


----------



## obscurantist (Jan 20, 2006)

*simpler works of Joyce*



			
				ThatSmokingGuy said:
			
		

> The thought of sitting down and spending a good deal of time on Ulysses or Finnegans Wake, both makes my mouth water and my brain hurt....



Can anyone suggest me the simpler works of Joyce which I can start trying on? How's Joyce classified among writers?:-k


----------



## Mike C (Jan 20, 2006)

obscurantist said:
			
		

> Can anyone suggest me the simpler works of Joyce which I can start trying on? How's Joyce classified among writers?:-k



Start with the Dubliners; it's a series of shorts, nice and easy to digest.


----------



## obscurantist (Jan 20, 2006)

*Thanks*



			
				Mike C said:
			
		

> Start with the Dubliners; it's a series of shorts, nice and easy to digest.



Thanks Mike, So kind of you...:salut:


----------



## Mike C (Jan 20, 2006)

A pleasure. You'll love it, and it shows that short stories can be beautiful if you dispense with plot, conflict, resolution, all the stuff everyone tells you you need.


----------



## Londongrey (Jan 20, 2006)

strangedaze said:
			
		

> though i list woolf as one of my favorite writers, it is more on the basis of her sex life than her novels.


 
Oh trust you!!! But as we have already discussed 'To the Lighthouse' is far to wordy with not enough substance to warrant such a splurge of language.


James Joyce is an enjoyable author, however, people these days don't seem to give the classics enough time for adjustment, they want instant satisfaction.


----------



## Hellknight (Jan 30, 2006)

I have read Dubliners, A Portrait of an Artist as an Young Man and am currently in the process of reading Ulysses (just started the second chapter). So far, it has been one of the, if not the most, difficult works I have ever read (and I just finished Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury) - but also one of the most beautiful. A very rewarding experience, if you ask me. Stream of Consciousness is an impressive technique, yet it has to be handle with care, otherwise you run the risk of ruining the entire piece. Joyce, quite obviously, is a master of it, and can use it as a powerful literary device. 

One thing I find very interesting is how he mixes third and first-person narrative, something he had already done in A Portrait. This allows him to balance moments of extreme introspection with more descriptive, elaborated sections, which works particular well in Ulysses, aiding the flow of the novel. 

As far as reading conditions goes, I personally can only read it when I'm completely awake and concentrated, otherwise I can't really focus on what I'm reading. I also look up on the net every expression I don't know or can't deduce the meaning of, as it happens with his many Latin phrases. Other than that, I suppose there's nothing else to it: just seat and read.

By the way, I second whoever suggested Faulkner. As I said, I just finished his The Sound and the Fury, and it's probably the best novel I have ever read. Brilliant masterpiece.


----------



## josephwise (Jun 1, 2006)

Ulysses is by far my favorite novel. The key to reading it, or to writing something similar, lies in the setting.  Peppered throughout the stream-of-consciousness you'll find setting and action references. "Bloom stepped down onto inkshimmered Colgrove where mudcaked sandles held a shineboy off the stones." Keep an eye on the character, where he is, what he's doing, and the SOC thoughts will make near-perfect sense.  The SOC is reactionary.  Thoughts are driven by what the characters see, what they hear.  Ever see a cat that made you think of your old childhood cat, which reminded you of the time your brother lost a shoe in a ditch, etc.?  Eventually you end up thinking about a candy store somewhere in town, and you think "how did I come to these thoughts?" Then you trace everything back, domino by domino, to the cat you just saw.  That's how it works.  It requires a bit of attention, but it's no sweat.

And once you have that down, you can start pondering Joyce's enigmas...but he was as human as we are, so it's all very "doable."  And rewarding, to boot.


----------



## cabbageguy (Jun 3, 2006)

I read Portrait, then Dubliners, then Ulysses, then Chamber Music.

James Joyce is an author who you can really picture through his works. You can really see how smart he really was.

Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man I read through way too fast, it flew over my head, but the part when the priest gives a sermon about Hell and Infinity really scared me.

Dubliners was all right, maybe I read through that way too fast too.

One day I picked up an old copy of Ulysses, and read the first three pages. I didn't get it, but later on I had the biggest urge to read all of it, because those three pages were _so good_.

You have to read Joyce slowly. When reading Ulysses there were parts where I just had to put the book down and say "How can he be that good at writing?", or just think about all the wordplay and allusions.


----------



## BeautifulDisaster (Jun 8, 2006)

I read "The Dead" for my approach to lit. studies class, and we literally beat it to death (ok, so that's a really bad pun, so sue me!). We must've spent about a month on it, including writing a paper about a theme (mine was music and gabriel's emotions.. how were they connected?) that occured throughout the novel. 

I thought it was a good story the first time I read it, but once we looked at all the symbolism and analyzed it thoroughly, I  hated it.  It could also be the fact that I had an incredibly boring prof, too... and he just rambled on about it. 

It wasn't that bad of a short story, but I had had enough of it. 

Did anyone else like "The Dead"?


----------



## andreaypich (Jul 29, 2006)

I'm reading Dubliners at the moment, but taking it slowly. I'm loving it. That and my 'Irish poetry' lesson at university have made me look for books on Irish history.


----------



## Jolly McJollyson (Dec 1, 2006)

James Joyce is my god, and Ulysses my messiah.


----------



## MrTamborineMan (Dec 1, 2006)

I just started Portrait of the Artist of a Young Man.  Its a very difficult read, but I like the premise behind it... and in general I enjoy the stream of consciousness writing style


----------



## Jolly McJollyson (Dec 1, 2006)

Portrait only has a little real Joycean stream of consciousness...  That part at the beginning is _in media res_, though many people accidentally call it S.o.C.  Ulysses is where his S.o.C. is fully showcased.


----------



## Ross Brodie (Sep 16, 2007)

liked ulyusee but it was bloody heavy. took a lot of work to get thru

loved the ending. one of my fav endings. so good.


----------



## Matt3483 (Dec 14, 2007)

I found Joyce a bit boring (although I have only read _Dubliners_).

Despite that, I think the last paragraph of "The Dead" is one of the best pieces of prose ever written.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Jan 25, 2008)

I too am reading Dubliners at the moment, and find it so different from Ulysses that had I not known better, I never would have assumed the same author wrote the two.  Ulysses was a study in language and exploring styles.  Dubliners seems like a much more enjoyable, readable story.
I'm really just amazed he wrote both books.  What a leap in styles!


----------

