# James Joyce - the greatest?



## Buddy Glass (Oct 26, 2007)

I've been re-reading him plenty lately and wondered quietly to myself: is he not without a doubt, at the very least, the greatest writer of the 20 Century?


----------



## Patrick (Oct 26, 2007)

In my opinion, no. He's unreadable. I couldn't get passed the first three pages because I was shaking my head and cringing when I read Ulysses.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 26, 2007)

Mermaid on the breakwater said:


> In my opinion, no. He's unreadable. I couldn't get passed the first three pages because I was shaking my head and cringing when I read Ulysses.


 
Obviously he is not unreadable. But don't start with _Ulysses_, start somewhat chronologically, with _Dubliners_. It is his most readable and it is one of the best short fiction collections to date, still. Then move on to _Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man_, which is also great. Here, he language gradually becomes more complex and advanced, but it is still a book that anyone can enjoy, in my opinion.

_Ulysses_. You can't stop after three pages. You need to get the hang of it. It is not easy. Get into it more, eventually it will suddenly dawn on you what Joyce is doing here. And then you will be nodding in proud consent and fully engage in what is undoubtedly _the_ novel of the 20th Century.

Then, if you're up for it, tackle _Finnegan's Wake_. It's a tough one, I admit. It is not a book you read, in the traditional sense. It redefines the reading experience completely. Many disregarded it as pure nonsense (Nabokov) while others heralded it as Joyce's masterpiece (Beckett, Harold Bloom). I prefer _Ulysses_, but you can't really compare the two. They're different novels. _Finnegan's Wake_ is truly enjoyable, though. A work of art.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

This is a writer's forum, is it not? There's a huge thread on JK Rowling and yet no one has anything to say about James Joyce?

Sad.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Oct 28, 2007)

Not even CLOSE.   He's a niche, really.  And acquired taste.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

lin said:


> Not even CLOSE. He's a niche, really. And acquired taste.


 
Wise words once again, genius. Care to elabora...ah forget it. Like asking a child about the collective unconscious.


----------



## Hodge (Oct 28, 2007)

Greatest? No. Good? Yes. I'm hesitant to say "greatest" about _any_ writer, because there's too much subjectivity and too much disparity in style. If I were to say Kafka is better than, say, Mary Shelley, then I'd be saying that modernism is better than the romantic style. If I were to say Joyce is better than Sartre, then I'd be saying realism is better than existentialism.

It doesn't work like that.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 28, 2007)

There's plenty of talk about James Joyce here.  

Specifically, a lot of talk about how college English majors like to fellate him and think they're better than other people because they "get Joyce" and other people don't.

And LOL at "collective unconscious."  Hey, you heard of Emerson too!  I'm so happy for you!
I'm guessing you're about 18, and your bookshelf contains a lot of Chuck Palahniuk?  Am I right?

Joyce, together with T. S. Eliot are probably the pinnacle of literary _modernism_, I'll give them that, in that together they essentially killed it off.

There's more than one reason to write.  You can write to entertain, you can write to inspire, you can write to educate... or you can write to show off.  Joyce (and Eliot) wrote to show how much classical symbolism they could cram into one book.  If you think that's what makes an author great, more power to you.  If you like books that require decades of college, copious footnotes, and companion books in order to be able to digest them, you should check out Ezra Pound, too.  You know, just so you can tell people you "get Pound" and they don't.

It's worth noting though that after Ulysses and The Wasteland people were so sick and tired of modernism that they ran screaming in the other direction and created postmodernism.


----------



## Hodge (Oct 28, 2007)

The collective unconscious is actually from Carl Jung. It's a psychological concept. Emerson's oversoul is kinda similar, but more spiritual and less definite.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 28, 2007)

Hodge said:


> The collective unconscious is actually from Carl Jung. It's a psychological concept. Emerson's oversoul is kinda similar, but more spiritual and less definite.



It's still the most pretentious attempt at an insult I've ever read.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> Specifically, a lot of talk about how college English majors like to fellate him and think they're better than other people because they "get Joyce" and other people don't.


Oh no, you're that kind of person. People who like Joyce are elitist assholes, bla bla bla. Not at all what I was going for. Just tired of people blabbering about Rowling and Stephen King. Don't be so black and white about this.



> And LOL at "collective unconscious." Hey, you heard of Emerson too! I'm so happy for you!
> I'm guessing you're about 18, and your bookshelf contains a lot of Chuck Palahniuk? Am I right?


Ha-ha! Couldn't be more wrong, my dear friend. First of all I wasn't referring to Emerson, but Jung (I'm so sorry you didn't know that), and secondly I cannot stand Chuck Palahniuk. He's one of the worst writers around.

Oh, but it was a good try. I'm sorry I didn't fit in with your expert stereotypes.


----------



## Voodoo (Oct 28, 2007)

I'm illiterate by choice, but Finny's Wake does seem quite fucked up.

Sans the philosophy, linguistics, and the effort, sounds like some nonsense words I'd make one day.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Oct 28, 2007)

> I'm hesitant to say "greatest" about _any_ writer,



Well said.   This whole "Letterman's list",  "thumbs up/down" approach to the arts and generally everything is cheapening civilisation.

The only Joyce book I really cared for was "Portrait of an Artist".  Well, written, human emotions, a nice idea well carried out.   After that it just got more and more precious.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

German Voodoo said:


> I'm illiterate by choice, but Finny's Wake does seem quite fucked up.
> 
> Sans the philosophy, linguistics, and the effort, sounds like some nonsense words I'd make one day.


 
There's an interesting introduction to FW in my edition of it. Here are some quotations from it:

"...only a book like Finnegans Wake could possibly appeal to a "common reader" - by including between its covers something in common for everybody, even if that something doesn't appear on the same page, or in the same place on the same page."

Joyce himself said: "You are not Irish... and the meaning of some passages will perhaps escape you. But you are Catholic, so you will recognize this and that allusion. You don't play cricket; this word may mean nothing to you. But you are a musician, so you will feel at ease in this passage. When my Irish friends come to visit me in Paris, it is not the philosophical subtleties of the book that amuse them, but my recollection of O'Connell's top hat."


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

Hodge said:


> Greatest? No. Good? Yes. I'm hesitant to say "greatest" about _any_ writer, because there's too much subjectivity and too much disparity in style. If I were to say Kafka is better than, say, Mary Shelley, then I'd be saying that modernism is better than the romantic style. If I were to say Joyce is better than Sartre, then I'd be saying realism is better than existentialism.
> 
> It doesn't work like that.


Well, of course it doesn't. No need to spell it out. It's a title for a thread meant to spark some discussion, not my literal opinion of Joyce.

Besides, if you said Kafka was better than Shelley you would not be saying modernism is better than romanticism. How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion? Kafka does not represent modernism (he was closer to absurdism, anyhow) and Shelley does not represent romanticism. That's the category into which they have been placed by literary theorists. Shelley didn't sit down and say, "OK, since I represent romanticism, I shall write this...".


----------



## Patrick (Oct 28, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> Oh no, you're that kind of person. People who like Joyce are elitist assholes, bla bla bla. Not at all what I was going for. Just tired of people blabbering about Rowling and Stephen King. Don't be so black and white about this.
> .




Why shouldn't he be? After all, you are. need I remind you...



> Nonsense. Based on what? Have you even read it?
> 
> What do you read? You gave up on Ulysses, you think the Wasteland is nonsense... just ol' JK Rowling, or?


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

Mermaid on the breakwater said:


> Why shouldn't he be? After all, you are. need I remind you...


 
That's hardly being black and white. It's called provocative humour. I'm all set for a real discussion on this, but everyone seems bent on disregarding any chance of having an intellectual debate.


----------



## Voodoo (Oct 28, 2007)

*Buddy Glass, I haven't read him but I don't think he'd be the greatest writer of the century. I know you'll quote me on that, but I'm not much for prose that does need so much esoteric knowledge to understand it, and appreciate it _Fully._ I do respect the labor, but no, I don't think he's the best just by reading an excerpt from One of his books. He does seem interesting, though.

You were being an asshole, though.


----------



## Hodge (Oct 28, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> Well, of course it doesn't. No need to spell it out. It's a title for a thread meant to spark some discussion, not my literal opinion of Joyce.
> 
> Besides, if you said Kafka was better than Shelley you would not be saying modernism is better than romanticism. How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion? Kafka does not represent modernism (he was closer to absurdism, anyhow) and Shelley does not represent romanticism. That's the category into which they have been placed by literary theorists. Shelley didn't sit down and say, "OK, since I represent romanticism, I shall write this...".



The absurdist movement was part of the modernist movement, as were the realist and existentialist movements. Kafka doesn't represent modernism, but he is modernist, and Shelley doesn't represent romanticism, but she is a romantic. By placing one author above another outside of their specific styles (if it can be said that any two authors even write within the same style), you are also comparing the styles.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 28, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> Oh no, you're that kind of person. People who like Joyce are elitist assholes, bla bla bla. Not at all what I was going for. Just tired of people blabbering about Rowling and Stephen King. Don't be so black and white about this.
> 
> Ha-ha! Couldn't be more wrong, my dear friend. First of all I wasn't referring to Emerson, but Jung (I'm so sorry you didn't know that)



You're an asshole without the Joyce.  Fuck off.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 28, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> That's hardly being black and white. It's called provocative humour. I'm all set for a real discussion on this, but everyone seems bent on disregarding any chance of having an intellectual debate.



What about the part of my post where I said Joyce killed off modernism?  Not intellectual enough for you?  There could have been a discussion there, but you decided to go for the insult instead.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

Hodge said:


> The absurdist movement was part of the modernist movement, as were the realist and existentialist movements. Kafka doesn't represent modernism, but he is modernist, and Shelley doesn't represent romanticism, but she is a romantic. By placing one author above another outside of their specific styles (if it can be said that any two authors even write within the same style), you are also comparing the styles.


 
Ok, I see what you mean. Still, if I were to say Kafka was a better writer than Shelley, I am judging them individually. Though, on some level, I suppose a judgment of their respective movements is unavoidable...I wouldn't put too much into it though. After all, every author, even those of the same movements, are very different.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> What about the part of my post where I said Joyce killed off modernism? Not intellectual enough for you? .


 
No, not when it lies at the bottom of a steaming pile of crap. I'm sorry dear Clancy Boy, but you're evidently not too bright. I can imagine the whole collective unconscious thing is still nagging you, seeing as you thought Emerson came up with it. Plus, that judgment of my age and literary taste wasn't exactly accurate, now was it? In fact, have you said anything even remotely interesting?

Don't sweat it kid. It's all good. Fucking off, now...


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 28, 2007)

German Voodoo said:


> *Buddy Glass, I haven't read him but I don't think he'd be the greatest writer of the century. I know you'll quote me on that, but I'm not much for prose that does need so much esoteric knowledge to understand it, and appreciate it _Fully._ I do respect the labor, but no, I don't think he's the best just by reading an excerpt from One of his books. He does seem interesting, though.


Again, I wasn't really out to ascertain whether or not Joyce is or isn't the greatest writer of the 20th Century. Appreciate the comments, though. However, I don't think you need a heap of "esoteric knowledge" to understand _Dubliners, Portrait_, or _Ulysses_. A familiarity with Homer's _The Odyssey_ would help with _Ulysses_, but other than there are no prerequisites for reading it.

Finnegans Wake is another story, though.



> You were being an asshole, though.


Not towards you, I hope.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 28, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> No, not when it lies at the bottom of a steaming pile of crap.



That is not an argument.



> I'm sorry dear Clancy Boy, but you're evidently not too bright.



Is it that evident?  God_dammit _I have to learn to keep my mouth shut.


----------



## Voodoo (Oct 28, 2007)

Clancy is not stupid.

Buddy Glass isn't too stupid. He's not being too beneficent in his intelligence, though. Smart or Smart for a kid ur age?

Stupid fucking brats!

I guess whichever author embodies their "movements" is the best. Someone who doesn't know, or give much fuck about, could still say which author makes better books.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Oct 29, 2007)

> everyone seems bent on disregarding any chance of having an intellectual debate.



You mean an intellectual debate with YOU?



> Originally Posted by *Buddy Glass*
> 
> 
> _No, not when it lies at the bottom of a steaming pile of crap. _


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 29, 2007)

lin said:


> You mean an intellectual debate with YOU?


 
Great stuff. Taking it out of context to prove a point... oh, it's so original.

Lin, you're completely incapable of even supporting your arguments. What are you doing here? Shouldn't you be spewing your sexist nonsense somewhere?


----------



## Linton Robinson (Oct 29, 2007)

Oh, I'm so sorry.  I have not doubt that in some other context you are a powerful intellectual.  Some other forum, perhaps.  Or maybe an alternative universe where monkeys control the government and educational systems.

You started this knucklehead thread...if there are any massive highbrow themes and citations to be had, maybe you should bring some.

Then maybe we won't continue to think that you are an ignorant, fairly stupid, over-opinionated poser.   Unless we've read your other posts.


----------



## UNDEAD (Oct 29, 2007)

My family is actually related to James Joyce. I think he was an awesome writer, definitely one of the best.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 29, 2007)

UNDEAD said:


> My family is actually related to James Joyce. I think he was an awesome writer, definitely one of the best.


 
One of the main reasons I cite him as one of the best is because, when you consider his entire body of work, everything he's written is so damn good and influential, a rare feat even amongst the best of writers. Flaubert had _The Temptation of St. Anthony_, Dickens had _Nicholas Nickleby_ and Nabokov had _Defense_. With Joyce, however, even his play (_Exiles_) and two collections of poetry, though overlooked, are considered to be great works of art.

It's hard to dispute, I think, whether you like him or not, that his influence on 20th Century literature is unrivalled. _Ulysses_ is a tremendously significant novel, Molly Bloom's monologue and the chapter at the funeral is some of the best prose I've read. Whether or not _Finnegans Wake_ is gibberish is an ongoing dicussion today. I think it has its strengths.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 29, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> One of the main reasons I cite him as one of the best is because, when you consider his entire body of work, everything he's written is so damn good and influential, a rare feat even amongst the best of writers. Flaubert had _The Temptation of St. Anthony_, Dickens had _Nicholas Nickleby_ and Nabokov had _Defense_. With Joyce, however, even his play (_Exiles_) and two collections of poetry, though overlooked, are considered to be great works of art.



I see.  James Joyce was great because everything he wrote was great and everyone thinks he's great.  Other 20th century authors wrote great stuff but they were not as great as Joyce.  

A tour de force!  Two thumbs up!  A+++++++++++ would read again!

You are the _king_ of literary criticism!  I bet this stuff kills during circle time in your introduction to English lit class.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 29, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> I see. James Joyce was great because everything he wrote was great and everyone thinks he's great. Other 20th century authors wrote great stuff but they were not as great as Joyce.
> 
> A tour de force! Two thumbs up! A+++++++++++ would read again!
> 
> You are the _king_ of literary criticism! I bet this stuff kills during circle time in your introduction to English lit class.


 
Little Clancy-boy, does a 34-year old have nothing better to do but lurk around the forum and insult every post I make?

Again, I've never taken any literature class and don't consider myself a literary critic. I'm just an unusually well-read person. Better read than you are, for example. Now, do you actually have anything of substance to say about Joyce or Pynchon or anyone, for that matter? Because surely, like me, you've read everything by Joyce, right?


----------



## Voodoo (Oct 29, 2007)

Stop commenting on age, moron.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 29, 2007)

German Voodoo said:


> Stop commenting on age, moron.


 
You're either a little late, or very biased:



			
				 ClancyBoy said:
			
		

> I'm guessing you're about 18, and your bookshelf contains a lot of Chuck Palahniuk? Am I right?


----------



## Voodoo (Oct 29, 2007)

I've been reading this thread.

Did I address you?


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 30, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> 'm just an unusually well-read person. Better read than you are, for example.



How did you arrive at that conclusion?



> Now, do you actually have anything of substance to say about Joyce or Pynchon or anyone, for that matter? Because surely, like me, you've read everything by Joyce, right?


More or less.  I think his best work is his letter to "sweet little whorish Nora."  (posted below)



> *“You had an arse full of farts that night, darling, and I     fucked them out of you, big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little merry cracks and a     lot of tiny little naughty farties ending in a long gush from your hole. It is wonderful     to fuck a farting woman when every fuck drives one out of her. I think I would know Nora's     fart anywhere. I think I could pick hers out in a roomful of farting women. It is a rather     girlish noise not like the wet windy fart which I imagine fat wives have. It is sudden and     dry and dirty like what a bold girl would let off in fun in a school dormitory at night. I     hope Nora will let off no end of her farts in my face so that I may know their smell     also.”*
> 
> 
> *-- James Joyce*



Discuss.


----------



## Buddy Glass (Oct 30, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> How did you arrive at that conclusion?


 
Oh, just a hunch.



> More or less. I think his best work is his letter to "sweet little whorish Nora." (posted below)


Brilliant. What a strange man. Where's it form?

How did you like _Finnegans Wake_?

If you're so well read, couldn't you make some form of intellectual comments on Joyce? You've yet to say anything noteworthy about him.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 30, 2007)

Or this one.




> "Have I shocked you by the dirty things I wrote to you? You think perhaps that my love is a filthy thing. It is, darling, at some moments. I dream of you in filthy poses sometimes. I imagine things so very dirty that I will not write them until I see how you write yourself. The smallest things give me a great cockstand - a whorish movement of your mouth, a little brown stain on the seat of your white drawers, a sudden dirty word spluttered out by your wet lips, a sudden immodest noise made by you behind and then a bad smell slowly curling up out of your backside. "
> 
> -- James Joyce



James Joyce did more to promote the artistic representation of farts and poopstains in English literature than any writer before or since.


----------



## ClancyBoy (Oct 30, 2007)

Buddy Glass said:


> Brilliant. What a strange man. Where's it form?



* his letter to "sweet little whorish Nora."
*
If you look closely, there's a link there.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Oct 30, 2007)

I am just so enjoying all of these intellectual remarks by Glass.  He's just filling us in with information and insight on Joyce.

Oh, and to the poster uneducated enough to comment on "Joyce is great because he's great"...how could you BE so ignorant.   He's great because he was the major influence of the century.  Because it says so right here.

I'm sure you can tick on on the figers of a single hand all the writers heavily influenced by Joyce.   Why Winnegan's Fake is practically the template for everything written since.


----------



## aubie84 (Nov 13, 2007)

Voodoo said:


> I'm illiterate by choice, but Finny's Wake does seem quite fucked up.
> 
> Sans the philosophy, linguistics, and the effort, sounds like some nonsense words I'd make one day.


 
For me, _Finnegan's Wake_ was unreadable. Came off as Joyce's effort at "Hehe, figure _this_ out!" 

That said, I did like _Portrait of the Artist_ and certain stories from _Dubliners_, particularly _Portrait_. The "pick pock puck of the cricket bats" is a line I will never forget, as is the priest's metaphor of the bird taking a grain of sand from the beach each day. Scary shit to sit through as a young catholic, I'm sure.

But the greatest? No. I'm not sure I'd hang that albatross on any single writer.

aubie84


----------

