Reading Ulysses

I can extend the similarity a bit, Steve - I could easily have written the following sentence after ploughing through Kenner and and the rest:

Sometimes a massive waste of time (the economics/politics of Ezra Pound fr'instance),

Maybe the difference is that I'm much, much less likely nowadays to be interested in self-consciously "difficult" art (although define-yer-terms may be a fair riposte to that because, for example, Cecil Taylor's Conquistador is on constant rotation on my cd player as I speak). The enthusiasm of Jaq, Pinefox and others, and the thread on favourite sentences, has even got me semi-interested in re-reading Ulysses, although perhaps not.

I, too, have found myself less interested in difficult-because-it-aspires-to-be art as well, but to me there's a distinction between that which arrives at difficulty organically (like Cecil, Ulysses-era-Joyce, or Messiaen) and the I'm-so-clever kind. As a phase of development, Kenner was important to me. I'm glad I did all that, not from what I took from it in terms of substance, but that it gave me confidence in sharpening my critical apparatus enough to understand the difference between complexities that proceed from expressive neccessity and those which are deliberate -and maybe pointless- displays of mental agility (kind of how I feel about FW, even though it makes me laugh).

http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,6737,1091216,00.html

does anyone know anything about a japanese film from a couple years ago: ulysses relocated to the red light district in tokyo except with an underpinning of japanese paganism replacing the classical references? i remember reading about this but people keep saying "that sounds like something you'd make up"

now, how would you film chapter sixteen?

xpost: like a 70s home movie with skronky film, jumpy edits and a final "flick flick flick flick" as it comes off the projector. Chapter 14 would be super duper fun.

Has anybody else seen the 1969 (?) version? All I can say is - it stays faithful to the story.

honestly, it'd be a great miniseries.

i remember 'bloom' being called 'bl.,m' on the website. or was that another one? regardless it's a useless title, guy gets to be called like twelve names, yo. VOICEOVERS. eahrrh.

i want someone to make a case for chapter sixteen as not being alarmingly uncharitable! please!

(I have just reread it, coincidentally.)

I am happy to agree quite strongly with the people who think Ulysses should be on TV, in a series. I remember saying so, enthusiastically, to a bloke at a bus stop, about 10 years ago, maybe more, and he unleashed his spleen against me. I did not use the word 'miniseries', though. Maybe that would have helped.

how would you televise it?

we also discussed whether "miniseries" would be the correct term.

Yes, I've seen it. It's, um, bad.

Reading Ulysses, enjoying it immensely and not having a terrible time with it, and then I got to the Scylla (Shakespeare) chapter. Good lord. Not only did I have a terrible time following it (I'm not using any notes this first time through), but I found it incredibly dull.

Is this usually regarded as one of the difficult chapters? I always hear about Oxen of the Sun, but I haven't gotten there then. Does anyone else find this chapter dull? It gets better again, right?

oxen of the sun is hi-larious.

So Gabler's edition is pants? I should just go back to the Random House edition?

who says that? I found the Gabler edition to be quite good. although some editions are missing a crucial punctuation mark on the last page.

I'd take the Random House over the Gabler, which might've been rooted in good intentions but seems to be mainly fucking with the text for the sake of it.

strangely upset i can no longer remember the publishing history of ulysses :(

i prefer the wikipedia summarisation version.

i say that, i mean i never actually managed to finish it.

dyao, <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_%28novel%29#Publication_history'>;Wikipedia sez</a>. (Third paragraph in that section.) Also, <a href=http://www.robotwisdom.com/jaj/#editions>;Robot Wisdom</a> sez Gabler is a pompous German with a tin ear, but seems to have backed off criticism since I last looked.

I'll say this: RH edition is easier to read in bed.

Url, ups. And double ups, guy who writes RW is apparently a wingnut crank.

Just read joseph collins' og 1922 review of ulysses on a whim. He makes a big deal of bloom being vile and depraved and having no moral compass. This was strange to me because one of the main points of the book, for me, is that despite the vagaries and trials of ordinary human existence, in a world that is at all turns hostile to the flowering of individual personality, Bloom manages to be a decent man. I wonder if early reviewers actually couldn't recognize that bloom is a remarkably generous and kind spirit or if they were afraid that noting these qualities would "excuse" his sexual irregularities, which reviewers wanted desperately to distance themselves from. Or is Bloom maybe not that admirable and I am misreading him. Despite his numerous anxieties, the frantic and confused quality of his interior life at times, there is something very open about his orientation toward others that -- to me at least -- seems extremely spiritual. I think he was intended as a model for a way to live without belief, god as a "shout in the street" and all that. I don't think he is in any way an "everyman"

i never noticed anything being wrong with him, except his being an ad salesman

also on a whim, on a few train rides this weekend i re-read the telemachiad. the stuff with mr deasy is wrenching. i love how stephen is already not impressed with his own pseudo-profundity but can't bear to view himself on an equal level with the people around him. also what other author can just make up words and make it seem like the most natural thing? is there a better novel?

Try 2666 sometime, that's better.

oof no

Coincidentally two weeks ago I was telling a friend (who has tried to read this five times now, and has not finished) to start with the last chapter (which is what the 'reading difficult novels' link above tells you to do). I did the 'sequential, only got 10% thing' about 5+ years ago, but looking back the important thing was getting to Molly.

Although I nearly also said that Thomas Bernhard has taken the one para thing on and improved on it and you should read Old Masters instead but actually hearing about her struggles and work (she is reading bits of the Odyssey plus a guide too) I found myself quite interested in re-reading Ulysses. Might do it over the World Cup acually, starting with the last chapter.

Of course Old Masters' content is a whole different thing to Molly. Nastier, misanthropic, more my thing.

Treeship, I am sure you are correct - Mr Bloom is good, unusually for a complex fictional character. Collins was basically wrong. Your thought that reviewers avoided stating the goodness because they were scared of the kinks is a nice one. Though I feel that the truth was, they just couldn't yet see the goodness. And even today, in a way, there is a 'banality of goodness' that can make one swerve away from it.

never had any interest in reading this

kudos

keep us updated

Still don't care

He had no use for ulysses, but posted here anyway.

Hey I just checked--still don't care about this

I read it once front-to-back with very minimal support about 15 years ago and tackled it again last year in conjunction with a (somewhat corny and condescending) guide and honestly I still got a lot more out of the second experience. The guide was useful for keeping track of the mythical and theological elements but even without it I appreciated the human (and comic) dimension so much more the second time round. It's the difference between reading it as an adult and reading it as a gauche and overconfident student I suppose. It's still possible to get a lot out of Ulysses even if you're only following two-thirds of it.

I still dislike the underworld section though.

I like that one but dislike Oxen of the Sun

it's funny that someone isolated the history of english prose he was using for oxen

man ilb is ~controversial~ today

waterface, why don't you care about this