>Dubliners: great
>Portrait: awful
>Ulysses: brilliant
>Finnegans Wake: unintelligible
Is there a more inconscient writer ranked among the greatest of all kind?
>Dubliners: great. >Portrait: awful. >Ulysses: brilliant. >Finnegans Wake: unintelligible
Portrait was good you clown ass double Black person.
>He passed out of the schoolhouse and halted under the shed that flanked the garden. From the theatre opposite came the muffled noise of the audience and sudden brazen clashes of the soldiers’ band. The light spread upwards from the glass roof making the theatre seem a festive ark, anchored among the hulks of houses, her frail cables of lanterns looping her to her moorings. A side door of the theatre opened suddenly and a shaft of light flew across the grassplots. A sudden burst of music issued from the ark, the prelude of a waltz: and when the side door closed again the listener could hear the faint rhythm of the music. The sentiment of the opening bars, their languor and supple movement, evoked the incommunicable emotion which had been the cause of all his day’s unrest and of his impatient movement of a moment before. His unrest issued from him like a wave of sound: and on the tide of flowing music the ark was journeying, trailing her cables of lanterns in her wake. Then a noise like dwarf artillery broke the movement. It was the clapping that greeted the entry of the dumbbell team on the stage.
t. fart sniffers
part 3 of portrait has to be the most trite piece of literature I've ever had to read
>had to read
When you get out of high school, give us a shout. Otherwise shut up.
This is actually clumsy af
Prove it
>Finnegans Wake: unintelligible
You only think that because you did not understand Portrait and Ulysses.
I probably would not go as far as awful but I don't think I could call it good. It was a failed experiment and the experiment gets been played out early in the novel which reduces it to gimmick for the remainder. How the style is going to evolve does not get us on the edge of our seats because we more or less know Stephen's path as soon as we figure out the experiment. But he learned his lesson and learned the limitations of the novel.
>is there any other writer about whom my personal opinions vary more?
I don't know, moron. You tell me.
filtered
His fart fetish letters to his wife: masterpiece.
>Nora dear, I am dying all day to ask you one or two questions. Let me, dear, for I have told you everything I ever did and so I can ask you in turn. I wonder will you answer them. When that person whose heart I long to stop with the click of a revolver put his hand or hands under your skirts did he only tickle you outside or did he put his finger or fingers up into you? If he did, did they go far enough to touch that little wiener at the end of your c**t? Did he touch you behind? Was he a long time tickling you and did you come? Did he ask you to touch him and did you do so? If you did not touch him did he come against you and did you feel it?
was he a cuck????
From what I have read of these letters it sounds more like Nora was into being humiliated or Joyce was a bit of an ass and got off on embarrassing her, the latter fits better in context of how he wrote bother personal correspondence and literature.
>bother
Every post of mine today has had an extra word in there somewhere, this is the test to see if it is me or something else.
From what I remember Joyce was worried that she'd fricked the guy she saw before the two of them went on their now famous date. He only fingered her though, according to Nora. If I remember right Joyce based Lynch in Portrait off this guy. Pretty sure he killed himself too.
t. read a Joyce biography five years ago
Can you underage non-readers stop bringing this up? We get it, we've all read it, now stop being unoriginal and cringe. Go to r*ddit if you want to repost stale jokes all day.
i read the first 'book' (chapter?) of the Illiad, should i just switch to Ulysses and read that instead?
You don’t need the Iliad for Ulysses. You don’t even really need the Odyssey that much either.
Joyce's whole thing with the novel was to write living literature, literature which grew with the reader. He started this with Portrait where we follow Stephen as he grows up and the novel's style grows with him. Ulysses is the same thing but without Portrait's exposition through style and character, he attempts to shift it all onto the reader. In Ulysses he moves this into the references, no one will get them all but if you are a regular reader you will pick up more of them in your day to day reading, sometimes first hand from the source but often second or third or fourth hand and skewed, these will inform your next reading of Ulysses and you will get a bit more and the novel will be quite different. Repeat. FW moves this aspect from references to the language itself.
Portrait was really good
it's over
>good bad good bad
seems pretty consistent to me
>Can you underage non-readers stop bringing this up? We get it, we've all read it, now stop being unoriginal and cringe. Go to r*ddit if you want to repost stale jokes all day.