James Joyce

[Darragh]

I loved systematically dissecting books in school, it helped me appreciate them more. Shakespear par example, I couldn't really understand why it was so great until it was taken apart piece by piece.

[Ripper]

I haven't read it yet, we studied a part of it in English a couple of years back.
Kinda sucks the fun out of it.

Sorry to start this discussion but I disagree. I think studying it in class only sucks the fun out of it with crap teachers.

Well, I wouldn't have called her a bad teacher, she certainly knew her stuff. It was just that she had no way of showing literature in the artistic way it was created, it became more like Maths, if you know what I mean.

Teachers like that SUCK! Where's PP when you need him, eh?

I'd actually pay to be taught by him.

Wait, of course I would.

[Jez]

I loved systematically dissecting books in school, it helped me appreciate them more. Shakespear par example, I couldn't really understand why it was so great until it was taken apart piece by piece.

But where's the sense of unity, of the whole book if you have to dissect every little bit of it? You take a story apart to look at all the different bits of it, and what's happened? You've destroyed the story. All that's left is words and sentences.

As for Shakespeare, well, it always annoys me when we have to read it because his plays are meant to be performed and watched, not read.

[Soapy]

All plays are supposed to be performed and watched.

But as I said about picking books apart and studying them and whatnot, it all depends on the quality of the teacher, I think.

Some do it in a way that ruins it and makes it a chore, but the really great ones let you see the story behind it, too.

[Jez]

All plays are supposed to be performed and watched.

But as I said about picking books apart and studying them and whatnot, it all depends on the quality of the teacher, I think.

Some do it in a way that ruins it and makes it a chore, but the really great ones let you see the story behind it, too.

Yep, I agree. Sometimes I think that critics read too much into a story... that they're trying to pull an interpretation out of the book that just isn't there. This doesn't just apply to James Joyce (come on, maybe he liked the colour yellow, it doesn't have to be symbolic, does it?), but a lot of literature which students study.

Hmm, can you imagine studying HDM in the same way? Now, that could either be really fruitful or just totally ruin the books... Again, it probably does come down to the quality of the teacher, like you say hermit.

[Soapy]

I'd love to study HDM in the same way, to be honest.

Although I'm not sure I'd like to write an essay on whether Will's world is ours or not

[Darragh]

But where's the sense of unity, of the whole book if you have to dissect every little bit of it? You take a story apart to look at all the different bits of it, and what's happened? You've destroyed the story. All that's left is words and sentences.

As for Shakespeare, well, it always annoys me when we have to read it because his plays are meant to be performed and watched, not read.

No book was spoiled for me by studying it in depth. The opposite in fact would be true, they were enhanced. All a book is is words and sentances is it not?

So by reading Shakespear I can't appreciate it? Plays are not meant to be read? I don't get that. Sure they are meant to be performed and watched but that doesn't mean they are not supposed to be read. I get great enjoyment and entertainment from reading plays.

[Jez]

No book was spoiled for me by studying it in depth. The opposite in fact would be true, they were enhanced. All a book is is words and sentances is it not?

So by reading Shakespear I can't appreciate it? Plays are not meant to be read? I don't get that. Sure they are meant to be performed and watched but that doesn't mean they are not supposed to be read. I get great enjoyment and entertainment from reading plays.

A book is made up of words and sentences, yes, but maybe you've missed my point, which was that separating a story into its component parts loses the effect of the whole thing. The cliche 'the whole is more than the sum of the parts' is probably true in this case. If dissecting a story works for you, and enhances your appreciation of it, then that's great but I don't think it works like that for everyone.

I don't see any reason why you can't appreciate a play by just reading it, but the purpose of a play is to be performed and watched, so it follows that it has greatest impact on stage.

[zemarl]

yes, but to have a good impact, the play must be thoroughly read and examined by the actors, or else they won't know how to play the part. (meaning for once i agree with darragh plays are great)

[Darragh]

(meaning for once i agree with darragh ...

Drats! I must be wrong.

[zemarl]

(meaning for once i agree with darragh ...

Drats! I must be wrong.

*glares*

[slideyfoot]

The only people I know who have read Ulysses are those who had to do so as part of an English degree. That's mainly why I read it (about 4 years ago now), having looked at extracts during my undergraduate degree, and I knew I was likely to come across it again on the MA. On top of that it was a book I felt I should read, like War and Peace a few years earlier (which was a hell of a lot easier to get through - that took me about 10 days on a holiday where I had absolutely nothing else to do, while Ulysses took months!), but I'm not sure I could have got all the way through if I hadn't had the impetus of a reading list.

I can't say it ranks among my favourites, as it is by intention a very mixed bag. In fact, the manner in which the chapters are stylistically differentiated is about the only aspect I can still remember, along with '16' (but thats only because it crops up in a book about homoeroticism in poetry, which I read more recently due to Thom Gunn). Perhaps its time I re-read it...

[Admiral Valdemar]

From what limited experience I've had with the book, I'd sooner burn every copy than be forced to read it all. I'm sure there's something profound in it, but all I can see is tedious crap that is being controversial for the sake of it.I actually prefer a plot in my books, but maybe I'm weird.

[aesahaettr101]

Anybody read any James Joyce? I started Ulysses today, and I have heard people saying Finnegans Wake is the hardest book to read ever..What about y'all?

[Somewhat]

Anybody read any James Joyce? I started Ulysses today, and I have heard people saying Finnegans Wake is the hardest book to read ever..What about y'all?

I think you don't read Finnegans Wake, as such... you kinda guess your way through it. I gave up.

[Darragh]

[Qu Klaani]

I am bumping this thread.

This is why. Slightly NSFW

[aesahaettr101]

That's pretty hilarious