Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Everyman wrote: "Patrice wrote: "The Great Courses sale catalog came around and I went ahead and ordered the course on Ulysses. So, I guess I'm committed."

Thanks for reminding me -- I got that course some time b..."

It's good. I haven't listened to all of it -- just like I've never gotten to the infamous last chapter of Ulysses. (??) The professor who conducts it, unless updated/changed, was from Dartmouth and very knowledgeable. The former library director in my town is teaching Ulysses. in an adult (seniors) program at a nearby university. We were talking a few weeks ago about the quality of that GC course. (I'm not taking her course, although I'm sure I would enjoy her lectures/discussions.)

I started it while another board was reading Ulysses a couple of years ago, but I allowed myself to get too caught up in all the cross references. So I am sympathetic to the view that the way to go is as straight-forward a read as possible, letting the heavy stuff sift in lightly. (I've tried this thing more times than I can count at this point. Maybe this time?)

Patrice wrote: "Have you noticed that people either adore this book or despise it? There doesn't seem to be any middle ground. I wonder which side of the fence I'll end up on? "

Actually, I don't recall very often discussing it with people to find out whether they do or don't like it!

But the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ reviews are all over the map. Though I have to wonder, maybe unfairly, how many gave it a five star review not because they really thought the book deserved five starts, but because they were supposed to think that the book deserved five stars (after all, it was Modern Library's number one novel of the 20th century. But interestingly, it was only #11 on the Readers list.)

Patrice wrote: "Have you noticed that people either adore this book or despise it? There doesn't seem to be any middle ground. I wonder which side of the fence I'll end up on? "

Some people start out hating it and end up devoted fans, serious people like Virginia Woolf, for example. It's audacious and presumptuous and utterly uncompromising, so I don't blame readers who don't like it, or who don't have the patience for it. But there are many reasons to love it as well, as we will soon find out.

Theresa wrote: "One reason I prefer reading ebooks, besides the easy portability, is that I feel more at liberty to underline things, and write notes in the margins. I was taught not to write in books when I was..."

Oh I'm the same! I can't write in a book but I have no objection to buying books which have been written in, I even enjoy reading their (whoever they were) notes. It's like a sort of glimpse into a strangers mind - I feel a bit naughty doing it ;-)

I found this podcast by Frank Delaney, a host on the BBC, who is in the process of an in depth analysis of Ulysses. He expects the effort to require on the order of thirty years and is currently on episode 232 with a new one published each Wednesday.

Here is a link to the Introduction:

John wrote: "I found this podcast by Frank Delaney, a host on the BBC, who is in the process of an in depth analysis of Ulysses. He expects the effort to require on the order of thirty years and is currently on..."

One can die before one starts, or at least gets beyond thirty pages, with Joyce.

My reference collection for U includes Ulysses Annotated by Don Gifford, which does not include the text of the book itself and is almost as long.

I consider this review by ZappaGirl on Amazon to be on the mark; it asks the reader to trust him/herself to just read the book: (for shorter length of post, definitely no spoilers re U)(view spoiler)[

"Several years ago, when I embarked on my first reading of Ulysses, I purchased this book to help me deal with the famous Joycian allusions.

"I was stunned by the size and careful detail of this annotation, since it rivals the size of Ulysses itself. For the first 60 pages or so of Ulysses, I religiously read every annotation for every allusion. And then I realized that I was missing out on the beauty of the book as a work of art. So I set the annotation down and continued reading Ulysses without help. Yes, there were many parts I failed to understand, but I loved the book nonetheless, and appreciated it as one of the 20th century's greatest pieces of art.

"The annotation should serve not as a companion during a first reading of Ulysses, but rather as a reference for future, more detailed readings. As I have read parts of Ulysses again, I have turned to the annotation to guide me and help me understand the intricate details of the book. It is a scholarly endeavor, and one must always remember that Joyce meant to be enigmatic - to enjoy his genius does not necessarily mean to understand every enigma and allusion.

"Savor the words of James Joyce, then savor his intellectual cavortings through this marvelous annotation. Do not use the annotation as a crutch to read Ulysses, the greatest novel of the 20th century, but trust your mind to learn his language."



(hide spoiler)]

U is one place where the general philosophy of this group, begin by relaxing into the original text itself, seems to come to the fore.

Lily wrote: "U is one place where the general philosophy of this group, begin by relaxing into the original text itself, seems to come to the fore. ."

I don't understand your comment. By "U" do you mean Ulysses? Or some text about Ulysses?

Theresa wrote: "Lily wrote: "U is one place where the general philosophy of this group, begin by relaxing into the original text itself, seems to come to the fore. ."

I don't understand your comment. By "U" do y..."

I think she means Ulysses itself. And she's right, we tend here to focus primarily on the book and less on secondary sources, unlike some other groups.

Everyman wrote: "I think she means Ulysses itself. And she's right, we tend here to focus primarily on the book ..."

I like to think we don't denigrate secondary sources, but we do indeed treat them as "secondary" and assume readers can tackle the text itself. But, Eman is our leader here, and I probably should defer to his reflections, which are the core of what I was trying to say, Theresa. (U was intended to indicate Ulysses itself.) Unfortunately (?), I do stand a little bit on the side of (troublemaker?) Felix when he challenges us to up the stakes and not ignore solid criticism as we ratchet our reading skills and efforts.

The other groups I follow do also focus on the text, but are not as vocal about it as this board.

Sadly, I have to admit a lacking in most of the background text/knowledge that may lend itself to an understanding of a dense text such as Ulysses. I have thought about just reading through initially to gain a basic understanding with this group and going back for a more in depth comprehension.

I don't want to fall prey to the typical problem where people become too encumbered with the details and fail to actually read the book.

John wrote: "I have thought about just reading through initially to gain a basic understanding with this group and going back for a more in depth comprehension."

I think your approach is perfect, John. There is a temptation when approaching Ulysses to "decode" it with secondary sources. But this focus on detail often results in a kind of myopia. The book as a whole becomes a blur, or worse, a bore. After you've read the book, going back with the notes and commentary is a great idea. Having the long perspective, it is easier to see how the details mesh and weave.

The other danger is that first-time readers who religiously follow a commentary sometimes surrender their own reading to that of the commentator. Don't let this happen. Discover the book for yourself.

Perhaps we can take a word of advice from Joyce himself:

Wipe your glosses with what you know.

--Finnegans Wake

John wrote: "But, Eman is our leader here,"

Yes, usually, but I think Thomas is one who will be taking over this time.

Patrice wrote: "We all seem to be a bit anxious. ;-) It's just a book, right?"

Its terrifying!

:)

Theresa wrote: "John wrote: "But, Eman is our leader here,"

Yes, usually, but I think Thomas is one who will be taking over this time."

But read what Thomas firmly says @119!

Despite my comments about secondary material, I wholeheartedly agree with Thomas! I don't think our views need to be considered contradictory. The text is primary -- let it be yours!

John wrote: "I have thought about just reading through initially to gain a basic understanding with this group and going back for a more in depth comprehension."

That, if memory serves, was Thomas's suggesting for first time readers.

Lily wrote: "But, Eman is our leader here, and I probably should defer to his reflections,... "

I consider myself an organizer, rather than a leader, and nobody should defer to my reflections on texts simply because I am the organizer. I learn more from people intelligently disagreeing with me than from those who simply defer to me. Of course, at times you may agree with me, but that's not deference.

The areas where I do seek a degree of deference are not in textual analysis or comments, but simply in process areas and in the basic concepts of the group, the main points of which are based in two simple maxims: Disagree without being Disagreeable, and No Spoilers.

Lily wrote: "I like to think we don't denigrate secondary sources, but we do indeed treat them as "secondary" and assume readers can tackle the text itself. "

Exactly.

Theresa wrote: "Patrice wrote: "We all seem to be a bit anxious. ;-) It's just a book, right?"

Its terrifying!

:)"

But not when you're with friends. Then it's a joint adventure, and joint adventures are always fun!

Hi We have a classics book club in Carrboro, NC and were scheduled to read Ulysses for February. I've encouraged folks to join this group for a challenging and informative discussion, well beyond what we could achieve in 2 hours. When will the schedule be released? I'm not seeing much to hook the first-timer or to help us plan for the speed or duration of the commitment to Ulysses. Any suggestions?

Susan wrote: "I'm not seeing much to hook the first-timer or to help us plan for the speed or duration of the commitment to Ulysses. Any suggestions? ..."

I'll be a bit cynical this morning, Susan. If not willing to at least scan this thread about the pros and cons of reading Ulysses and the discussions of what editions and supplementary material to consider, perhaps that first timer ought to reconsider and try it as a little stretching exercise for the book itself!

Okay, I'll be less cynical and just say, hang on; history tells me that Thomas will be giving us a schedule as the start date approaches. But this board has a book to finish and a palate cleansing exercise with Richard II before we tackle Joyce.

Susan wrote: "Hi We have a classics book club in Carrboro, NC and were scheduled to read Ulysses for February. I've encouraged folks to join this group for a challenging and informative discussion, well beyond w..."

Great! We'll be delighted to have them.

The reading schedule for works is generally not posted until about a week before the start of the discussion, and in the present case it's Thomas who will be deciding exactly what the schedule will be, but the current thinking (subject to change!) is that the schedule will cover about 12 weeks, starting on January 7. If this is the final decision, it will run into late March. At this point, Thomas is still working out exactly how many weeks and what sections will be discussed each week, but that gives you a rough idea.

I don't know how flexible your reading group's schedule is, but if some of the join in with the discussion here, you might want to consider moving Ulysses to your March book to match more closely with what our schedule will be. But of course, that may be undesirable or impractical from your group's point of view, which is perfectly understandable.

Susan wrote: "I'm not seeing much to hook the first-timer or to help us plan for the speed or duration of the commitment to Ulysses."

As tend to rely on the books themselves, and the discussions which take place during the selection process (we always announce the list of candidates well before poll is put up, and there is always a but of lobbying and people advocating for (or sometimes against) certain books) to hook readers. :)

For our reading schedule, as a general rule, we tend to take more rather than less time in our discussions, following Bacon's feeling that these are books not to be merely tasted or swallowed, but to be chewed and digested. Rarely have we scheduled only a single month for a book; most often our discussions run from 8 to 12 weeks, though it depends of course heavily on the book. (For examples, we spent 14 weeks on War and Peace, only 5 weeks on Huckleberry Finn, 12 weeks on Les Miserables, and if memory serves we spent three months on the Divine Comedy.)

Thanks for the rough schedule. Our members can choose to participate or not as their schedules and interest allows. Some of our members will be very interested in the level of discussion in this forum and hopefully contribute to the conversation.

Susan wrote: "Thanks for the rough schedule. Our members can choose to participate or not as their schedules and interest allows. Some of our members will be very interested in the level of discussion in this f..."

Great. Perhaps they will introduce themselves as members of your group if they decide to participate.

I have long wanted to read JJ's Ulysses but have wanted to do it with a book/reading group. I am strongly in favor of doing it, in fact I just joined this group in hopes of that being chosen.

Jessica wrote: "I have long wanted to read JJ's Ulysses but have wanted to do it with a book/reading group. I am strongly in favor of doing it, in fact I just joined this group in hopes of that being chosen."

Which is what we're for. The lone reader braving the storm behind a wall of secondary sources, bibliographies, and scholarship has a much harder task. Among ourselves we can clear up a great many difficulties. On the morning of Paddy Dignam's funeral Bloom walks into a bar. The story is told in newspaper headlines. What's this? Well, Bloom's business is canvassing for a newspaper, selling ads. What could be a better joke now? And what's with this bar of soap which keeps turning up? You reach into a pocket, there's that dang soap. You move it to another pocket. And guess what? Hilarious. In a group of bright people like this one, somebody will always come up with something helpful.

Charles wrote: "And what's with this bar of soap which keeps turning up? You reach into a pocket, there's that dang soap. You move it to another pocket. And guess what? Hilarious."

Dang. I might have to read this just to find out what's with the bar of soap. :)

I am sorry if someone already asked this, but how essential is reading A Portait of the Artist to reading Ulysses?

Genni wrote: "I am sorry if someone already asked this, but how essential is reading A Portait of the Artist to reading Ulysses?"

It's helpful, but not necessary. The "young man" of Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is Stephen Dedalus, who is one of the three main characters in Ulysses, and the subject of the first three episodes of Ulysses. At the end of Portrait we see Stephen leaving Ireland, but at the beginning of Ulysses he is back. It's important to know why he is back (his mother has died) and a few other details, but I will be providing those for people who haven't read A Portrait.

Great. Thank you.

Well I haven't joined you all for a read in ages. Ulysses was already relegated to late 2015 or early 2016. Then I read the posts. Can't imagine a better time to read Ulysses so I will join you in January. May attempt to squeeze Portrait in first. If I have read the posts correctly I need to locate a 1961 edition.

Susan wrote: "Well I haven't joined you all for a read in ages. Ulysses was already relegated to late 2015 or early 2016. Then I read the posts. Can't imagine a better time to read Ulysses so I will join you in ..."

Welcome back! We'll be delighted to see you again.

when does this start?

The Ulysses discussion is slated to begin on Jan. 7. I will be posting a reading schedule on or around Jan. 1.

For those who want to get a head start, the first week of discussion will cover the first three episodes.

Thomas wrote: "The Ulysses discussion is slated to begin on Jan. 7. I will be posting a reading schedule on or around Jan. 1.

For those who want to get a head start, the first week of discussion will cover the ..."

Thanks for the update