[ExI] Joyce

[Lee Corbin]

Damien writes

> At 07:50 PM 1/28/2008 -0800, Lee wrote:
> 
>>I am quite certain that if John and I forced ourselves to
>>read Finnegan's Wake or Ulysses, we would be in the
>>main merely confirmed in our lack of appreciation.
> 
> And that's your basis for excoriating the writings of James Joyce,

I for one have never excoriated his writing. Hopefully I've
made clear to most people that I don't even consider 
excoriation or condemnation appropriate---or even logically
possible when you come right down to it---for works of art.
Instead, I particularly criticize and dismiss out of hand claims
that Ulysses is "gibberish".

Sorry, but that I have a "lack of appreciation" is as mild a
comment as I'm able to find, and happens to be entirely true.
 
> (John C. Wright, for all his stated detestation of ULYSSES,
> would be aghast at such a comfortable attitude, I feel sure.)

His detestation seems mostly to be cast in terms of the subsequent
effect on literature (and probably on the human spirit). I would 
agree with him entirely, except that I suppose Joyce and T.S. Eliot
to be more likely symptoms than causes.

> As Wittgenstein said so long ago, although in German: "If you don't 
> know what you're talking about, just shut the hell up."

Actually, I know *exactly* what I am talking about. If you read
this post and my last one very carefully, you'll find the very
moderate statements I made quite accurate.

I should say more about claims that many passages from "Ulysses"
are gibberish. It's possible, but doubtful.  In fact, you probably have
a far better sense of how possible than most of us.  The Question:

       Suppose that we did produce a page or so of gibberish using
       a sophisticated computer program. The program generates
       prose that is syntactically correct, of course, but also uses the
       same vocabulary items as some given extant passage of Ulysses.
       If this page of true mindlessness had been substituted for one of
       the pages of the most "difficult" part of Ulysses (or Finnegan's
       Wake), would anyone be the wiser?  After all, such a passage,
       if unique or relatively infrequent, could be understood as humor.

But to say that a work like Ulysses---highly acclaimed by thousands of
people who aren't crazy and who themselves exhibit uncommon skill---
is rubbish or gibberish is obviously false. Although I personally do not
appreciate Wagner nor Joyce, it's clear that they were geniuses in their
own way, every bit as much as Einstein was in his.

Lee