6 ms·

What people often forget about classical books: They were written to be enjoyed. That's true even for Finnegan's Wake although it requires a special kind of per

What people often forget about classical books: They were written to be enjoyed. That's true even for Finnegan's Wake although it requires a special kind of person to enjoy it.

okket 8y ago
Nitpick: His book is titled correctly "Finnegans Wake", not "Finnegan's Wake".
- rumcajz 8y ago
  Oops!
fergie 8y ago
Joyce's books are, in a real sense, "unreadable", and thats to some degree what the attraction is.
- justonepost 8y ago
  Unreadable, but very very listenable. These books are amazing on audio tape and fantastic to listen to when going on hikes or runs or whatever. I find there is a very pleasant atmospheric lyricism to Joyce's work that paints a very particular picture of Dublin that is quite fascinating and enjoyable. Art sometimes is best absorbed rather than understood. Great art can reveal when pressed, but I usually only do that randomly to ensure that there is substance there, and there usually is.
  - tracyshaun 8y ago
    Yes. I only read Finnegans Wake by reading it aloud to myself. I can hear a lot more of the puns and word enjambnents auditorally than I can see them visually. Having said that, I am still reading the book only a few pages at a time every other week or so. I’m 25 years in and not even close to being done. I’m ok with that.
    - mordechai9000 8y ago
      I think (for me at least) it's best approached as a kind of wild, surreal poetry with mythological themes and scope. I've never read it end to end, and I probably never will, but there are passages I have memorized just from rereading them so many times.
- tomgp 8y ago
  huh? In a very real sense I read Dubliners last month.
  - stult 8y ago
    That is by far his most readable work. And his earliest. He became steadily more impenetrable over time.
    - fergie 8y ago
      TIL- will check it out
  - josephjrobison 8y ago
    I love Dubliners and reread it all the time. Shows what Joyce could have produced if he stayed in that style, but then again he may not have become Joyce.
pupser 8y ago
I wonder how you enjoy 200 pages of no punctuation or coherence (Ulysses)? It takes a special kind of person to enjoy this sort of thing... or some hipsters who want to show off.
- rumcajz 8y ago
  It requires a person that loves to solve riddles. Think of a crossword aficionado escalated to the next level.
  - pupser 8y ago
    But maybe there's no riddle after all... just Joyce being a dick. This is my preferred theory. The guy was a dick or just mocking the academics - nothing more, nothing less. Edit / To clarify: I know about art and people's preferences. I am not English/Irish, am no expert in Shakespeares' works or "speak" fluent Latin, so there will be things I won't understand without some (sometimes substantial) effort on my part (reading Ulysses) - I know that. I am also capable to enjoy unconventional styles and writing (like Naked Lunch, for example - no comparison, just an example). With Joyce, however, I just can't shake the feeling the guy was just showing-off and making fun of the people who later try to convince others and/or themselves that they "got it". But to each their own.
    - rumcajz 8y ago
      I can't tell about Finnegan's Wake. I am not a native English speaker and that kind of prevents me reading it. I've enjoyed Ulysses though. Even on the most simple level, you can, for example, read the book with a clock and a map of Dublin and follow what's happening in real time (the reading time seems to match the time described in the book). Anyway, my point was that art is, essentially, to be enjoyed. I've enjoyed it. Great. You didn't. Good as well. What's weird though is the academics analyzing books nine-to-five, to put food on the table.
      - sdenton4 8y ago
        (To be sure, I am a native english speaker, and feel that not being Joyce prevents me from reading Finnegans Wake.)
lmm 8y ago
The article seems to me to claim otherwise: > his life was driven by his one-eyed obsession to fulfil his destiny > The method did not please Joyce very much because he considered it not imaginative enough, but it was the only way he could work. What if Joyce wrote not to be enjoyed but to gain a literary reputation? (You could claim that the literary establishment favours books its members enjoy, but I think that's only true if you define "enjoy" in a way that removes all meaning)
- twoodfin 8y ago
  I think even the most ardent critic of the Wake would acknowledge that it’s full of delightful linguistic somersaults. Joyce had a talent for producing prose that can be enjoyable to read without being fully comprehended—the question is whether the level of effort Joyce required to achieve even limited comprehension is adequately rewarded.
lisper 8y ago
> it requires a special kind of person to enjoy it. I have never been able to get through even a few paragraphs of Joyce without feeling the need to throw the book down and scream WTBF? I guess I'm not a special kind of person.

What people often forget about classical books: They were written to be enjoyed. That's true even for Finnegan's Wake although it requires a special kind of person to enjoy it.

okket 8y ago

Nitpick: His book is titled correctly "Finnegans Wake", not "Finnegan's Wake".

rumcajz 8y ago
Oops!

fergie 8y ago

Joyce's books are, in a real sense, "unreadable", and thats to some degree what the attraction is.

justonepost 8y ago
Unreadable, but very very listenable. These books are amazing on audio tape and fantastic to listen to when going on hikes or runs or whatever. I find there is a very pleasant atmospheric lyricism to Joyce's work that paints a very particular picture of Dublin that is quite fascinating and enjoyable. Art sometimes is best absorbed rather than understood. Great art can reveal when pressed, but I usually only do that randomly to ensure that there is substance there, and there usually is.
- tracyshaun 8y ago
  Yes. I only read Finnegans Wake by reading it aloud to myself. I can hear a lot more of the puns and word enjambnents auditorally than I can see them visually. Having said that, I am still reading the book only a few pages at a time every other week or so. I’m 25 years in and not even close to being done. I’m ok with that.
  - mordechai9000 8y ago
    I think (for me at least) it's best approached as a kind of wild, surreal poetry with mythological themes and scope. I've never read it end to end, and I probably never will, but there are passages I have memorized just from rereading them so many times.
tomgp 8y ago
huh? In a very real sense I read Dubliners last month.
- stult 8y ago
  That is by far his most readable work. And his earliest. He became steadily more impenetrable over time.
  - fergie 8y ago
    TIL- will check it out
- josephjrobison 8y ago
  I love Dubliners and reread it all the time. Shows what Joyce could have produced if he stayed in that style, but then again he may not have become Joyce.

pupser 8y ago

I wonder how you enjoy 200 pages of no punctuation or coherence (Ulysses)? It takes a special kind of person to enjoy this sort of thing... or some hipsters who want to show off.

rumcajz 8y ago
It requires a person that loves to solve riddles. Think of a crossword aficionado escalated to the next level.
- pupser 8y ago
  But maybe there's no riddle after all... just Joyce being a dick. This is my preferred theory. The guy was a dick or just mocking the academics - nothing more, nothing less. Edit / To clarify: I know about art and people's preferences. I am not English/Irish, am no expert in Shakespeares' works or "speak" fluent Latin, so there will be things I won't understand without some (sometimes substantial) effort on my part (reading Ulysses) - I know that. I am also capable to enjoy unconventional styles and writing (like Naked Lunch, for example - no comparison, just an example). With Joyce, however, I just can't shake the feeling the guy was just showing-off and making fun of the people who later try to convince others and/or themselves that they "got it". But to each their own.
  - rumcajz 8y ago
    I can't tell about Finnegan's Wake. I am not a native English speaker and that kind of prevents me reading it. I've enjoyed Ulysses though. Even on the most simple level, you can, for example, read the book with a clock and a map of Dublin and follow what's happening in real time (the reading time seems to match the time described in the book). Anyway, my point was that art is, essentially, to be enjoyed. I've enjoyed it. Great. You didn't. Good as well. What's weird though is the academics analyzing books nine-to-five, to put food on the table.
    - sdenton4 8y ago
      (To be sure, I am a native english speaker, and feel that not being Joyce prevents me from reading Finnegans Wake.)

lmm 8y ago

The article seems to me to claim otherwise: > his life was driven by his one-eyed obsession to fulfil his destiny > The method did not please Joyce very much because he considered it not imaginative enough, but it was the only way he could work. What if Joyce wrote not to be enjoyed but to gain a literary reputation? (You could claim that the literary establishment favours books its members enjoy, but I think that's only true if you define "enjoy" in a way that removes all meaning)

twoodfin 8y ago
I think even the most ardent critic of the Wake would acknowledge that it’s full of delightful linguistic somersaults. Joyce had a talent for producing prose that can be enjoyable to read without being fully comprehended—the question is whether the level of effort Joyce required to achieve even limited comprehension is adequately rewarded.

lisper 8y ago

> it requires a special kind of person to enjoy it. I have never been able to get through even a few paragraphs of Joyce without feeling the need to throw the book down and scream WTBF? I guess I'm not a special kind of person.