Have you read Ulysses?

[ValentineGreen]

Or War & Peace?
I read Ulysses a few years ago but since then I've read a lot about it & now feel like I would like to reread it..

Just wondering if many others have read it?

I like JA. I like that she understands and can portray character; she understands and can portray social conventions and constrictions. I like her humour.

I find stream-of-consciousness boring and a long-winded pointlessness. It is word-count rather than interest or ideas. I live in hope that it will eventually be seen as 'of its time' and fall out of favour.

@Maireas I totally agree with you re: continuous stream of consciousness. It's difficult for us to experience just how groundbreaking this was when it was written and published in 1922.

I read a great description that Ulysses was the first novel concerned with the act of thinking as its central theme.

And we still see and feel the ramifications of this today all the time, it was so hugely influential.

I was idly thinking on a train journey recently that I would love to see Lenny Abrahamson tackle a film of Ulysses as he excels at finding ways to reveal interior emotional scapes etc.

@senua I argue that Joyce was a master at portraying character, revealing social conventions (and binds) and humour is the corner stone of Ulysses.

And I utterly disagree that the continuous stream of consciousness is 'word-count' and devoid of interest or ideas - it is teeming with ideas, ideas layered and heaped upon each other so dense it would take multiple readings to even begin to tease them out.....

Haven't read either. Had to read another James Joyce book at school and I could barely get through any of it as it was so boring/difficult to read. But maybe I am just not that smart/cultured!

Loved Moby Dick. No to Ulysses though. Gave up about 20 pages in.

Same for me with Jane Austen and bonnet sagas 😉

And I utterly disagree that the continuous stream of consciousness is 'word-count' and devoid of interest or ideas - it is teeming with ideas, ideas layered and heaped upon each other so dense it would take multiple readings to even begin to tease them out.....
But so many people are saying that it is impenetrable and unreadable. What's the point in a book like that?
Don't get me wrong: I don't take to fluffy chick-lit and love a deep-and-meaningful book. But something that is such a shaggy-dog story that the message gets lost along the way? - that's not my thing.

@ValentineGreen - absolutely, I couldn't agree more. It's so compelling, I was just drawn in by the words.
I have never heard of Lenny Abrahamson, but I'd love to see anyone tackle it!

Nope. Ditto Remembrance of time past, after reading a biography of marcel proust at 14. I was a really weird child looking back, as I would have no interest in that now!

I have read both, and Anna K twice, but a really long time since I have read either (at least 20 years?).

@senua it is a book that requires some work but I think in truth large parts of it are totally readable without requiring research and other parts do need some additional info.

Shakespeare is similar, not everyone can pick up a play and understand it fully without exploring some of the theme, evolving use of language etc.

I think significantly more of Ulysses would have been immediately accessible to readers 100 years ago as it references people and events from that time.

We have a bit of a double whammy in that we are no longer as familiar with historical events that would have been in common circulation then, along with businesses etc . Certain common phrases / use of language has also changed in 100 years. Plus the political landscape is very alien to modern day Dublin, which in 1904 (when U is set) was a stagnant and strangled outpost of the British Empire. Etc etc

Reading it (and googling / using notes ) really open it up in ways I never imagined. Reading it without this is, to me, the same as expecting to understand Shakespeare with zero preparation. Perhaps others are FAR better at this than I am but I would expect to not 'get' a huge amount of the nuances and meanings.

Yes to both, though did have the same penguin modern classics Ulysses for 30 years before actually reading it!

Tolstoy is obviously the much easier read, both W&P and Anna Karenin aren't difficult, just long, read them both many times now and still love them.

I did find the middle section of Ulysses difficult/dull and for a few hundred pages ( especially the Q&A bit) I just forced myself to do 30 pages a day.

It is still I think the best book I've read, if not necessarily my favourite because it is so large and so human and so inventive.

You can't really compare the two, except as 'great books' because they are so different but they are both like eating a fabulous meal in great company which both satisfies you and leaves you wanting more.

@DiDonk - the fabulous meal comparison is very apt!

Reading it (and googling / using notes ) really open it up in ways I never imagined. Reading it without this is, to me, the same as expecting to understand Shakespeare with zero preparation.
I disagree. The reason why Shakespeare continues to be popular is because much of it is timeless and universal. Background reading will improve the understanding of subtleties but it stands on its own merit.
Ulysses is just (to quote PP above) difficult and dull, IMO. There is not enough to pique the interest to try to get past that. There are plenty other, better books in the world to be read.

Well, @senua , I would argue strongly that it's not difficult, and certainly not dull, but of course tastes vary.

Yes to both. Ulysses was a bloody slog. I only didn’t give up because I’m stubborn.
Also yes to War and Peace. Which actually as long as you have a good translation is very readable! Just long!

I've read War and Peace (twice) and I'm currently on my second reading of Anna Karenina. War and Peace is in my top 10 favourite books of all time. Ulysses, though, I've never attempted!

Read and love Tolstoy, but tend to keep a thumb in the cast of characters list as the names can get confusing. I love those big overblown historical novels.

Ulysses has defeated me a couple of times but this thread is prompting me to have another go. Similarly Catch 22. I know it’s a masterpiece and I understand the spiralling nature of the narrative but I just can’t get through it.

@senua without coming across as too argumentative here, I would argue that for many people, without it being on a school course, would find Shakespeare difficult, similarly John Donne etc.

@Maireas I sometimes think that Ulysses suffers more from it's reputation for difficulty than it actually being that difficult?

@Ratonastick - join our (soon to be set up) reading group for Ulysses!!

Can I join? Big Joyce fan here but also now have mangled brain due to watching films on t’internet.

Irish writers are just phenomenal imv. Such a heritage.

Also, why wasn’t Joyce ever depicted in Midnight in Paris when they show Gertrude Stein? 🤔🧐

I agree, @ValentineGreen - I only read Ulysses for the first time recently, prepared for it to be difficult, but I think that's an unfair reputation. It was certainly one of the most compelling books I've ever read.
I agree about Shakespeare. Timeliss, but you need keys to unlock some of the points.

It was on my degree syllabus. I never read it (couldn’t bring myself to plough through it!), instead I read a synopsis and various critical pieces about it, wrote an essay on it and got a First life is too short to read it even when you were meant to

That should read timeless, sorry.

I would have thought you had plenty of time as a student to read a set book? 🤔

Finnegan’s Wake is the real tough one, imv.

Portrait was always my favourite