Live data from Hacker News

The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

crimereads.com

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#61

We don't ban books anymore. We ban tweets, or Facebook posts, or other social media contributions. The drive to censor remains.

we do worse than that nowadays, instead of censoring the offending text we censor the person whole

Slightly different. Blasphemers used to be executed back then, now you lose your job, ability to bank, go out in public etc. Slight improvement?

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#62

> Because Ulysses could not be legally published in the United States, it could not be copyrighted I'm struggling to understand that particular statement. Can anyone explain? EDIT: "Copyright exists automatically in an original work of authorship once it is fixed in a tangible medium"[0] If you write out your original thoughts on a piece of paper, that's fixing them in a tangible medium, right? [0] https://www.copyri…

Automatic copyright is a feature of fairly recent copyright law; the law at the time of Ulysses was different. I don’t offhand know if the upthread comment about it be ineligible for US copyright or thr asserted reason is correct, but pointing to a feature of current US copyright law that didn't exist at the time isn't germane to that o e way or the other.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#63
post #3

> Despite Quinn’s persuasive argument—Ulysses was so dense and convoluted that no one could possibly understand it, much less be debauched by it, he argued—a three-judge panel, using the Hicklin test, concluded that the book had the potential to corrupt youth and was therefore obscene. LOL. The kids are too dumb to be corrupted by this book! The best part is that it is true. If you have enough constitution to be able…

If you really want to be corrupted read his letter to his wife, https://allthatsinteresting.com/james-joyce-love-letters-nor...

Wow--I wasen't expecting that.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#64
post #3

> Despite Quinn’s persuasive argument—Ulysses was so dense and convoluted that no one could possibly understand it, much less be debauched by it, he argued—a three-judge panel, using the Hicklin test, concluded that the book had the potential to corrupt youth and was therefore obscene. LOL. The kids are too dumb to be corrupted by this book! The best part is that it is true. If you have enough constitution to be able…

When I was a teenager, I looked for "banned" (none of them actually banned when I grew up in Norway) books, and excitement turned to disappointment most of the time at how outright boring the supposed obscene parts were. I was mostly shocked at how little it used to take to get people worked up.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#65
I've yet to hear a good justification for why there is any accepted legal case for banning any work of fiction for things like "obscenity" in the US given the first amendment, nor other jurisdictions with similar foundational laws. It seems pretty cut and dry

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#66
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to Gravity’s Rainbow and Infinite Jest. I recommend to people to just fight through the first 200 pages and you end up in the flow and things begin to come together. Gravity’s Rainbow in particular is confusing for a long while but when it begins to come together it’s rewarding. Agreed - Finnegan's Wake is impossible. Try the audio version and it’s somehow even more difficult. I was tempted to eat a bag of mu…

It seems like after 100-200 pages of Gravity's Rainbow one of two things can happen: 1. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on anymore or who anybody is. They give up and stop reading. 2. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on anymore or who anybody is. They stop trying to make sense of the book and just read the words. "Sure this guy has a toilet stuck to his foot now, and can prevent b…

I'm definitely category 1 there: couldn't tell where it was going or why (was a blind pickup because little said it was important) and Wikipedia'd a synopsis to see if I was missing out on anything. Didn't seem like it.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#67
post #56
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judge for yourself: Here's "Nausicaa" : http://web.uvic.ca/~mvp1922/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Episo... I personally found that calling this indecent is really pushing it. Maybe because it presented some light erotic ideas in an unexpected medium (a young girls stream of consciousness).

Is this okay to open at work?

Very. I skimmed about halfway through and I guess the closest thing to eroticism that far in was a bit of blushing and some racy ankle descriptions.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#68
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to Gravity’s Rainbow and Infinite Jest. I recommend to people to just fight through the first 200 pages and you end up in the flow and things begin to come together. Gravity’s Rainbow in particular is confusing for a long while but when it begins to come together it’s rewarding. Agreed - Finnegan's Wake is impossible. Try the audio version and it’s somehow even more difficult. I was tempted to eat a bag of mu…

Your advice is spot on. For me it was 100 pages. It was decades ago, but I still remember being puzzled, feeling like I didn’t know what was happening, but being pulled along by the unique quality of the prose. 100 pages in, the lightbulb went on. It’s as if the book teaches you how to read it.

Yeah it’s almost like magic. I remember feeling pretty confused and then suddenly there’s a chapter with an adenoid walking around and it’s like wtf?! But because the prose was so good and there were enough nuggets tugging you along I stool with it. And then right as it feels the entire endeavor is pointless it comes into focus and you get a grip on it.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#69
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like after 100-200 pages of Gravity's Rainbow one of two things can happen: 1. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on anymore or who anybody is. They give up and stop reading. 2. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on anymore or who anybody is. They stop trying to make sense of the book and just read the words. "Sure this guy has a toilet stuck to his foot now, and can prevent b…

I'm definitely category 1 there: couldn't tell where it was going or why (was a blind pickup because little said it was important) and Wikipedia'd a synopsis to see if I was missing out on anything. Didn't seem like it.

I think this is a good summary of the themes explored throughout the book:

https://americanaejournal.hu/vol6no2/lacey

Reading a synopsis of the story sort of misses the point of the book. The plot is pretty limited.

Re: The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses

#70
Ulysses is literary viagra and should be consumed with care. The government acted responsibly in controlling its availability until its side effects on consumers became apparent. With the benefit of hindsight we can see that the strong moral fiber of our society is quite capable of withstanding subversive materials such as this.
Post reply on HN