11–20 of 27 posts
>You may like or you may dislike Ulysses, and you are entitled to express your opinion of its merits or demerits, but you are not entitled to demand that it should be other than it is; This is profound. Replace “Ulysses” with “X” and it holds true for much of the hate spreading today.
I tried reading it in late 2015 and it was just hard! The only thing I remember and find really funny is the dog on the beach peeing on an unsmelt rock!
I tried reading it in late 2015 and it was just hard! The only thing I remember and find really funny is the dog on the beach peeing on an unsmelt rock!
You can try listening to podcasts by Frank Delaney called Re:Joyce. He goes through the book sentence by sentence. Sadly, Frank Delaney died before he could complete the podcast series.
For anyone struggling with Joyce, I recommend Finnegan's Wake. You are guaranteed to find Ulysses easier to read after this.
Reading Ulysses, on the other hand, I know there is a story there, so when I lose the thread I get a bit frustrated. It's an absolutely gorgeous experience, of course, but one riddled with such frustration. I'm not sure if maybe reading an outline of the story first would help, so that I have the general idea in my head before going into it?
Much to learn here for modern music journalists. Instead of inserting their own desires, shallow beliefs and ego into the review, the book is reviewed for what it is, with the artists intention considered and respected. Compare and contrast with this tiresome Guardian review, which leaves you very unclear about the performance but all too sure about what the reviewer likes and wants https://www.theguardian.com/music/…
I won't put words in your mouth but striving for some notion of apolitical art is folly. Especially if it's art by Thom Yorke, surely?