James Joyce's Ulysses
The Modern Library considers Ulysses to be the greatest English language novel of the 20th century. A bold claim for a book that’s always had a whiff of the emperor’s new clothes about it. It’s the sort of book you’ll find used as a doorstop in hipster flats, as though to say “I’m so intellectually above this book that I’m contemptuous of it.”

It’s not hard to see why so many people hold this opinion. For those who get past the first chapter, this review echoes a common experience:

www.dougshaw.com/Reviews/review1.html

One can emphasise with Doug’s anger at the intellectual snobbery of it all, the idea that if you don’t “get” Ulysses then you’re clearly a dolt.

Believing that to read Ulysses was to confirm one’s intellectual superiority, I gamefully ploughed through it, usually getting to the end of a chapter before having any idea what was going on then, frustrated, returning to the chapter’s start to re-read it in a newly enlightened state. This was not fun.

But there were glimpses of brilliance within those chapters, the feeling that if only I could get under the surface of the text I was going to be treated to something glorious. So I embraced my inner dolt, cast away my shame and started again using a study guide. You see, the problem with Ulysses is that James Joyce made it deliberately impenetrable. He puts you inside a character’s head without giving you any prior knowledge of the character, as though you are an Irish Sam Beckett, Quantum Leaping back to the plot. James Joyce wanted his book to be argued over, he wanted it to be read more than once, he wanted the humour to be stumbled upon by chance.

So, if I was Sam Beckett, a study guide was my Ziggy. Once I understood the context, how the plot beautifully and wittily mirrored Homer’s Odessey, I actually gasped at its brilliance. The word “genius” is bandied around very commonly these days but it truly applies to this piece of work. Yes, you have to work at it but the pleasure you’ll get from this book is overwhelming.

There’s no excuse not to give it a try. It’s free via the Gutenberg project and there’s a study guide on sparknotes. Go on.
( blindmelon, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 15:17, 12 replies)

I think it might be like marriage.
I'd really like to give it another go but I'm afraid it'll be just the same.
( Infidel , shit and wrong, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 15:31, closed)

Wouldn't it be easier to read the Odessey?
Reading should be a pleasure, not a chore, thus I can't see me ever going back to Ulysses.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 15:34, closed)

Literature is ok,
but I'd rather read a good book.
( The Awful Puppy Bakery is still bored, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 15:56, closed)

www.b3ta.com/questions/books2012/post1489975/
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 16:08, closed)

It's shit.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 16:21, closed)

AND he fucked your sister.

( Amorous Badger NAKED BEA ARTHUR PHOTOS 4U, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 19:38, closed)

Lucky bitch.

( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 19:59, closed)

I disagree
It should stand on its own without readers having to seek help from a study guide. No novel should be so difficult to read that it needs to be explained. It shouldn't be necessary and only makes it seem that the author is saying "look, aren't I clever?"
(BearWithLittleBrain, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 16:49, closed)

I don't really think Joyce needed to say "look, aren't I clever".

( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 16:52, closed)

Isn't that the point?

( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 17:07, closed)

I dunno.
I suspect the point was to write a good book and expand on some of the themes from the Dubliners. But ... you know ... I'm probably being terribly old-fashioned or sutin.
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 19:37, closed)

I'd expect an Irish Sam Beckett to be one of the people most likely to get through 'Ulysses' without a guide.

( Pig Bodine., Wed 11 Jan 2012, 23:19, closed)