Classics and the Western Canon discussion

This is a tough part of the book, one of the toughest in my opinion, and it's where many people fall off the raft. If it gets to be too much, just read it for the beauty of the language. Listen to the RTE performance, and understand that a lot of what Joyce does here is wordplay. It isn't meaningless gibberish, as it sometimes sounds, but it is exceedingly difficult to decode.

(My apologies for the length, but I'm guessing this episode will need a little more fleshing out than the rest.)

Regarding this episode, Joyce said to his friend Frank Budgen that "Change is the theme. Everything changes -- sea, sky, man, animals. The words change too." When Budgen expressed surprise at the word "almosting," Joyce said, "Yes...parts of speech change too. Adverb becomes verb."


Overall relation to the Odyssey: Telemachus has traveled to Sparta to inquire of Menelaus the whereabouts of Odysseus. Menelaus tells Telemachus how he had to trap Proteus, the Old Man of the Sea, to learn of the fate of his own companions.

"First he turned into a great bearded lion, and then to a serpent, then to a leopard, then to a great boar, and he turned into fluid water, to a tree with towering branches, but we held stiffly on to him with enduring spirit." (Lattimore, Book 4)

Stephen walks along Sandymount Strand, first thinking about how his perception (visible and audible) relates to the real world. First he walks along, observing the seaspawn and seawrack via the “ineluctable modality of the visible.” Then he closes his eyes to observe via the “ineluctable modality of the audible” and hears the crik crack of his stick and his shoes on the sand. Finally he opens his eyes: “See now. There all the time without you: and ever shall be, world without end.”

Next he observes two women coming down to the beach. He imagines they are midwives and that one of them is carrying a misbirth in her bag. His thoughts trail to an image of navel cords as a network, all linking back to Adam and Eve, which leads to thoughts of his own conception and birth: his mother a “ghostwoman” and his father a merely physical presence.

Stephen is near his aunt and uncle’s house, the Gouldings, and he thinks about visiting, imagining how he would be received. (These are relatives on his mother’s side, who his father Simon Dedalus regards with derision.) He decides against it. “Houses of decay, mine, his and all.”

His thoughts drift to his abandoned vocation to the priesthood until he turns toward the Pigeonhouse generating station. The word “pigeon” conjures up a book -- La Vie de Jesus by Leo Taxil, in which Joseph asks Mary “who has put you in this wretched condition” and to which she responds “it’s the pigeon, Joseph.” This he relates back to Mulligan’s “Ballad of Joking Jesus” : “my mother’s a Jew, my father’s a bird.” Stephen lent the Taxil book to the son of Kevin Egan, an Irish nationalist exiled in Paris. His thoughts turn to nationalism and the plight of exile.

He looks back south toward the Martello Tower and affirms to himself that he will not return to the panthersahib (Haines) and the pointer (Mulligan). He sits down and observes the corpse of a dog on the beach, (a dogsbody.) Meanwhile two cocklepickers come up the beach with a living dog (pointer) who frightens Stephen briefly (Stephen is afraid of dogs and thunder, among other things).

Joyce’s "protean" description of the dog is most obvious here as the dog morphs into other animals:

“Looking for something lost in a past life. Suddenly he made off like a bounding hare, ears flung back, chasing the shadow of a lowskimming gull. The man’s shrieked whistle struck his limp ears. He turned, bounded back, came nearer, trotted on twinkling shanks. On a field tenney a buck, trippant, proper, unattired. At the lacefringe of the tide he halted with stiff forehooves, seaward pointed ears…”

The pointer sniffs at the dead dog and returns to the cocklepickers, who are gypsies (Egyptians). According to Nabokov, the poem that Stephen makes up is composed of “rogue’s lingo, rogue words, gypsy talk" and apparently there is a "special dictionary" that Joyce used (and Nabokov locates) to make up the poem.

The dog reminds Stephen of the dream he was having when he was awakened by Haines’s panther nightmare: He was being led down a street of harlots by a man holding a melon against his face. (This dream and its elements -- Haroun al Raschid, the street of harlots, and the melon man -- are important and will crop up again.)

Stephen observes his own shadow and his thoughts turn back again to the relation of perceptions to reality, subjective idealism and George Berkeley (the good bishop of Cloyne), which leads to an image of him unveiling a woman and some thoughts on sin.

Stephen feels the call of nature and urinates on the rocks. This must be the most poetic description of a man's urination in all of English literature. (I could be wrong. Maybe there's a contest for this somewhere.)

At last, he muses on the news heard earlier of the man who has drowned, imagining the corpse washing up on the shore. He gathers up his stick and his hat and wanders off to "evening lands."

Here's a look at Sandymount Strand as it exists today, with a brief overview of the episode given by Robert Nicholson, the curator of the James Joyce Museum (currently housed in the Martello tower where Joyce briefly lived and where the Telemachus episode takes place.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YITCa...

Patrice wrote: "One question: where is his father?
"

We'll see Simon Dedalus in episode 6, Hades, next week.

Thomas wrote: "Stephen feels the call of nature and urinates on the rocks. This must be the most poetic description of a man's urination in all of English literature. (I could be wrong. Maybe there's a contest for this somewhere.) ..."

Lol! I definitely have to agree with you about the poetry. I had to read this section 3 times to figure out what was going on (and 2 of those times I used the summary from shmoop.com).

Although, the words used in this section, and other parts of the episode, reminded me of the poem Jabberwocky and it's made up words in order to mimic sounds or create imagery.

Patrice wrote: "Remove the made up words and isn't this the way everyone thinks? Images and associations, connected and unconnected spring to mind instantly. I'm always amazed by how an object or a sound or a sm..."

Excellent point, Patrice! I had a similar thought as I was walking to the subway station the day after I read episode three. Even the way that there appears to be no separation between internal thoughts and external stimuli seems to mimic our own natural way of thinking.

I guess I'm hanging onto more of the raft than I had thought! After reading Thomas' summary, I think I understood a lot more of what was going on than I gave myself credit for (not to say that I actually picked up on any references that may have gone over my head, though). I did read chapter 3 in one sitting and didn't get too caught up on all the weird words or fragments, but instead read it right through. I think in this way I was able to let the imagery wash over me. Now, to go back and reread and try to pick out more focused bits.

Thomas - I appreciate your info on The Old Man of the Sea and how he is always changing, and how this relates to the language of the chapter. That is pretty cool. I also watched the Robert Nicholson video and could appreciate how now (view spoiler)[Stephen will "slip out of our hands" for a few chapters (hide spoiler)].

I'm reading along with the performance (https://archive.org/details/Ulysses-A...) and I'm halfway through chapter 3. Yes, the irritating chapter 3. The performance can't even save it. As we grow and learn to write, we develop filters. Not every crunching step needs to be described in detail. Unless there's a surprise at the end, woolgathering does not need to be expressed. Dear god, I have suitcases of writing like this and I'm not published FOR A REASON.

I signed up for this book as a challenge. I don't normally care for fiction; I like nonfiction. Maybe this just isn't a book for me.

Very helpful summary, Thomas.

I am finding that as I go back to look up a small point in the text, I constantly get diverted by other points which lead me to ... not quite as disheveled a progress as Stephen's in this episode, but not completely unlike, either.

However, already the book is raising a question I feel the need to keep my eyes open for. That is, what is the point of the book? I understand completely Joyce's comment about keeping the professors busy for a lifetime, and I'm guessing that he had a lot of fun sticking in all these obscure references -- I can see him sitting at his desk chuckling away saying to himself "let them figure THAT one out!"

But is there more here than clever writing and puzzles? In this episode, for example, I see us following (on and off for me) Stephen's train of thought, but at the end of the episode, I ask myself what have we learned, how are we progressing, where are we progressing to, and I don't have an answer. Of course it's very early days yet, so it may all become clear. But what I find interesting (and a bit disturbing) is that all the references we've been pointed to talk the structure of the book and the hidden meanings in each episode, but none of them, that I've seen, talk about what the book is about; how reading it makes us better people, more educated readers. I have a suspicion that perhaps it's like one of those role playing computer games where you progress through layer after layer, solving hidden puzzles and overcoming obstacles, but when the game is over, that's all there was to it.

Is Ulysses just that, a journey but no destination. As I say, way too early to make that judgment, but it's a question in my mind. I expect that Thomas and Charles, and perhaps others here, have found their own answers to the question, and maybe at the end we'll all share the answers we've found, if any. Maybe we'll come up with opinions as to whether there's a "there" there in the end.

Not that I intend this to be discouraging. If the book is all there is, if it's all journey and no destination, well, it will still be an interesting journey, and I couldn't ask for a better set of companions to share it with than those here.

Everyman wrote: "That is, what is the point of the book?"

Yes, it is far too early days, and to even begin to answer this question would require a massive spoiler. Rest assured on one point, that what it's about does not depend on the myriad references, allusions, allegories, and whatnot we have been talking about. One thing I might safely say: it's a celebration.

There's a related question about books having a point. We are accustomed, have been accustomed probably since the origins of the novel, to be given at least hints and sometimes outright announcements of what the point is. Without touching the difficult question of a book's having a point, and what a point might be, we are not accustomed to having to wait on this point. :-> But here, as with so many things in life which Joyce is eager to capture in the the least mediated way, the results of an action, its interpretation and significance, emerge or accumulate gradually, sometimes after many encounters. Being asked to wait might be uncomfortable. Understandably. I myself find that the reading matter is a lot better than in the dentist's office.

--oh, and as an aside, I am Spouse of Thomas. So he got home from work and had to listen to me rant for an hour.

Yes, Patrice, the archaeologist. Also an out-of-work librarian. But I like science. And Thomas likes literature. Christmas is an interesting time at our house.

Happily, Thomas explains things in a way that I can understand, and this is no exception. I'm going to keep at it, even if I feel like going back in time, grabbing Joyce, and violently shaking him till his brains fall out of his ears.

And it's nice to meet you!

Everyman wrote: "...That is, what is the point of the book? ..."

So what is the point of any book, beyond a deeper understanding/awareness of what it is to be human on this planet earth in this grand universe? Sure, we can posit more specific "points" for specific books. But is that criteria enough or do we need something "more"?

Everyman wrote: "But is there more here than clever writing and puzzles? In this episode, for example, I see us following (on and off for me) Stephen's train of thought, but at the end of the episode, I ask myself what have we learned, how are we progressing, where are we progressing to, and I don't have an answer."

Joyce's method in Ulysses is similar to that of pointillism in painting. It's nearly impossible to see what the big picture is until the reader has a little distance. The trouble is that the reader can't step back until she has digested all the literary points, which means reading to the end and looking back. Making this more difficult is the fact that Ulysses is a BIG picture, and the fact that Joyce is both an extremely erudite and elliptical writer. He almost always prefers suggestion to statement, and he was not willing to compromise his artistic principles to make easier reading. Just as Stephen was not willing to compromise his. As Mulligan says: "O, an impossible person!"

Nancy wrote: "--oh, and as an aside, I am Spouse of Thomas. So he got home from work and had to listen to me rant for an hour."

It must be very interesting to be married to him. And, of course, vice versa. Are you also a Johnnie?

I think I did find a reason why I love this book and that there is a reason for reading it. Not everybody might agree with it, but more important is that I found a reason for myself. Somehow this happened last spring after finishing the novel for the second time. I also find the ending really beautiful, one of my favourites definitely. That is also a very subjective comment, so don't come after me if you don't find the ending special at all. :)

And a weird thing is that I'm really liking this chapter this time around. It must be that I'm finally reading it in English and without any footnotes. Now it's pure poetry on paper and not an analytical dissection of every word.

Tommi wrote: "Somehow this happened last spring after finishing the novel for the second time. I also find the ending really beautiful, one of my favourites definitely."

(view spoiler)[ To my mind the final episode is one of the greatest statements of adult love ever penned. (hide spoiler)]

Everyman wrote: "Nancy wrote: "--oh, and as an aside, I am Spouse of Thomas. So he got home from work and had to listen to me rant for an hour."

It must be very interesting to be married to him. And, of course, v..."

No, not a Johnnie. He talked me into going to college (University of Nevada, Las Vegas) when I was 43, but I focused on anthropology and left English classes to what I had to take to graduate. I like scientific papers on archaeology; you can't get much further from Joyce than that. --unless you're talking Barbara Cartland.

This morning, it comes to me that I love this book.

So "what's the point of the book?" asks Everyman....... My take is that the point is not out there on the page, but in the personal journey the reading inspires, guides, forces, goads the reader to take. Like Daedalus we could be caught in the labyrinth of our own making or use our creativity and Stephen's journey to fly. I think that is the purpose of art and literature--to liberate the personal creativity of the reader/viewer.

Patrice wrote: "Susan! That is beautiful! Perfect!

That scene where he had to decide whether or not to kneel inspired more analysis of my own principles and emotions than anything I've read in a long, long time..."
I'm still questioning whether Stephen's non-kneeling was a conscious decision at all. I think he was dealing unconsciously with mother, death, loss, identity..so the the internal dialog should I kneel never took place. It's what he did in the moment and I prefer to withhold judgement.

So who's going to take a shot at contransmagnificandjewBANG--God is a noise in the street--tantiality! Maybe the explanation is right in the middle of the word. Nothing more to be said!???

Tommi wrote: "I also find the ending really beautiful, one of my favourites definitely. That is also a very subjective comment, so don't come after me if you don't find the ending special at all. :) "

I went out and purchased a new book, it is a 2013 Vintage edition. Of course I turned the book over to read the back figuring it would be a synopsis of the book, but instead it was a passage that was so beautiful I read it over and over, and then only to discover that it's very last few lines of the book. So, although I don't know the ending exactly, I'm looking forward to actually getting to the end to read those last lines again and in context.

Adelle wrote: "This morning, it comes to me that I love this book."

Hooray! Ay! Whrrwhee!

I think it's perfect for someone who reads as closely as you do.

@ Susan: I actually kept a little list of the funniest words I came across in this episode.

Shellcocoacoloured
Loudlatinlaughing
Horsenostrilled
Basiliskeyed
Brightwindbridled
Contransmagnificandjewbangtantiality
Almosting

No wonder that philology is mentioned as the art of this chapter in the Gilbert schema. Yet I suppose the craziest invention of Joyce’s appears in Finnegans Wake: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bababad...

Susan wrote: "So who's going to take a shot at contransmagnificandjewBANG--God is a noise in the street--tantiality! Maybe the explanation is right in the middle of the word. Nothing more to be said!???"

Your explanation is right, I think. In part it's a mashup of Catholic theology that Stephen has been mulling over:

Consubstantiality, the doctrine that God, the Son, and and the Holy Spirit are one. Stephen also refers to his "consubstantial father" in mocking terms. (Arius denied this and was declared a heretic.)

Transubstantiation, the doctrine that the bread and wine become the body of Christ during the sacrament of the Eucharist.

The Magnificat, the Song of Mary (the mother figure must show up)

The "consubstantiality of the father" is a concern on more than just a theological level. Stephen does not get along well with his own father, and after his mother's death his whole family is in shambles. So this is something that will occupy Stephen throughout the book.

Thomas wrote: "Susan wrote: "So who's going to take a shot at contransmagnificandjewBANG--God is a noise in the street--tantiality! Maybe the explanation is right in the middle of the word. Nothing more to be sai..."

so con and trans tantiality (minus the sub)Catholic doctrine split up with a BANG. The "con" is man's pathway to the divine through Christ. What breaks up this happy transcendence is "God is a noise in the street"--the divine in all things. I think this might be Stephen's quest since he is rejecting the Catholic path. I don't get the magnificandjew part at all.

Linda wrote: "I went out and purchased a new book, it is a 2013 Vintage edition. Of course I turned the book over to read the back figuring it would be a synopsis of the book, but instead it was a passage that was so beautiful I read it over and over, and then only to discover that it's very last few lines of the book."

I think I can say without spoiling anything, as regards the nature and point of the book, that the last word is "yes".

Charles wrote: "I think I can say without spoiling anything, as regards the nature and point of the book, that the last word is "yes"."

:)

My son was pointing out the cover of the book and wondering why the letters Y, E, and S were highlighted in such a way to spell out YES from the title. I told him I didn't know, but that I would be reading to find out.

James Joyce sheds words like a dog sheds fleas.

He drops them right and left,
'Tis true, :-)
Yet works quite hard--I think--
To find the words of perfect hue.

Susan wrote: "so con and trans tantiality (minus the sub)Catholic doctrine split up with a BANG. The "con" is man's pathway to the divine through Christ. What breaks up this happy transcendence is "God is a noise in the street"--the divine in all things. I think this might be Stephen's quest since he is rejecting the Catholic path. I don't get the magnificandjew part at all. "

Here's my take on it: Magnifica is a reference to the magnificat, which is about Mary, the mother of Jesus. So we have the consubstantiality of God and Jesus, plus the transsubstantiality of the Eucharist, plus Mary, the mother of Jesus. The whole family, and of course they were Jews. (Maybe Stephen emphasizes this because of his conversation with Deasy.) But what breaks it up with a bang is Arius, who maintained that Jesus was not consubstantial with the Father. That bang is Arius "warring his life long on" it.

I'm not totally satisfied with that, but maybe it's a start...

Nancy wrote: "James Joyce sheds words like a dog sheds fleas."

Keep clam and carry on. You'll be off this beach soon enough.

Thomas wrote: "Susan wrote: "so con and trans tantiality (minus the sub)Catholic doctrine split up with a BANG. The "con" is man's pathway to the divine through Christ. What breaks up this happy transcendence is ..."

Do you think it's significant that Bloom is also a jew and somehow part of Stephen's moving on from the bust up of his Catholic faith? Where do you put "God is in the street" in the bust up?

Linda wrote...My son was pointing out the cover of the book and won..."

Who decides how the covers are displayed? My 1966 Vintage Books cover does not have a large Y, E & S, instead a very large U and an elongated L.

Nancy wrote: "James Joyce sheds words like a dog sheds fleas."

LOVE this comment!

So I just finished this chapter, OH MY! I was glad for Thomas's summary and I his point about Joyce's BIG picture & we must digest the small bits first before standing back to see that picture in it's totality. I did feel as if I was slogging through the sand for the most part in trying to follow S.D.'s incredible flight of ideas. There were definite moments of clarity, but most was muddled for me. Listened to the great courses lecture & re-read group's comments. I think I'll re-read now for better understanding. I did find it interesting that after opening his eyes & ears to the world, his first thoughts were of birth & some of his last thoughts were of death certainly encapsulating life's journey!

Susan wrote: "Do you think it's significant that Bloom is also a jew and somehow part of Stephen's moving on from the bust up of his Catholic faith? "

Yes, I think it is. Joyce is foreshadowing a bit here. In the first two episodes we see the anti-semitism of Haines and Deasy, and how Stephen is opposed to this in heart and mind. But this also sets the background for Bloom who has to deal with this bigotry first-hand.

Bloom thinks about these problems in an entirely different way than Stephen, but one of the purposes of these first chapters is to set up the contrast. Bloom and Stephen are both strangers in their own country, but they deal with their circumstances in very different ways.

Maybe what is so frustrating in reading a chapter like this is that although this may be the way we think, it isn't the way we communicate. In a way, Joyce is doing a mashup of two different modes. He's using writing, an established form of communication which, like speech, has certain "rules" that we follow in order to be understood, to express internal thoughts which follow no rules at all.

Reading this chapter was a really interesting exercise for me (I couldn't help thinking of it that way) because one of the courses I teach is all about working with "difficulty" in reading. This chapter is probably a good approximation of what my college freshmen experience when I give them a text so difficult that it's usually taught at the graduate level (the idea being that they can't learn how to work with difficulty if the text is too easy or even manageable). One of the things we talk about is identifying what is causing your reading difficulty because then you can figure out what to do about it. So I made a list of the causes of difficulty for me in this chapter. A big one that comes up over and over again is expectations. If we come into this reading with expectations of plot or linear thought, we won't know what to do with it. Other difficulties included (for me): pronouns without clear antecedents, unfamiliar allusions, foreign vocabulary, resistance to the character, and unexpected word combinations, though I would say these posed the least trouble because that's what poetry is. With a list like that, it's no wonder many readers "fall off the raft," as Thomas put it.

I also found this chapter challenging. However, because I knew that it was going to be difficult, I was not as disturbed when I did not get a lot of meaning out of it. I found myself wondering-do I think like that? Are my perceptions like that? I have to say they are not. I generally think in narrative. When I am focusing, I shut out extra noises. For example, if I was on the beach, I would probably miss out on much of what Stephen heard/felt, because I'd be focused on just the ocean. But, I've always been told I'd be a terrible witness for a crime. I miss so much. But, I'm actually glad I do because this type of torrent of information is crazy distracting.

For me, this was like art where a person "throws" a bunch of paint at a canvas and it drips and becomes this great big blob of colors. I don't really "get it," but I acknowlege it is art.

Nancy and Patrice, I'm so glad you posted those early comments. The whole time I was reading I found myself trying to ascertain which personality disorder Stephen had. Who was the poster who, during our Bleak House read, came up with a clinical diagnosis for Skimpole? I'd like to hear her take on Stephen's mind dump.

I have definitely found this chapter a lot easier this time around. I did more research, listening to the podcasts (which really helped me over the first few hideously complicated paragraphs), got overviews and generally approached it with lots of knowledge backing me up.

And..., I enjoyed it :-)

I am pretty sure I will enjoy this more and more as we go on and it will be a book that I'll come back to over the years.

Well. Time to get packing! See you all in a few days.

Patrice wrote: "Cool! But I have to say, it all looks so ordinary! It was something else in my imagination."

It didn't use to look like that though. The actual beach is now land. So, who knows how it looked in his day. A painting from that era, if you can find one, might be a better way of seeing what it looked like then.

Joyce by Robert Ballagh, University College Dublin

"Ballagh presents Joyce striking a dapper pose with his familiar cane, standing on Sandymount Strand with Howth Head in the background"

Found here.

Patrice- I'm not sure my mind bounces around as much as that when I am engaged in work, reading, viewing, conversing etc or even musing...but BOY when I'm trying to go to sleep. Things ping around in my head, can't seem to turn off various thoughts & the worst is when it is repetitive. Going over & over a conversation or a piece of music. Of course it's said that when there are no other distractions all kinds of things come to the surface and often one can actually problem-solve some sticky issue as we get rid of all the internal noise.

Wendel wrote: "

Joyce by Robert Ballagh, University College Dublin

"Ballagh presents Joyce striking a dapper pose with his familiar cane, standing on Sandymount Strand with Howth Head in the background"

Head in the clouds, his art soon to be consumed by the great mother/father sea of collective consciousness...himself likely consumed likewise if he's stuck there in the sand! And the shape of the canvas!

Found..."

Patrice wrote: " But I was distracted. How to explain that I was thinking of Ulysses? I said nothing."

So glad you are OK, Patrice!! What a scary incident.

You had me laughing at keeping clam about Ulysses to the police, though. :)

Patrice wrote: "Chris wrote: "Patrice- I'm not sure my mind bounces around as much as that when I am engaged in work, reading, viewing, conversing etc or even musing...but BOY when I'm trying to go to sleep. Thin..."

Bet the censors of Ulysses never guessed it's existence might pose a physical danger--only the corruption of the mind as one sits safely in an armchair!!