1 2 3 4 5
Where's Charles when he's needed?

Someone needs me? I must be going bonkers; that or I'm Sally Field.
James Joyce has a single sentence chapter in one of his high-modernist books ( Ulysses or Finnegans Wake ). It goes on for pages.

With no punctuation save the final full stop its a bit hard to tell but Id argue the chapter has two sentences the final one being the one word Yes.
This insightful chapter into the mind of woman goes on for 36 pages in my favourite edition of Ulysses.

Charles Riggs
Thus spake Mickwick:

Where's Charles when he's needed? James Joyce has a single ... or Finnegans Wake ). It goes on for pages.

Molly's soliloquy (odd: I think it is the first time I ever typed or wrote the word) at the end of "Ulysses".

Her soliloquy, yes, but the chapter is entitled Penelope. I'm not a Homer fan, but wasn't she Ulysses's wife as Molly was Bloom's?
But it's replete with meaning, and a glorious piece of writing.

Both in meaning and style Yes.
Without a dodgy semi-colon.

Which the great man rarely used, although he often used the full-blown variety, but not in this chapter of course. Does everyone know that each of the 18 chapters is written in a totally different style? Yet the novel remains one coherent piece, sort of, no matter that a few yahoos find it somewhat incoherent.
And I say that as somebody who is not particularly enamoured of Joyce's work.

Shame on you. And "not particularly enamoured"! Christallmighty, PB, you've got to love it or hate it. Just say which, sans wishywashiness. Me, I love it, but you knew that.
Charles may come along to sing a paean of praise more in keeping with Joyce's place in the divine order. Yes I say yes he will yes.

His place being at the very top of the divine order, he needs no praise from the likes of me.

Charles Riggs
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thus spake Charles Riggs:
... Molly's soliloquy (odd: I think it is the first time I ever typed or wrote the word) at the end of "Ulysses".

Her soliloquy, yes, but the chapter is entitled Penelope. I'm not a Homer fan, but wasn't she Ulysses's wife as Molly was Bloom's?

Yes. Or was it Marge?

Simon R. Hughes
And I say that as somebody who is not particularly enamoured of Joyce's work.

Shame on you. And "not particularly enamoured"! Christallmighty, PB, you've got to love it or hate it. Just say which, sans wishywashiness.

I don't love Joyce's work; I don't hate it. That's how it is.

You want more?
I liked "Portrait"; I liked his short stories. I have not looked at either for some time. With such a wealth of other promising reading material out there, I don't re-read much.
I ploughed through "Ulysses". Some of it was superb prose; other passages did not appeal to me. On balance, I liked it.

I looked at "Finegans Wake" and judged that, for me, the apparent potential for enjoyment would not exceed the apparent difficulty of reading it.
Me, I love it, but you knew that.

Yes, and, guess what? I don't object.
Charles may come along to sing a paean of praise ... the divine order. Yes I say yes he will yes.

His place being at the very top of the divine order, he needs no praise from the likes of me.

Fair comment. Joyce's reputation is unlikely to be greatly affected by your opinion or mine. Some will love his work; some will hate it; many will remain ignorant of it; some, despite your protestations, will know it and neither love nor hate it.
PB
It is possible for people to do something valuable without being able to say anything valuable about it.

I agree. Fuller did a lot useful things. But it's still the longest, least comprehensible sentence ever written and published in English, I reckon.

Mickwick,
the universally concerned intellectual optic of integrity
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
The odd thing is that I can read the entry and think that I am processing it correctly for a bit before I hit the wall.

Same here. Three or four lines down.
Do you think that Fuller knew what he meant to say?

Yes, he probably did. But what he wanted to say probably turned out to be so trivial when put down in black and white that he felt a need to bulk it up a bit and hide its essential triviality behind a smoke-screen of pseudery. This is a very common technique. It is, for example, the only technique necessary for a career as a conceptual artist.
I was given one of his books some years ago, and got to the second page. It's sitting in the (large) pile of books to which I mean to return when I have the time. Like eternity.

A collection of Buckie's writings has sat on my bookshelves for about 25 years. By the looks of it, I must have read it all the way through at some stage but I don't remember doing so.
A quick riffle - crikey! it seems to be written in English. I might give it a go. I find ego-maniacs fascinating, and Buckie was nothing if not an ego-maniac.

Mickwick,
the universally concerned intellectual optic of integrity
That sentence was written by Richard Buckminster Fuller, the father of geodesy.

Fuller was the father of the geodesic dome, but geodesy dates to the sixteenth century, a bit before his time.

Oh well.
Not me. It's crap. It means nothing.

I can't tell whether it means anything or not, as I'm too lazy to try to decipher it. But any ... bad one. Are you sure he didn't intend it as a parody? I'd hate to think he really meant that.

I'm afraid he probably did mean it. They were all a bit over-excited in those days.

Mickwick,
the universally concerned intellectual optic of integrity
Here is my (re)submission: The ideal of modern architecture being ... visible only through the universally concerned intellectual optics of integrity.

The ideal of modern architecture being not only to provide survival function, but to make the mechanics of life so ... merge into the eternal now, which is only available to a mind wholesomely occupied with universal, rather than local concerns.

Well done! I can see where you got that from (I think).

Although, with respect, you've dumped so much of what he wrote that translating it as
The ideal of modern architecture is integrity.
would rescue almost as many of the many possible meanings that can be dug out of his baffling 'sentence'.
More of a parenthetical statement, maybe, since it's not quite a sentence.

Yes. Most of the article/manifesto was written like that.

Mickwick,
the universally concerned intellectual optic of integrity
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
... Molly's soliloquy (odd: I think it is the first time I ever typed or wrote the word) at the end of "Ulysses".

Her soliloquy, yes, but the chapter is entitled Penelope. I'm not a Homer fan, but wasn't she Ulysses's wife as Molly was Bloom's?

Some recent additions omit the Odyssean chapter titles. They probably have a reason for that.

Never, not once, in Ulysses , right?
although he often used the full-blown variety, but not in this chapter of course. Does everyone know that each of the 18 chapters is written in a totally different style?

Something that would have worked better, at least in the chapter of parodies, if he hadn't been so fastidious about punctuation. (No dashes either.)
Yet the novel remains one coherent piece, sort of, no matter that a few yahoos find it somewhat incoherent.

And I say that as somebody who is not particularly enamoured of Joyce's work.

Shame on you. And "not particularly enamoured"! Christallmighty, PB, you've got to love it or hate it. Just say which, sans wishywashiness. Me, I love it, but you knew that.

Like PB, I neither love Joyce's work nor hate it.
...

Jerry Friedman
Show more