"A speck of eager fire from foxeyes thanked him" (Page 49 Gabler Edition)
>What? You can have a speck of fire?
>Fire can be eager?
>Fire can be in eyes?
>And the guy who's thanking Bloom doesn't just have any eyes, he has foxeyes?
>And you're also telling me that this eager speck of fire in these foxeyes is thankful?
I think this metaphor's a little wobbly, Jimmy boy.
Bad bait thread
a waste of ink, page space and readers time, if possible always choose simple uncomplicated prose and get to the fucking point.
boring
kys retard
I'm not against good metaphors which make the point clearer though
>kys
That's a flash from the past
except maybe 1% of all metaphors are actually good
The best possible question to ask is where the actual writing method Joyce adheres to in Ulysses was plagiatrized from.
Because that fruit loop abso ficking lutely didn't invent it himself.
Another way to rephrase this question would be. Suppose Ulysses' literary style was shoplifted from another book. Probably, English, more or less contemporary to it, probably way more obscure. Are here any people here with early 20th century Irish and English literature being their area of expertise, that might've stumbled, on a chance, upon such a book, which just might've served as a primary source for Joyce's Ulysses?
Read Wyndham Lewis' chapter on Joyce in T&W Man, if you actually want to know.
I don't see any metaphor, seems like a straight description of reality to me. Present arguments to the contrary.
>prosebad the prosefailer
and memebad the memer
and shitbad the shitposter
There is no actual speck of any actual flame and the man doesn't have the eyes of a fox and his eyes are not literally thanking anyone
but there is and they do
you can't understand how much nuanced information can be evoked in consciousness from adding these additional words, even without the original cultural context of those symbols
it be referring to the reflection in a glistening pupil maybe
I started to, but I don't think "something in between if this and that" is actually going to cut it. Joyce's schtick, from what I gather, is essentially, a kind of "artistic echolalia" pushed to the point where it becomes utterly absurd. If he didn't invent it, someone else did, published it, and it necessarily must've stuck like a sore thumb too, even if only very locally. It might've been a much more serious book too, the tone or the content didn't nearly have anything whatsoever to do with what Ulysses became, only the writing method had to essentially match.
Also, "kind of "artistic echolalia" pushed to absurdiry" is basically in itself an antinaturalistic statement, that is an expression of a belief it's not artistry's job to document surrpunding reality to a t without any rhyme or reaaon to it. Were there any books more or less contemporary to Ulysses, with their actual explicit content to match that vibe? Sort of hyperrealism that gets intentionally turned completely on its head?
Why?
As I said, get to the fucking point. If its reflection in pupil then write its a reflection in a pupil. If its not then dont write anything.
Joyce was an agnostic irishman resucitating the rhetoric ,the arts of memory and the esoteric methods of composition of the italian renaissance and barroque by the way of yeats' theosophy and the ambient Nietszcheanism of the early 20th. Joyce work was also a deliberate detournement of the systematic cosmotheology of the jesuit fathers among other things, he had a fondness for past heretics.Giordano Bruno's hermetic writings and Vico's Scienzia Nuova- bot get called out repeatedly in Finnegans Wake. Joyce aims to record vician ricorsi like a seismograph. Generative world making discourse long predates modernism, it is man itself. At the begining we were giants, bodies driven by infinite desire, until the thunderclap flashed across the sky, then came speech marriage property the law of the father and the burial of the dead. The second barbarism the barbarism of reflection entails the benumbing of mans world worlding poesy. This is why Mcluhan brought up giants and thunderclaps back in the pop art gogo heyday of the 60s.
It’s supposed to be more evocative than sensible. You can vividly see what he what he’s describing by his word choice, a mischevious looking guy with a thankful glint in his eye. But putting it the way Joyce did is far more artful and interesting.
>a mischevious looking guy with a thankful glint in his eye. But putting it the way Joyce did is far more artful and interesting.
A mischevious looking guy with a glint in his eye sounds a lot better.
it's ok user some autists have problems understanding metaphoric language
But then we wouldn't be discussing it 100 years later
I think its the normal well adjusted people that might hard time understanding some senseless metaphors. The intellectually challenged, especially on this board seem to be all about metaphors.
Good
Kafka, Metamorphosis, 2015, Joyce knew German and resided in Zurich at the time.
>1915
I think you want non-fiction
Sounds like you're a word-brain with no appreciation of imagery. Sad desu.
It's a simple idea - imbue evocative imagery with meaning to produce a unique synthetic feeling in the reader.
Kind of like how songs work with the combination of melody/harmony and lyrical content, combining to produce a more potent and specific subjective experience than either element could, independently.
Unfortunately, for people like yourself with a poor appreciation of imagery (or perhaps outright aphantasia) the effect doesn't work, and the attempt to induce it can be misunderstood as bad writing or pretentiousness.
Proteus, written by Stephen walked along the beach while pondering his past. The end.
Utter crap. Syphilitic ramblings.
bump
to right baz
ate joyce
ate proost
ate pinchin
luv arry potta
luv books wiv pickchas
simple as
Its the information that matters, you can jerk off as much as you want, but simple readable form that coveys information easily is superior.
i think you're just a certified brainlet
how's that grab you?
I have saved this post. I am thinking about it, thanks user
Lewis shows that it is more of a social echolalia; he takes the currents which are present in bourgeois society and condenses them into Stephen's perspective (his associations/stream of consciousness)
eager fire works real good
you can feel the flame eagerly rising
>Proteus
mega lul
You seem to think that practicality is the only path to ideas and information. Poor man.
Mkgnao!