Help with "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" quotes

[guitargoalie]

Hi everyone, I'm doing an essay for grade 12 English. I have to compare the life of Stephen Daedalus to Bertrand Russel's view of "the good life". I have chosen to say that Stephen does not live a good life because for most of the story, his life lacks love, knowledge, and benevolence. Can anyone give me quotes that would directly tell those 3 subtopics? I was marked poorly because my chosen quotes would've answered the subtopics, but with explaining. I need quotes that the reader will know "he lacks love, knowledge, or benevolence" just from reading the quote, thank you :)

[hawthorns]

Why does it have to be those three, specifically? I never got the impression that he was universally deprived (at least, to any extreme) of any of those, especially after boarding school.

[guitargoalie]

In Russell's essay, his main points of living a good life are love, knowledge, benevolence and delight. I have to pick 3 and relate them to Stephen's life. It seemed like there would be more proof for him not living a good life. The quotes I have for each topic:
love - when he has the affair with the prostitute, showing fake love
knowledge- When he refers to Eileen as the Tower of Ivory, yet he doesn't know what real meaning of Tower of Ivory
benevolence - When he spends all of his prize money on gifts for his family, which soon disappears, showing a failed attempt at benevolent actions

Any input is appreciated, I'm having a rather hard time interpreting this book and not where what other quotes to use

[My2cents]

If I were writing the essay, I'd say Stephen has all three aspects of Russell's "good life" going for him. Benevolence and knowledge are definitely granted Stephen because he's the only child of the family who is financed by the family to attend a prestigious school. There are I think, including Stephen, five Dedalus kids, and there's a scene where Stephen thinks about the unfairness of him receiving all the family support but he graciously accepts it, silently thanking his younger siblings for not holding a grudge. As for love, if Russell means love between man and woman, then you have a point but if not, that is if love can be love in the most general sense, then Stephen in receiving the lion's share of his family's support, is loved as no other child in a family of multiple children has a right to be loved.

I hope I didn't throw a monkey wrench into your plans. But at the very least I would think I have you thinking, and that's a good thing (I think).

[hawthorns]

If I were writing the essay, I'd say Stephen has all three aspects of Russell's "good life" going for him. Benevolence and knowledge are definitely granted Stephen because he's the only child of the family who is financed by the family to attend a prestigious school. There are I think, including Stephen, five Dedalus kids, and there's a scene where Stephen thinks about the unfairness of him receiving all the family support but he graciously accepts it, silently thanking his younger siblings for not holding a grudge. As for love, if Russell means love between man and woman, then you have a point but if not, that is if love can be love in the most general sense, then Stephen in receiving the lion's share of his family's support, is loved as no other child in a family of multiple children has a right to be loved.

I hope I didn't throw a monkey wrench into your plans. But at the very least I would think I have you thinking, and that's a good thing (I think).


This is what I was thinking as well. I'd have to go back because the book didn't inspire any serious thinking on my part, but SD seemed to be the recipient of growing amounts of 'love' among his classmates/college students/instructors too. In the beginning he's shoved into a filthy cesspool by boarding school punks. Then he's lifted onto their shoulders, his courage celebrated for remonstrating against Father (can't remember)'s lashes. Finally, he's seen explicating the minutia of his own philosophical theories on art, with the general feeling that he's finally escaped the strictures of community/faith/duty and gained independence/self-identity. I also vaguely recall a religious heart to heart with Cranly, who seemed genuinely concerned for SD. But take this with a grain of salt because I just flipped through it. Shakespeare was calling and I couldn't wait to finish it. :p

[guitargoalie]

Hmm thanks guys. I'm not sure how hard it would be to change my point of view, as I've already handed in some process work supporting not living a good life. You present some good arguments though, and if there is more accessible support for living a good life, I will switch it. If we had to categorize the points so far,
benevolence - reflecting on being fortunate for school
love - family support
knowledge - his aesthetic theory

does this seem easier to do than the ones I had chosen?

[My2cents]

Hmm thanks guys. I'm not sure how hard it would be to change my point of view, as I've already handed in some process work supporting not living a good life. You present some good arguments though, and if there is more accessible support for living a good life, I will switch it. If we had to categorize the points so far,
benevolence - reflecting on being fortunate for school
love - family support
knowledge - his aesthetic theory

does this seem easier to do than the ones I had chosen?

Yeah, that's pretty much how I'd formulate it, and for me it's easier to argue.

[My2cents]

I'd have to go back because the book didn't inspire any serious thinking on my part:p

Ulysses dwarfs everything Joyce wrote. There are faint traces of Ulysses in Portrait and that's what had me re-reading it, that plus Stephen's discourse on art, which if nothing else, is interesting.

[hawthorns]

Ulysses dwarfs everything Joyce wrote. There are faint traces of Ulysses in Portrait and that's what had me re-reading it, that plus Stephen's discourse on art, which if nothing else, is interesting.

Yeah, I'd agree. It's without question masterful. Joyce is odd in that I greatly appreciate his writing style, yet find little enjoyment in the experience. Which is very odd because style, for me, is the usual source of enjoyment. Maybe I'll go back to Ulysses someday...