On re-reading Ulysses

[Yulehesays]

Hello. I read Ulysses a couple of months ago and really enjoyed it. Then I want on to read Ellman's biography of Joyce. I am thinking of re-reading it because I feel I may get more out of it now having read the biography, and I also just want to trawl through its depths again.

On first reading it I read it cold, with no guide. So my question is: Should I reread with a guide? I feel this way I'll get more of the references and I should understand the boom pretty well at the end, but I really abhor the constant interruption of the text, especially with Joyce's stream of consciousness style.

What do you guys think?

[YesNo]

I enjoy reading commentaries about books that I value especially if I plan to reread the book.

In the case of Ulysses, I think I tried reading it two times in the past five years and I couldn't get past the first chapter, which is about page 50. In my case, a commentary wouldn't help.

[ashulman]

Can I recommend Gilbert's book? Very helpful.

http://www.amazon.com/James-Joyces-Ulysses-Stuart-Gilbert/dp/0394700139/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1363183302&sr=1-12&keywords=ulysses

[Yulehesays]

Can I recommend Gilbert's book? Very helpful.

Is this read concurrently with Ulysses or prior to reading?

[maxphisher]

While Gilbert's book is interesting and very helpful, I would argue that it is no longer definitive. It's a great entry into the backgrounds behind Ulysses, but it's somewhat limited by his insistence on adhering to the Odyssey plotline. Ellmann's Ulysses on the Liffey, however, takes Gilbert's reading a few steps further and fleshes out some of the other inspirations.

I would recommend listening to the audiobook during the same period in which you are reading it. In Joyce's case, I find it very rewarding to actually hear the text as well. I generally read when I have the time and listen to it in the car when I'm driving around. Don't read one part and then listen to the next though. Read and listen all the way through. Even if the two are staggered a bit, you will hear parts that didn't necessarily stick with you when you read them.

[chrisvia]

I'm not above using SparkNotes. In fact, my approach to my first experience with Ulysses was to read the SparkNotes to each episode in the morning; then read the actual episode that evening, with my dayjob in between. I found this to be very effective. Of course, this method also ruins your chance to be a literary detective and figure out things like: which part of Homer's epic, and which body part each episode relates to (among other goodies)!

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/ulysses/

[ashulman]

You can do either, but you can dig into it since you read it already. I read it concurrently, but that gets tedious after a while.

[Yulehesays]

You can do either, but you can dig into it since you read it already. I read it concurrently, but that gets tedious after a while.

Thanks ya I can imagine it becoming very tedious. leaning towards a cold rereading

[cacian]

While Gilbert's book is interesting and very helpful, I would argue that it is no longer definitive. It's a great entry into the backgrounds behind Ulysses, but it's somewhat limited by his insistence on adhering to the Odyssey plotline. Ellmann's Ulysses on the Liffey, however, takes Gilbert's reading a few steps further and fleshes out some of the other inspirations.

I would recommend listening to the audiobook during the same period in which you are reading it. In Joyce's case, I find it very rewarding to actually hear the text as well. I generally read when I have the time and listen to it in the car when I'm driving around. Don't read one part and then listen to the next though. Read and listen all the way through. Even if the two are staggered a bit, you will hear parts that didn't necessarily stick with you when you read them.
I would not listen to audio because half the words won't be there/read. They will be shiped somewhere else I say.
A book is to be read personally. I think the real reason an editor i is to take half a book's worth and turn it into another one. They do say words of mouth. A bit like the page/pager . That what a crafty editor take someone' else work and use it for something. It reminds me of the cuckoo.

[cacian]

What is the meaning of the name Ulysses?

[cafolini]

What is the meaning of the name Ulysses?

Whatever you wish it to mean. If you believe it, that is IT. ROFLMAO

[cacian]

Whatever you wish it to mean. If you believe it, that is IT. ROFLMAO

I believe it is a symbol or a synonym of something else.

[Yulehesays]

Well as you probably know it's Roman for Odysseus. So he called it Ulysses because it was modelled on The Odyssey. When asked why he called it Ulysses, Joyce replied: "because it is my working system."

[maxphisher]

I'm not sure what you're even arguing here. Pretty much every decent recording of the novel is complete. If you're buying a cheap and abridged audio version, then I might be able to see your point. But, to my knowledge, no such abridged versions of Ulysses exist...

[cacian]

Well as you probably know it's Roman for Odysseus. So he called it Ulysses because it was modelled on The Odyssey. When asked why he called it Ulysses, Joyce replied: "because it is my working system."

Here he goes again the word 'work'. He mentions it somewhere else as work when he talked about Ulysses.
It seems that he was working rather then writing. Bolchevist take writing as work, It is an expressing they always use that is because writing /literature was not their idea at the first place so they use 'working' instead.

He called it Ulysses because he could not think of another to name. It is not even his on his admittance. Roman for Odysseus.
Interesting he ''modelled'' his 'work' on Odyssey.

[mal4mac]

Like YesNo I couldn't get through the thing at all... I guess you can enjoy reading intriguing stuff that you can't fully understand. Not a criticism, by the way... if you enjoy something, you enjoy something? YesNo was highly involved with a thread on trying to understand quantum mechanics... like me he has a 'scientific bent', and science is all about utmost clarity of thought with no room for muddling through without understanding the basic concepts. Hence our problem with quantum mechanics :) And Ulysses. I think with Ulysses no one can offer you any advice, there are so many different reactions to the book. If you fancy reading it again, why not have a go. If you get bored, try something else... I did try and read Ulysses again after reading Ellman's (wonfderfully clear...) biography... it didn't help me... but as you have *already* (kind of?) read all of Ulysses, your experience may differ.

[Yulehesays]

Like YesNo I couldn't get through the thing at all... I guess you can enjoy reading intriguing stuff that you can't fully understand. Not a criticism, by the way... if you enjoy something, you enjoy something? YesNo was highly involved with a thread on trying to understand quantum mechanics... like me he has a 'scientific bent', and science is all about utmost clarity of thought with no room for muddling through without understanding the basic concepts. Hence our problem with quantum mechanics :) And Ulysses. I think with Ulysses no one can offer you any advice, there are so many different reactions to the book. If you fancy reading it again, why not have a go. If you get bored, try something else... I did try and read Ulysses again after reading Ellman's (wonfderfully clear...) biography... it didn't help me... but as you have *already* (kind of?) read all of Ulysses, your experience may differ.

I too have a "scientific bent" but if I don't get every reference I can enjoy the work for the beauty of it's prose. Nevertheless I still understand the plot etc very well, it's just the bits and pieces I'd like to pick up. If I read it again it will be for pleasure and nothing else.

[Lykren]

Mal4mac, I would say that literature also requires strong knowledge of the fundamental concepts. You can't read Ulysses if you don't know half the words.