My rule for any book I get is to read at least the first half but feel free to drop it after that if it's just not happening.
Though sometimes I'll finish reading a bad book I hate especially if it's been highly praised just to make sure that it really is that bad (case in point right now is John Banville, "The Sea").
About Ulysses: I "read" it about 23 years ago and barely understood or got anything out of it. Now, I've started re-reading it about two months ago. I'm taking my time, reading along with a guide book, and watching a chapter-by-chapter discussion held by some guy on YouTube.
I'm about 1/5 of the way through, judging by page count. I definitely understand it more now, at least on the basic "what the heck is happening level." But I still don't "get it" and am not sure it's worth the effort, at least not for me.
That's not a total judgment on the book or on Joyce. (I'm a fan of Dubliners, as you might tell from my pseudonym.) I accept that people smarter than me or more attuned to literary art can appreciate that which for whatever reason eludes me. Or maybe it's just I'm withholding some effort here. (I confess that I'm almost deliberately doing it as a side project, not a full commitment....I'm not, for example, listening to it aloud.)
Even so, there are decisions Joyce made that I'm inclined to criticize and see as sub-par. To be clear, I have written exactly zero novels, fewer than 10 short stories (never published) and maybe about 100 (not very good) poems. So I don't have much standing. But some things Joyce does just seems....doesn't work for me.
Great piece, although I was tempted to stop reading about halfway through, because it appeared that you had made your point.
As Pascal famously apologized: "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."
Understood.
My rule for any book I get is to read at least the first half but feel free to drop it after that if it's just not happening.
Though sometimes I'll finish reading a bad book I hate especially if it's been highly praised just to make sure that it really is that bad (case in point right now is John Banville, "The Sea").
About Ulysses: I "read" it about 23 years ago and barely understood or got anything out of it. Now, I've started re-reading it about two months ago. I'm taking my time, reading along with a guide book, and watching a chapter-by-chapter discussion held by some guy on YouTube.
I'm about 1/5 of the way through, judging by page count. I definitely understand it more now, at least on the basic "what the heck is happening level." But I still don't "get it" and am not sure it's worth the effort, at least not for me.
That's not a total judgment on the book or on Joyce. (I'm a fan of Dubliners, as you might tell from my pseudonym.) I accept that people smarter than me or more attuned to literary art can appreciate that which for whatever reason eludes me. Or maybe it's just I'm withholding some effort here. (I confess that I'm almost deliberately doing it as a side project, not a full commitment....I'm not, for example, listening to it aloud.)
Even so, there are decisions Joyce made that I'm inclined to criticize and see as sub-par. To be clear, I have written exactly zero novels, fewer than 10 short stories (never published) and maybe about 100 (not very good) poems. So I don't have much standing. But some things Joyce does just seems....doesn't work for me.
Walked out of Les Mis (the movie) ten and half years ago. It was awesome!