Joyce, Vulgarity and the Sublime
mark webber
Once again, the server I rely on to read this group (in the very
antiquated PINE program, which I happen to prefer to any other method of
reading and posting to usenet) has missed or dropped a bunch of
contributions to the Joyce/Vulgarity/Sacred&Profane thread. I saw them,
however, in deja.com (when did they stop calling themselves dejanews,and
why?) - went looking there because the number of new posts to the group
looked slim.
Anyway, I want to thank Nancy - are you one in the same with Irisherdog?-
for keeping the thread alive, and sorry I didn't see your posts until
today.
(A very sharp Joycian scholar I know is named Whiticker, and he would be a
clever dog.... sorry....)
Anyway, I didn't understand part of what you wrote, Nancy, and feel free
to email to clarify, but I'll try to answer the questions of yours that I
was able to track.
Nancy wrote:
> Mark, I can understand that Joyce might not be considered
> vulgarity-free (unless you think of the literal translation of
> vulgar), but how can you possibly not find the serene and aristocratic
> in him?
First, I'll point out that my remarks were in response to some things Iian
wrote, and Iian and I have a bit of a history here in R.A.F. He doesn't
always bring out the best in me but he has got me reading and writing here
again. For better or worse.
Iian, without having read any James Joyce, was talking about his work as
though it was vulgarity free, serene and aristocratic - the third notion
seeming quite out of place, somehow, with the other two, to my mind.
Joyce is one of my favorite writers, and what he does with "vulgar"
subject matter I find quite beautiful. Subjects such as masturbation,
menstruation and the movement of bowels, as well as more "traditional"
sexual themes, are handled with great poetry in _Ulysses_.
Therefore, I do not find him vulgarity-free - but this doesn't trouble me.
I'll take questionable subject matter presented as beautiful
form over sweet subject matter presented as weak or unfelt form any day.
Joyce was not an aristocrat, nor are any of his characters. I'm not sure
what it means for a work of literature to be aristocratic but I don't find
anything aristocratic in his writing. This remark is qualitatively
neutral.
Serenity may well be an esthetic response Joyce can elicit in a reader.
And there may be some serene moments in his work. There is a certain
serenity in the final paragraphs of "The Dead". There is a serene, but
very haunting, moment when Bloom "sees" his dead son Rudy reading the
Torah. But on the whole, none of Joyce's work seems serene to me. The
other eleven stories in _Dubliner's_ are sad and hopeless. _Ulysses_ is
too violent, uneasy, uncomforatable, by turns, to be a serene book.
_Portrait_, with its depiction of hell, the turmoil, the guilt, the
declaration "Non Servium" (spelling?) the willingness to dissapoint and
flee... this wasn't serene content. The form is beautiful, yes, but I
don't even thing of the form as serene.
Finnegan's Wake has kept me at bay. I have tried very hard to find a
method to enter it, and the best I can do is follow motifs. Even so, not a
serene read.
(I wrote:)
> <A useful distinction is the difference between the emotion present in
> <the artist while making the work and that which may be elicited in
> <the viewer.
>
> I am interested in what you said here, but I do not think i understand
> it. Could you expand more?
Again, in response to Iian I was saying that what the artist feels may not
be what the viewer feels - even if the work pleases or is deemed
successful. I don't know how else to say it, really, except to ask you if
you think you feel exactly what an artist felt when you view her work?
Thanks for joining us!
Mark
Marilyn
I enjoyed your walk down the Joycean lane.
Here's a tip from Joyce himself regarding Finnegan's Wake:
"Read it out loud." He said it was written to be read aloud.
(sorry I don't have the reference. "Trust me." she said slyly.
Marilyn
mark webber
Hi Marilyn,
I trust you, but I also remember him being quoted to that effect that as
well.
Now, don't you agree that Iian's time would be better spent reading
Portrait or Ulysses than "tipping his hat" to that which he doesn't
understand and putting jpegs of bad paintings (or even good paintings)
on the web?
nice to hear from you,
Mark
Marilyn
or even reading one of Joyce's literary descendants,
like Don DeLillo.
When are we going to read about your Italy trip?
What epiphanies, and where?
Marilyn
mark webber
Hi Marilyn,
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Marilyn wrote:
>
> When are we going to read about your Italy trip?
> What epiphanies, and where?
>
Thanks for asking. I won't go on too long, but I was pretty impressed with
Milan. It's not one of the more popular destinations - has a reputation
for being industrial, which is nonsense. But I can say that the Brera Art
Gallery is one of the finest museums I've visited. The Piero there is much
bigger than I imagined. I spent about 20 minutes with it before I realized
what he was doing with it. A miracle of a painting.
One can waltz into the Castelo Sforza for free and see Michelangelo's last
work, a Pieta, which was in revision at his death. A really remarkable
thing.
Caravaggio's Fruit Basket, often touted as the first Italian still life,
was worth the price of admission at the Ambrosiano, as were a Bellini and
a Piero in the Polde Pezzoli.
I'm afraid I was also mistaken about Padua - this is a town that merits a
least a few days, rather than the morning I allotted to it. The Giottos
there, in the Scrovegni Chapel, are pretty breath-taking. It interests me
that this progenitor of Western Painting holds little interest for the
realist crowd.
Padua also has some early Titian frescos - a very rare thing - which I
know from reproduction only because the chapel they decorate is closed
from noon to 2:30. Give Padua at least a full day. It is a University town
and not at all provincial. It appears there are great book and record
stores, for example. ( I like to track down Jazz recordings that are out
of print in the U.S.)
But of course most of our time was in Venice, and that I could go on about
for days. I won't. New revelations, for me, were the hands in Bellini, Del
Piombo in general, and the now very clear connection between Balthus and
Carpaccio.
(I didn't see any Balthus on this trip, but the Carpaccios are incredibly
beautiful - even without the notion of how early he was working.)
On a different note, our train ride from Milan to Venice was peppered with
startling fields of poppies. Cadmium expanses.
Anyway, thanks again for asking; it's nice to conjure these images for
myself.
Mark
Nancy
out, so I may not answer it all at once. Besides, I am a slow thinker
(if at all).
I guess I think of Joyce as aristocratic because his sensibilities are
so refined, His themes are aristocratic because they are classical. I
think of him as aristocratic because he has a noble mind. ( Besides,
just because their lands were taken away hasn't made the Irish
forget their nobility. For all we know, Joyce has a crest lying around
somewhere.:)
More later--the lights are flickering again.
Nancy
Irish...@webtv.net
Been thinking about why Joyce makes me feel serene (This group is making
me think!).
Perhaps because I was brought up Catholic before Vatican II, where the
music of the Latin litany made me feel serene. Joyce has that music.
And, as Marilyn said, he wanted Finnegan's Wake to be read, fitting
with the great oral Irish tradition. I am glad when any of them write,
because naturally they would prefer to talk than write. They are so
good at it.
Joyce is maybe a little like Beethoven? Serene as an angel at one
moment, and then the most intense emotions the next? And like
Beethoven, he was a bridge between the old and the new.
So far as his description of hell-- when I read it, I could only think,
"Thank God I didn't go to THAT school", but it's nothing out of the
ordinary for a Catholic. Hell is so bad that Purgatory seems like a
good compromise , something to look forward to.
Nancy
Shan...@aol.com
Regards,
John
mark webber
Hi John, I don't know if you are addressing me, but if so, you're welcome.
I wouldn't mind hearing anything you might want to add....
Mark