Thursday, May 1, 2008
Molly
Molly’s thoughts race, she makes inaccurate assumptions, and I think these elements of her characterization contribute to Nabokov’s suggestion that numerous meager poets were inspired by her narrative. Molly articulates the gross misstatements that occur to her at a whim. She progresses from one idea to another too quickly, leaving each idea unexplored and unquestioned-- which is dangerous, because a lot of the sentiments are self-deprecating. She is overly concerned about her weight, age, clothes, and sexuality. Her misstatements are delivered in an ungraceful tone-- this may have contributed to Nabokov’s suggestion that she is vulgar, in addition to the crass way in which she discusses her sexuality.
Transmigration of Souls
“Why did he desist from speculation?
Because it was a task for a superior intelligence to substitute other more acceptable phenomena in place of the less acceptable phenomena to be removed.
Did Stephen participate in his dejection?
He affirmed his significance as a conscious rational animal proceeding syllogistically from the known to the unknown and a conscious rational reagent between a micro- and a macrocosm ineluctably constructed upon the incertitude of the void.
Was this affirmation apprehended by Bloom?
Not verbally. Substantially.
Was this affirmation apprehended by Bloom?
Not verbally. Substantially.”
I want to better understand Joyce’s thoughts on the transmigration of souls-- a concept that may or may not be a Platonic reality. In this passage, we’re presented with a manifestation of the two contrasting modes of being that Bloom and Stephen seem to exhibit throughout the book-- specifically, the ways in which they interpret the unknown.
Stephen is described as distrusting “aquacities of thought and language.” He accepts or disregards his sensations with regard to his ability to articulate them in the terms of the systems of thought-- in which he has been educated-- that are deemed acceptable according to the popularly accepted standards of the contemporary academic community. He is a little surprised by Bloom’s earnest hospitality and he is conscious of his intellectual superiority to Bloom, as well as his academic background.
Bloom apprehends Stephen’s assumptions, although he would be unable to articulate the reasons for his apprehension, as the narrator alludes in his parodies of the thought processes of the two characters-- the pedantic and eloquent explanations given for Stephen, the laconic and sparse answers given for Bloom.
Later, the narrator will describe Bloom’s apprehension as a misapprehension. Is this Joyce’s critique of Bloom’s assumption of synchronicity with Stephen?
Is there a substantiveness to the transmigration of souls? In class, Robin said that there is if we allow there to be, as Bloom does and Stephen does not. I think that this chapter is a suggestion of what will happen if we allow there to be inexplicable realities, and it suggests the effects that might be provoked by the acceptance of such an assumption.
Because it was a task for a superior intelligence to substitute other more acceptable phenomena in place of the less acceptable phenomena to be removed.
Did Stephen participate in his dejection?
He affirmed his significance as a conscious rational animal proceeding syllogistically from the known to the unknown and a conscious rational reagent between a micro- and a macrocosm ineluctably constructed upon the incertitude of the void.
Was this affirmation apprehended by Bloom?
Not verbally. Substantially.
Was this affirmation apprehended by Bloom?
Not verbally. Substantially.”
I want to better understand Joyce’s thoughts on the transmigration of souls-- a concept that may or may not be a Platonic reality. In this passage, we’re presented with a manifestation of the two contrasting modes of being that Bloom and Stephen seem to exhibit throughout the book-- specifically, the ways in which they interpret the unknown.
Stephen is described as distrusting “aquacities of thought and language.” He accepts or disregards his sensations with regard to his ability to articulate them in the terms of the systems of thought-- in which he has been educated-- that are deemed acceptable according to the popularly accepted standards of the contemporary academic community. He is a little surprised by Bloom’s earnest hospitality and he is conscious of his intellectual superiority to Bloom, as well as his academic background.
Bloom apprehends Stephen’s assumptions, although he would be unable to articulate the reasons for his apprehension, as the narrator alludes in his parodies of the thought processes of the two characters-- the pedantic and eloquent explanations given for Stephen, the laconic and sparse answers given for Bloom.
Later, the narrator will describe Bloom’s apprehension as a misapprehension. Is this Joyce’s critique of Bloom’s assumption of synchronicity with Stephen?
Is there a substantiveness to the transmigration of souls? In class, Robin said that there is if we allow there to be, as Bloom does and Stephen does not. I think that this chapter is a suggestion of what will happen if we allow there to be inexplicable realities, and it suggests the effects that might be provoked by the acceptance of such an assumption.
“works changing colour like those crabs about Ringsend in the morning"
Joyce’s style shifts from alchemist prose to his tighter, trademark narrative throughout the chapter. The shift is indicative of so much-- It indicates the utilisation of two very different parts of the brain. While capable of writing traditionally, Joyce-- like Shakespeare, Nabokov or (what I determine to be) any great writer-- is able to change voices. There is his traditional voice, but there is also the ability to create atypical phrases that suggest the patterns of the subconscious thought found in dreams. There are is a parallel between the narrative and its author’s complexities, in this case.
Literary alchemy is a technique that seems to convey reality more thoroughly than a more focused, restrained narrative. So much occurs throughout a day; our perspectives and attitudes change. Thoughts aren't perfect or linear. However, sometimes there is perfection in complication and this is what we see with Joyce’s prose-- and, I think, the mind of a good artist.
Throughout the conversation that occurs in this chapter, we see some of the ways in which these characters change throughout the novel. Stephen is bright and articulate with those who he believes to be his intellectual superiors, but witty with those he considers less intelligent than he is, such as Bloom. Bloom is sexually conflicted and obssessed, but trying to posture as a successful adman in conversation, although his thoughts are elsewhere. However, he is able to recognize that Stephen is hungry and offers to buy him dinner.
Note: There is an intriguing power dynamic in this chapter. When Bloom talks about the prostitute in the black straw hat to Stephen, we notice that he criticizes the man who didn’t take care of her, yet it seems that Bloom is unable to take care of or control his own wife. Are his criticisms of women an example of misused power?
Literary alchemy is a technique that seems to convey reality more thoroughly than a more focused, restrained narrative. So much occurs throughout a day; our perspectives and attitudes change. Thoughts aren't perfect or linear. However, sometimes there is perfection in complication and this is what we see with Joyce’s prose-- and, I think, the mind of a good artist.
Throughout the conversation that occurs in this chapter, we see some of the ways in which these characters change throughout the novel. Stephen is bright and articulate with those who he believes to be his intellectual superiors, but witty with those he considers less intelligent than he is, such as Bloom. Bloom is sexually conflicted and obssessed, but trying to posture as a successful adman in conversation, although his thoughts are elsewhere. However, he is able to recognize that Stephen is hungry and offers to buy him dinner.
Note: There is an intriguing power dynamic in this chapter. When Bloom talks about the prostitute in the black straw hat to Stephen, we notice that he criticizes the man who didn’t take care of her, yet it seems that Bloom is unable to take care of or control his own wife. Are his criticisms of women an example of misused power?
Subconsciousness
In this chapter, Bloom explores a dream state in which amalgams of his diurnal experiences appear to him. He doubts himself, as Hamlet did, in the beginning of the chapter, wishing he hadn’t bought the crubeen and the trotter.
He hallucinates, pictures an ex-girlfriend/Gerty, and imagines a fictional Gulliver’s Travels-like city in which he has ultimate control of the subjects.
If *Hamlet* has been described by a certain Russian emigre writer as the paranoid dream of a neurotic scholar, this chapter is Bloom’s paranoid dream.
Hamlet returns from Wittenberg, finds that the people around whom he came of age are inadequate and wonders if he may be an amalgam of their inadequacies. When he kills them, he attempts to eliminate the influences of their solipsisms on his life and free himself.
What is Bloom doing here? He, like Hamlet, is looking on the figures who influence him and imagining a world in which he has control-- in which he is not an amalgam of his early life experiences, can act freely--
Are we amalgams of our early experiences? If we are, can we learn to understand ourselves better by studying our subconscious desires, with their origins? How could we do so? And could we benefit from the study?
He hallucinates, pictures an ex-girlfriend/Gerty, and imagines a fictional Gulliver’s Travels-like city in which he has ultimate control of the subjects.
If *Hamlet* has been described by a certain Russian emigre writer as the paranoid dream of a neurotic scholar, this chapter is Bloom’s paranoid dream.
Hamlet returns from Wittenberg, finds that the people around whom he came of age are inadequate and wonders if he may be an amalgam of their inadequacies. When he kills them, he attempts to eliminate the influences of their solipsisms on his life and free himself.
What is Bloom doing here? He, like Hamlet, is looking on the figures who influence him and imagining a world in which he has control-- in which he is not an amalgam of his early life experiences, can act freely--
Are we amalgams of our early experiences? If we are, can we learn to understand ourselves better by studying our subconscious desires, with their origins? How could we do so? And could we benefit from the study?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)