[HN Gopher] The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Banning of Joyce's Ulysses
        
       Author : okfine
       Score  : 67 points
       Date   : 2021-06-24 16:51 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (crimereads.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (crimereads.com)
        
       | okfine wrote:
       | This part is fun:
       | 
       |  _A few days later the book showed up at Random House--it had
       | passed through customs. Furious, Ernst personally marched the
       | package over to the customs office and demanded that it be
       | searched. When the inspector opened it and found Ulysses, he
       | muttered, "Oh, for God's sake, everybody brings that in. We don't
       | pay attention to it." Ernst insisted that he seize it._
        
       | jandrese wrote:
       | > Despite Quinn's persuasive argument--Ulysses was so dense and
       | convoluted that no one could possibly understand it, much less be
       | debauched by it, he argued--a three-judge panel, using the
       | Hicklin test, concluded that the book had the potential to
       | corrupt youth and was therefore obscene.
       | 
       | LOL. The kids are too dumb to be corrupted by this book!
       | 
       | The best part is that it is true. If you have enough constitution
       | to be able to get through the prose you aren't going to be turned
       | into a sex maniac by it.
       | 
       | I did appreciate the explanation of how the novel became so
       | infamous so quickly, with lurid portions of the book apparently
       | being excerpted in newsmagazines of the time. It always seemed
       | strange to me that such a dense and nigh-unreadable novel would
       | attract the ire of censors. How would they have even gotten to
       | the objectionable material?
        
         | nicklecompte wrote:
         | Keep in mind that the novel itself was originally serialized,
         | and the chapter in question (Nausicaa) is one of the easiest in
         | the novel - further, the "obscene" part is right at the
         | beginning of the chapter.
         | 
         | So this wasn't a case of censors plumbing an 800-page novel and
         | discovering something, or of a snippet being excerpted in
         | newspapers - a scandalous specific issue of a literary journal
         | started the whole controversy.
        
           | Jun8 wrote:
           | Judge for yourself: Here's "Nausicaa" :
           | http://web.uvic.ca/~mvp1922/wp-
           | content/uploads/2013/01/Episo...
           | 
           | I personally found that calling this indecent is really
           | pushing it. Maybe because it presented some light erotic
           | ideas in an unexpected medium (a young girls stream of
           | consciousness).
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | Maybe its like how people called marijuana a "gateway
             | drug", because after all of the breathless hype about how
             | great it is and how it will immediately ruin you life, the
             | people who tried it were mostly disappointed. If the
             | authorities were so wrong about marijuana then heroin can't
             | be that bad.
        
           | jandrese wrote:
           | That makes sense. One constant of book censors is that they
           | don't read very much, so normally as long as the juicy bits
           | aren't right at the start of a novel it is safe.
        
         | cortesoft wrote:
         | It is so funny that anyone could believe a book could turn
         | youths into sex maniacs.
         | 
         | Hormones do that all on their own.
        
         | leephillips wrote:
         | The difficulty in reading this book is usually greatly
         | exaggerated. It takes a while to come to grips with, but it is
         | not in the least impenetrable. It's one of my favorite novels.
         | It's certainly no _Finnegan's Wake_ , which I pick up and read
         | a page of every few years, only to put it down, saying, "not
         | this time".
        
           | xsmasher wrote:
           | I'm of average intelligence. Some sections of Ulysses are
           | straightforward and understandable, some are strange, but
           | others are completely impenetrable without some kind of
           | guidebook, and intentionally so.
           | 
           | Example
           | https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/u/ulysses/summary-
           | and...
        
           | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
           | Indeed, _Ulysses_ is accessible to anyone with a well-rounded
           | humanities education, even some particularly bookish high-
           | school students. Sure, you might not get every single
           | reference, but the story is plain.
           | 
           | Arguably the most challenging element for readers is not
           | Joyce's heavy erudition in drawing on the classical canon.
           | Rather, it is some of the Irish politics in the early 20th
           | century that will baffle most readers outside Ireland (and
           | probably most readers inside Ireland, the colonial era being
           | so far away now).
        
           | jhedwards wrote:
           | My favorite way to read Finnegan's Wake is to get some
           | friends and perhaps some drinks, have everyone pick a random
           | spot from the book and read it out loud.
           | 
           | The book is a circle so it doesn't really have a proper
           | beginning, and the way the narratives are intermeshed to the
           | point that they are incomprehensible means that the narrative
           | is secondary, so concepts such as beginning and middle don't
           | really matter anyway.
           | 
           | It is the language and wordplay of the book that is the
           | enjoyable part. If you sit there by yourself and read it
           | silently, it's mostly a boring academic exercise. When you
           | read it out loud the playfulness and humor of the book comes
           | through. There is one part that is written such that if you
           | read it aloud you sound like a drunken irishman, and one part
           | which is simultaneously a description of a pantry (or perhaps
           | a grocery) and an erotic scene. The main thing I think people
           | miss about the book is how funny it is!
        
             | QuinnWilton wrote:
             | Finnegan's Wake absolutely exists to be read, or even sung,
             | out loud. If you've never gotten the appeal, just try
             | listening to the start of an audiobook version. There's a
             | Youtube series that covers the first few chapters that I
             | adore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HgCjtd2iPU
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | You may have inspired me to try harder next time.
        
           | nemo44x wrote:
           | Similar to Gravity's Rainbow and Infinite Jest. I recommend
           | to people to just fight through the first 200 pages and you
           | end up in the flow and things begin to come together.
           | 
           | Gravity's Rainbow in particular is confusing for a long while
           | but when it begins to come together it's rewarding.
           | 
           | Agreed - Finnegan's Wake is impossible. Try the audio version
           | and it's somehow even more difficult. I was tempted to eat a
           | bag of mushrooms and listen to it but alas, perhaps one day
           | far in the future.
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | It seems like after 100-200 pages of Gravity's Rainbow one
             | of two things can happen:
             | 
             | 1. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on
             | anymore or who anybody is. They give up and stop reading.
             | 
             | 2. The reader can't figure out what the hell is going on
             | anymore or who anybody is. They stop trying to make sense
             | of the book and just read the words.
             | 
             | "Sure this guy has a toilet stuck to his foot now, and can
             | prevent bombs from landing on him by magic or something.
             | That's great, oh I think somewhere in that sentence it
             | became 20 years earlier in a different part of town and
             | there are two entirely different characters I don't know
             | talking about something else. That's neat."
        
               | asimpletune wrote:
               | The literary device in the novel is effect preceding
               | cause. Like, very early in the book the hypersonic v2 -
               | and how series it is for things to blow up and _then_ you
               | hear it - is introduced, but if you miss it then that
               | then you miss all the other times we see the same
               | concept.
        
             | ericmcer wrote:
             | I thought Gravity's Rainbow got more confusing as time went
             | on, if you just flow through it yeah its not too bad. But
             | to fully understand the 100s of characters disappearing,
             | reappearing with new names, etc. I definitely found myself
             | consulting notes in the later pages to remember what role
             | someone had played 400 pages earlier. The earlier chapters
             | you can just absorb with no thought for how it contributes
             | to the whole, by the end it is a lot of threads to try and
             | keep in order.
        
               | prionassembly wrote:
               | Try Sartre's "Le Sursis". The novel follows several
               | groups of young people as the news that the Germans
               | invaded Prague and war is probably weeks if not days
               | ahead. But it switches focus between groups mid-paragraph
               | and sometimes mid-sentence. Sartre's not known for
               | experimental fiction, but whew.
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | Your advice is spot on. For me it was 100 pages. It was
             | decades ago, but I still remember being puzzled, feeling
             | like I didn't know what was happening, but being pulled
             | along by the unique quality of the prose. 100 pages in, the
             | lightbulb went on. It's as if the book teaches you how to
             | read it.
        
             | voldacar wrote:
             | I think Gravity's Rainbow is significantly harder than
             | Infinite Jest
        
               | asimpletune wrote:
               | Yeah I never understood the association with infinite
               | jest and being hard other than it's long. The book is
               | super funny and enjoyable to read.
        
             | prionassembly wrote:
             | The problem I have with Infinite Jest (I have a paperback
             | edition; USD/my currency is expensive and I'm not made of
             | money) is that the tome is too big for its binding and will
             | seemingly fall apart at any time; and too heavy to hold in
             | your hands in a reading chair (as opposed to propped on a
             | table).
        
         | cge wrote:
         | Wikipedia's article on that trial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wik
         | i/Obscenity_trial_of_Ulysses_in_...) suggests that Quinn both
         | didn't like Ulysses and didn't like his clients, to say the
         | least. The whole trial seems to have had numerous absurd
         | elements: critics being asked to "speak in a language that the
         | court can understand", a judge objecting to the offending
         | passages being read out in front of a young woman--one of the
         | two publishers--and insisting that she couldn't have understood
         | what she published, and Quinn apparently blaming the
         | incomprehensibility of Ulysses on Joyce's poor eyesight.
        
         | LambdaComplex wrote:
         | > The kids are too dumb to be corrupted by this book!
         | 
         | Or Joyce is just that impenetrable. Have you _seen_ Finnegans
         | Wake?
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Joyce changed a huge amount and FW is at the end of that. Go
           | back to Dubliners or Portrait and he isn't impenetrable at
           | all. Ulysses is somewhere in between.
        
             | prionassembly wrote:
             | In jazz, this is the album "The world of Cecil Taylor".
             | Previously he's doing Coltrane-class stuff; there's even an
             | album that's alternatively credited to Coltrane or him
             | depending on pressing. Afterwards who knows what the hell
             | is going on. But "Lazy Afternoon" with Archie Shepp on the
             | sax, man... that's my speed.
        
           | jandrese wrote:
           | Sometimes I have to stop myself and ask "Is this genius, or
           | just badly written?"
        
         | mywacaday wrote:
         | If you really want to be corrupted read his letter to his wife,
         | https://allthatsinteresting.com/james-joyce-love-letters-nor...
        
           | nodesocket wrote:
           | lol. Who knew Joyce liked farts.
        
       | williesleg wrote:
       | I love book bannings! Like facebook fact checks and twitter
       | shadow bans! Bring 'em on, log and track me, shadow ban me and
       | save everything.
        
       | hereforphone wrote:
       | We don't ban books anymore. We ban tweets, or Facebook posts, or
       | other social media contributions. The drive to censor remains.
        
         | avereveard wrote:
         | we do worse than that nowadays, instead of censoring the
         | offending text we censor the person whole
        
         | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
         | It is going to sound sad, but that is because reading books is
         | not a mainstream time sink. Now, FB and Twitter? So many things
         | to get upset about in real time.
        
       | fogof wrote:
       | My favorite part about this episode in history is the name of the
       | supreme court case "United States v. One Book Called Ulysses".
       | The whole of the United States going up against just one book?
       | That's a fight I would love to see.
        
         | leephillips wrote:
         | And the book won! The pen was literally mightier than the
         | sword.
        
       | NoImmatureAdHom wrote:
       | There's an excellent book about this by Kevin Birmingham, "The
       | Most Dangerous Book"
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Most-Dangerous-Book-Battle-Ulysses/dp...
        
       | damontal wrote:
       | I highly recommend the podcast Re:Joyce by Frank Delaney if
       | you're at all interested in Ulysses.
       | 
       | He reads Ulysses and discusses it - sometimes an episode is
       | dedicated to just one sentence, sometimes a paragraph.
       | 
       | Tragic that he died before completing it and that his website has
       | gone untended.
       | 
       | https://feeds.feedburner.com/libsyn/sQtR
        
         | Koshkin wrote:
         | > _an episode is dedicated to just one sentence_
         | 
         | > _he died before completing_
        
           | dpwm wrote:
           | It appears he started on Bloomsday 2010, and in episode 321,
           | from 2016, he remarked in an introduction that he planned to
           | finish it within ten years from then - which Wikipedia cites
           | as evidence of it being "planned" to run to 2026, whilst
           | completely missing the bit where he's really talking about an
           | there being an extra episode once a month and jocularly
           | remarks that it is to reduce the weekly podcast from 25
           | remaining years to ten.
           | 
           | I hadn't heard of this until today. This is amazing.
        
         | dpwm wrote:
         | Thank you for posting this.
         | 
         | I had not appreciated the scale of this. There are 368
         | episodes, spread over almost seven years.
        
       | leephillips wrote:
       | This is a great story. I laughed out loud twice. It's probably
       | more entertaining than you suspect.
        
       | rcgorton wrote:
       | I had to read some of his works in high school. It was 'stream of
       | consciousness' DRIVEL. At best. "Horse-Piss and Rotted Straw"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-24 23:00 UTC)