/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13737525]

He actually beat Shakespeare.

[Anonymous No.13737551]

I don't think that's how it works.
I did really like the casual academic Shakespeare discussion thrown in with Stephen as his mouthpiece in Ulysses though. Was he right? Was Billy a crypto-Catholic?

[Anonymous No.13737589]

>>13737525
I would let young James Joyce ravage my anus

[Anonymous No.13737593]

>>13737589

[Anonymous No.13737597]

>>13737525

Tie looks stupid, he should have a collar down or somesuch.

[Anonymous No.13737598]

>>13737593
What gave it away?

[Anonymous No.13737600]

>>13737598
posting on /lit/

[Anonymous No.13737605]

>>13737551
>Was Billy a crypto-Catholic?
probably. i don't see how anyone could write such beauty without (non-heretical) divine inspiration.

[Anonymous No.13737606]

>>13737600
Loled and checked

[Anonymous No.13737607]

>>13737551
I have spent many moons pondering exactly that. I think he was being ironic, my fellow. I think he was being ironic insomuch as he was excessively trying to autobiographize (pardon the coinage of the word: one must forever and willingly seek out new terms to approximate experience) Shakespeare's life. What Stephen, I believe, saw in Shakespeare was a kind of father-figure: a father-figure who corresponded to what Bloom calls the "anxiety of influence." Stephen in Shakespeare saw himself as that past being which would become himself in the future (oh, how do you explain that one).

Let's try that again. Stephen, looking back to Shakespeare, considered him the father-figure (excluding his actual father, Simon, whom he loathed for his emotional and cultural insensibility) as the person after whom he would model himself. The past of Shakespeare-as-father would, if all things went right, rush up to become the Stephen-as-son in the future: this is why he must ascribe to him as much as possible so that he could understand the actual component of himself. He discarded his own father, flesh and blood, for the artistic flesh and blood whom he wanted to become.

[Anonymous No.13737639]

>>13737525
Looks like Gabe from The Office

[Anonymous No.13737640]

>>13737551
No, let me again clarify that. Stephen saw in Shakespeare that which he would model himself after and that which he would reject, according to Bloom's theory of the anxiety of influence. Stephen saw within Shakespeare the past which he would discard and the past which he would retain. And to understand what to discard and to retain, one must correspondingly know that which is in question: the circumstances and the biography of the father figure after which we model ourselves.

[Anonymous No.13737676]

>>13737607
>autobiographize (pardon the coinage of the word: one must forever and willingly seek out new terms to approximate experience)
Leopold, there's a difference between digression and fluff.

[Anonymous No.13737690]

>>13737640
n-p?

[Anonymous No.13737707]

>>13737676
how do you know this is me is this Mr. Brown or Lucretius?

yours

[Anonymous No.13737731]

>>13737639
let me guess, you like being fed pizza and you only swiped right for my dog?

[Anonymous No.13737735]

>>13737731
huh?

[Anonymous No.13737736]

>>13737525
Not really when he mentions Shakespeare in all of his works.

>Joyce: I pity you.
>Shakespeare: I don't think about you at all.

[Anonymous No.13737740]

>>13737736
that greentext makes no sense

[Anonymous No.13737744]

>>13737740
Then the OP doesn't make sense either. Go away.

[Anonymous No.13737755]

>>13737735
your baby daughter the ONLY thing in your life, but you still like to have fun. you're sick of fuckboys aren't you? i knew it.

[Anonymous No.13737757]

>>13737744
Shakespeare had no way of even knowing Joyce but Joyce could've perfectly beaten Shakespeare since he came after him.

[Anonymous No.13737759]

>>13737755
what the actual fuck

[Anonymous No.13737776]

>>13737759
i think the best option is equilateral nipples. if its not possible, an elongated triangle is better than a short and squat one. just look at how much arnold's triangle improves when we lower the belly button. also, i'm 6'2 if it matters.

[Anonymous No.13737791]

>>13737759
He's imitating thots on tinder that all have the same unfunny shit posted in their bio.

[Anonymous No.13737821]

>>13737551
>Was Billy a crypto-Catholic?

I've read quite a bit on both sides of the argument. Imho, the best synthesis of the evidence -- that accounts for all of it, and makes sense of all of it -- is the one Stephen Greenblatt provides in Will in the World -- with the bulk of the argument set forth in the chapter which ends with the young Shakespeare crossing London Bridge for the first time, and seeing the Catholic heads on pikes.

I do not always find Stephen Greenblatt persuasive, but his analysis of the various Shakespeare puzzles in Will in the World I find consistently persuasive.

[Anonymous No.13737831]

>>13737525
>He actually beat Shakespeare.

No, he didn't. Not even close.

And that's not a knock on Joyce, it's just the simple truth of the matter.

[Anonymous No.13737856]

>>13737821
>(((Stephen Greenblatt)))

[Anonymous No.13737860]

>>13737776
Are you gay

[Anonymous No.13737863]

>>13737831
Why do you say this? Are you measuring this by appeal, by influence, by...oh, what does it matter.

[Anonymous No.13737869]

>>13737860
no

[Anonymous No.13737881]

>>13737863
I'm saying this from my position as the Final Arbiter of Taste.

It is my judgment. It is correct. And it is final.

[Anonymous No.13737911]

>>13737856

Yeah, well, you know, on that front, for a member of the tribe, I must say he is very even-handed on the subject of Shakespeare's relationship to Catholicism, which is not always the case with scholars who are members of that tribe. And as a member of a different tribe - the tribe Joyce belonged to before he became a degenerate whoremonger and lost his faith - I appreciate that (although that appreciation is neither here nor there wrt my judgment of the soundness of his various arguments in Will in the World).

[Anonymous No.13737921]

>>13737911
>as a member of a tribe
lol african

[Anonymous No.13737946]

>>13737911
idk, but i just feel like he would've had to have been catholic. i don't think anyone who didn't love God deep down would be able to produce such beauty. its also weird how the same questions arise with beethoven.

[Anonymous No.13737955]

>>13737911
But Joyce's degeneration into whoremongering is perhaps one of the most profitable circumstances to have transpired in the creation of his art: I mean, and I mean, that his whoremongering and his turning away, his turning aside and brooding upon his faith lead to and constituted the great masterpieces to which he lays claim

[Anonymous No.13737968]

>>13737955
Go to bed Georg Wilhelm Friedrich

[Anonymous No.13737977]

>>13737589
>letting someone with a negative canthal tilt fuck you
Y I K E S dude

[Anonymous No.13737979]

>>13737955
>It is exactly when the boy gets far enough off to see the giant that he sees that he really is a giant. It is exactly when we do at last see the Christian Church afar under those clear and level eastern skies that we see that it is really the Church of Christ. To put it shortly, the moment we are really impartial about it, we know why people are partial to it.

[Anonymous No.13738051]

>>13737977
I just looked up what a canthal tilt is and it amazes me how absolutely fastidious the human mind is in finding faults in other humans. My god, we have somehow devised, in jealousy, a standard by which to measure to the lateral and the median angles of the fucking eye so as to correspond to some arbitrary definition of beauty. I never. nor would ever, have noticed on my own the angle to which the edges of the eye correspond.