>>25111973
it's as if almost humans are capable of developing completely subjective opinion

>>25111973
If you hated Dubliners then you have a mental deficiency.

>>25111973
>Do people just pretend to enjoy this hack ?
No, you retard. Also, what books do you like? Maybe Joyce just isn’t for you. I’m not a huge fan of Dubliners until the later stories and Portrait is amazingly written, you see his growth as a writer in just a few years. But as I asked, what sort of literature do you actually enjoy?

Joyce is the greatest irish writer because he was the only irish writer. And it's fitting that a drug addled deviant with daddy issues was the best that misbegotten island churned out

>>25111988
GOD SAVE AR FACKIN KING!

>>25111989
Blow out down a ditch, potato nigger

>>25111988
I fucking hate the irish but this is blatantly untrue

>>25111973
Portrait has some good moments. I really liked the brimstone sermon by the Jesuit lecturer

On the whole I find Joyce jumps between excruciatingly boring and incomprehensible, some books have more of one than the other

>>25111986
My favourite lit book is Demons by Dostoyevsky.

>>25112044
What's a "lit book"?

>>25112046
Literature

Yeah idk why he's so loved on /lit. I started reading A Portrait and found it beyond boring.

>>25112028
I found the speech so excessive that I just rolled my eyes at it throughout. Still, it must appeal pretty well to the Catholic who's had that kind of religious guilt hammered into them their whole life, so I could at least understand. I just thought it was pretty obvious that eternity means something that never ends. Yeah, duh it'd go on for billions and trillions of years and still be nothing.

What I thought was stunning was Joyce's capacity for prose and metaphor especially. He's one of maybe three writers where I just think, "there's no way I could ever write like this, not in a million years."

I will gladly get behind knocking a highly respected name off their perch (even if I disagree, just to see someone thinking for themself) but when the extent of the crit is a bland ‘I started reading this and found it boring/didn’t like it’ it just makes you look … feeble.

Maybe you’d like his fart fetish letters to his wife

>>25112057
It's been too long since I read these , like 5-6 years.

There were just very very boring. And keep in mind I was really excited to read these because of /lit/.

Portrait was better than Dubliners 100%, but still didn't like it.

I have read much bigger books than these so it's not like I had some zoom zoom attention span.

I practically wasn't connected at all to these books.

>>25112001
>I fucking hate the Irish.
They're not that bad.

>>25112071
just an unacceptably toothless & boring(!) criticism.

>>25112076
Whatever you say, Bono

>>25112082
I was a little disappointed at how little of it was about art compared with then-contemporary Irish politics and religious guilt. Still enjoyed it, but I found the scenes with his friends weaker than the bits of actual narration. Definitely preference, that.

>>25112165
with Joyce, for me, when he goes wrong, it's never through doing something badly, always through doing something I don’t want done.

>>25111973
I don't care what you think. Why should I? You hated Dubliners and Portrait? I literally don't care.

>>25111973
>Hated it
I know you act insolent on the internet for attention but there are some retards who actually need to hear this so I'll just say it: this is not a valid criticism.

It was novel at the time

>>25112055
>Yeah, duh it'd go on for billions and trillions of years and still be nothing.
We all know this, and it’s easy to say like that, the point of the sermon is not to just state that any amount of time is nothing compared to infinity, it’s to make you imagine viscerally what that would actually be like, and to conceptualize it in a more concrete way

>>25112165
What did you think of Stephen? I think he’s great actually, he’s a fucking pseud but he reminds me of me because I’m also broke, somewhat reticent and resent all my friends.

>>25111973
>filtered
>filtered again
cope

>>25112044
>le jordan peterson fanclub
Many such cases kek

>>25111973
I didn't like Dubliners and thought Portrait was just okay, but Ulysses is undoubtedly a masterpiece. Though I personally prefer Moby-Dick and GR.

>>25112044
We like Dosto here, but we also hate him, I have come to the decision that your taste is shit. Read Dead Souls instead.

>>25112364
Never seen anything of Peterson except the make your bed and him raging memes.

Idk if he shills for Dosto, but he's based of he does it.

>>25112340
It was a while ago I read it, but yeah I liked him. That kind of unsure sensitivity in your adolescence. The type of education he and his friends had couldn't be further from what I had. I mostly recall the prose and poetry, so I really need a reread, actually. Maybe soon... But I gotta do Dubliners, first. Got that one waiting on the shelf.

>i thought book was...LE BORING
then go to an entertainment board, maybe anime and vidya will be more you.

>>25112367
Moby Dick is great, couldn’t enjoy GR, he’s a good writer but I simultaneously hate his quirky reddit tier humor on acid.

>>25112371
>ad hoc
>jumps to conclusions
you'll be a perfect member jej

>>25112377

So you believe a book can't be boring ?

>>25112376
He’s better in Ulysses, and even then, he’s not the best character in that, on account of not being the protagonist partly. He’s always written beautifully though, you can tell he’s Joyce’s literary alter ego just by reading his prose. Ulysses creates a sort of microcosm for many of the themes in Portrait, while also making them more interesting. I don’t want to say much else though if you haven’t read it.

>>25111973
"You had an arse full of farts that night, darling, and I fucked them out of you"
based

>>25112367
>I didn't like Dubliners
>but Ulysses is undoubtedly a masterpiece
Pseud.
>Though I personally prefer... GR.
Turbo-pseud.

>>25112441
I like Dubliners, but he’s right about Ulysses. Unfortunately he loses all his credibility when he makes the statement about GR

what would you even hate about dubliners?

>>25112395
I definitely aspire to read it, but I have a bunch of preliminaries before I dare. Maybe I'll get through those this year. Got a long list of works ahead. Joyce is definitely one of the few authors whose writing feels so poetic that the text itself is pleasant reading, even completely divorced from its context.

>>25112460
Oh yeah, Ulysses ramps up the poetry a lot, each episode is stylistically different from the last, though context definitely reinforces the experience. I think you’ll enjoy Sirens and Oxen I reckon (though Oxen is quite difficult without knowledge of a good bit of English language literature) considering how playful they both are. At least you’re preparing yourself.

>>25112393
>inferring the opposite is....LE LOGICALITY

>>25112522
This poster radiates effeminate energy

>>25112475
I know. Joyce's (and the general attitude of the high modern) style is so allusive and obsessed—not necessarily in a bad way—with being as dense as possible that it's sure to lose me in places, no matter how much Shakespeare and epic poetry I read, but I'm sure it'll be interesting. Probably, if I manage to stick with it, it'll become one of those "forever books" that you keep coming back to as you read. Don't even dare think about Finnegans Wake, his attempt at reaching total immortality through obscurity.

>>25112538
>forever books
I’d like for you to think so, it’s still my favourite after 25 or so years of reading. I generally like pre-modern literature too
>Finnegans Wake, his attempt at reaching total immortality through obscurity.
Well, he’s proven successful so far no?

>>25112460
Wait til you start reading actual poetry

>>25112535
>i'm smart and interesting

guess what


wrong.

>>25112454
Pynched

>>25112570
>I pretend to like certain things to appear smart and interesting
Sad

>>25111973
I read both recently. I almost forgot that I read Portrait this year, because I just wanted it to the end. The beginning was excellent and it made me more excited to read it after chapter 1, and I related with Stephen when he lost his virginity as a young man to a prostitute, and the subsequent development of his guilty conscience, but I found Joyce's personal philosophy infused in later sections to be... bland. I very much prefer non-fiction and philosophy, but it seems that in certain sections, Joyce seems to go too far. And then at others, when I would like to see the narrative expanded, he seems to not... I read Dubliner's two years ago and I enjoyed it more, but I wouldn't rate it above a 6 out of 10. I don't typically enjoy short stories, but most stories in Dubliners were good from memory, but in saying that I cannot recall details of any of them, and I have quite a good memory. Regardless, I am excited to read Ulysses. I expect it to be a huge step up, because without a doubt, Joyce's prose is pleasant.

>>25112044
Cringe. Dostoyevsky is for low IQ normie scum, considering his pathetic use of filler, fallacious philosophical arguments carried out through obvious and poorly masked narrative techniques, self-pity etc. Now I'm embarrassed that I share an opinion with a retard like yourself. Dostoyevsky is the retarded version of Goethe.

>>25112637
you will never be smart and you will never be interesting. unlike me.

>>25112763
dost is for americans too lazy to read russian symbolism, normies obsessed with psychology self-help bullshit are obsessed with his fiction because they can use it to support their meaningless, toothless worldviews. mishima is unfortunately currently being infected with a very similar strain of conceit and self-indulgence.

>>25112763
How did you find his then nascent stream of consciousness style being utilised in Portrait? He definitely improved on this, to a massive degree.

>>25111988
Oscar Wilde will always mog Joyce no matter what academia tries to force. Unless you make Wilde not Irish because he was too Anglo (he himself disagreed with that).

>>25112763
>Dostoyevsky is the retarded version of Goethe
trvke, I never did like that insipid, emotionally stunted excuse for a writer, and they call him the greatest!

>>25112809
Yeah, this is true, only if you literally suck cocks though of course, I’ll take Swift over him any day.

>>25112808
>little boy named tuckoo
I like Joyce's prose. I even liked the abruptness and the shifting narrative. The first chapter, when everyone is positioned at the dinner table and the contrast bwteen that and Stephen's experience at school, was utter genius. I took a break from reading for a day or two due to work commitments, and when I returned, I had the expectation that the rest of the novel would be of the same quality. I found it very relatable too as I mentioned above, even the thought processes employed by Stephen in trying to understand the world, to discern meaning from sounds, words etc. I also related with Stephen visiting the prostitutes... I was Catholic when I was younger. I remember just wanting to succumb to lust, and I did when I was in Holland during an exchange I completed over there. And I lost my "virginity" to a prositute. I felt so dirty, unclean and guilty. Now, I merely accept it as a fact - guilt is wasted effort and involves the meaningless self-infliction of pain.

>>25112792
He is the most entry level author imaginable. Hacks like Camus and Satre ride his cock, which isn't surprising. I read CP and Notes when I was 12, and I remember loving him then! Alas, it seems that only a genuine retard, or one who has the intellect of a pre-pubescent boy, can appreciate Dos

>>25112458
>>25111973
can you tell me op?

Kind of ironic The Dead is by far the most beloved of the collection and it's precisely because it's the one piece that Joyce ever really developed a plot for. Plotchads can't lost

>>25112903
the plot is the shittiest thing about that story and is why it drags for the first ~15 pages

>>25112829
In that case, yeah I think you’ll enjoy Ulysses, and at least in my opinion, it gets better as it continues with the latter half of the novel being some of the greatest literature I’ve ever read. I found myself relating to Stephen myself, though for different reasons than you, namely my desire to make something of my art while struggling financially, and being held back by my own hubris. Furthermore, I too relate in guilt, that comes less from a religious context and more familial. That all being said, I much prefer Bloom.

>>25112889
There were like a couple of good stories and all the others were not something incredible. It was a mid book which isn't terrible, but it's being shilled as if it's a masterpiece.

I really wanna know, what kind of people enjoy Joyce ? Maybe it's a culture thing that depends on where you live etc.

>>25112829
I like to hope dostoniggers grow out of him and read good Russians like Gogol, Tolstoy and Bely (the best ruskie)

>>25112909
Cope how you will but you know I'm right

>>25112922
well then I would say you were indifferent to it, not that you hated it

>>25112922
Well anon… I don’t know what to tell you, stick to your ghastly rigmarole in Dostoevsky I guess.

File: 1591388614381.jpg (23.7 KB)

23.7 KB JPG

Why are Americans and other internet fags constantly cooming over Dostoyevsky?
Russians themselves wouldn't even put him into top 3 (where Tolstoy, Pushkin and Chekhov are) and maybe not even in top 5 (where he would have to fight Turgenev, Gogol and Lermontov, who are rarely even mentioned here)

>>25111985
Dubliners is a collection of short stories, some of which are just dreadful. If you heap praise on every single one, you have a mental deficiency.

>>25112044
>>25112763
It is, as in all Dostoyevsky's novels, a rush and tumble of words with endless repetitions, mutterings aside, a verbal overflow which shocks the reader after, say, Lermontov's transparent and beautifully poised prose. Dostoyevsky as we know is a great seeker after truth, a genius of spiritual morbidity, but as we also know he is not a great writer in the sense Tolstoy, Pushkin and Chekhov are. And, I repeat, not because the world he creates is unreal -all the worlds of writers are unreal - but because it is created too hastily without any sense of that harmony and economy which the most irrational masterpiece is bound to comply with (in order to be a masterpiece). Indeed, in a sense Dostoyevsky is much too rational in his crude methods, and though his facts are but spiritual facts and his characters mere ideas in the likeness of people, their interplay and development are actuated by the mechanical methods of the earthbound and conventional novels of the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

>>25112964
>and though his facts are but spiritual facts and his characters mere ideas in the likeness of people
One of the biggest issues I have with him is how theatrical and his mouthpieces for his ideas masquerading as actual characters are while, as you say, are actually quite unremarkably written.

>>25112959
jordan peterson fanclub

stemkiddies felt shame for having spent their entire 20s with porn and vidya, and the internet's most popular self-help daddy shills dost like nothing else

>>25112928
>le non-argument
I win

>>25112959
Babby's first Russo. I like him but always preferred Nabokov, Gogol and especially Bely, personally.

File: IMG_0783.jpg (179.2 KB)

179.2 KB JPG

>>25112959
Do they not like Bely? But he’s my boy… :(

>>25113107
Burgers have literally never heard of him, unironically.

>>25113099
Go ahead and explain the real reason why it's the most celebrated story then, and also how it drags anymore than the plot less moodpieces that can't be called stories.

>>25113146
most people are retarded and frolic towards the slop. unlike me, the enlightened intellectual. simple as.

File: readingtbk.jpg (30 KB)

30 KB JPG

>>25112959
He makes me feel like I’m all cultured and unique and shit after doomscrolling

>>25111973
i think both of them have really good parts but they're in the middle of a lot of stuff that is either incomprehensible or just not compelling. he's definitely a good author, better than Beckett at least, but I don't think he's top-tier like a lot of people say

>>25113107
Who?
t. Mutt burger

>>25113153
>autism
skill issue.

I was Stephen at 18 whenI first read Portrait. Now at 33 I am still Stephen.

>>25113149
Concession accepted.

Why did this Joyce thread turn into Dosto hate thread?

>>25113241
>i will never be smart and i will never be special

>>25113396
dont know but glad it did

>>25113396
Dosto is the first thing people read when they're trying to get into literature, so even though he's actually good, /lit/izens are obligated to constantly go out of their way to shit on him in order to not seem like "normies"

he's 7/10 and deserves to be treated as such

t. someone who's glad this turned into a hate thread

>>25113409
He’s being treated more like a 4/10 right now. I don’t really like him at al but he’s better than that, there are many better Russians though

>>25113085
Dostoyevsky seems to have been chosen by the destiny of Russian letters to become Russia’s greatest playwright, but he took the wrong turning and wrote novels.

>>25113405
He is not good. Dosto is essentially sadomasochistic, he loves dwelling on characters who revel in how depraved they are, but who also prostrate themselves in the just punishment or humiliation of their depravity. His sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes imply the exact situation he adored, all the violence and sexual intrigue he desired so much, but with the approval of his super ego since they ritualistically degrade themselves in a kind of spiritual fetishistic pleasure in confessing, being punished, and then being "redeemed". It's lurid and partakes of a sick kind of gratification in self flagellation. If you read Dosto's novels, they are chock full of a grotesque macabre fascination with suffering and shame, with murder and sex and the subsequent groveling misery of those who find themselves in such situations. This type of tripe is 100% on the level of a typical harlequin romance novel, but because it's some old Russian who added Christian Orthodox themes as an accent to the sadomasochism, /lit/ eats it up. It's perverse.

No you fucking retard lol

>>25112959
I'd rate him above Tolstoy. I don't particularly like either of them that much though.

>>25113456
Another retard quoting Nabokov, good job. How does it feel to be an NPC?

>>25113465
>grotesque macabre fascination with suffering and shame
Perhaps you should read into the social surroundings and personal experiences Dostoevsky lived through. What you call perverse, was very much the reality that he had to deal with. You’re just a pampered retard.

>>25113409
>7/10
That’s generous
>>25113532
Cope

>>25113409
>he's 7/10
Yeah he's no looker, but he's a brilliant writer.

>>25113870
…on planet Peterson

>>25113870
lol

>>25112961
>some of which are just dreadful.
Your taste is dreadful.

>25113870
>i just started reading 2 years ago
>the porn cravings are still quite strong

>>25114147
Nausicaa gave me a stiffy. Though GR is still better if you're in for a wank.

>>25113465
he's just a weak sensitive twink-boy born into a country and culture much too hardcore for his sensibilities, it's no wonder he has the fans he has. read poets like mayakovsky if you want russians with conviction and gravitas.

>>25111973
I'm convinced anyone who does not like Dubliners is not human. I don't even like modernism but the simple way in which he conveys emotions and thoughts is unmatched.

>>25114427
>t.bugman

>>25114427
Borges considered Dubliners as sentimental, silly and stupid stories and Joyce deprived of all talent except rhetoric skill

>>25114536
Yeah but Joyce is a much better writer than Borges.

>>25114536
He was mostly right but so is >>25114562

>>25113804
It is questionable whether one can really discuss the aspects of ''realism'' or of ''human experience'' when considering an author whose gallery of characters consists almost exclusively of neurotics and lunatics. Besides all this, Dostoyevsky's characters have yet another remarkable feature: Throughout the book they do not develop as personalities. We get them all complete at the beginning of the tale, and so they remain without any considerable changes, although their surroundings may alter and the most extraordinary things may happen to them. In the case of Raskolnikov in ''Crime and Punishment,'' for instance, we see a man go from premeditated murder to the promise of an achievement of some kind of harmony with the outer world, but all this happens somehow from without: Innerly even Raskolnikov does not go through any true development of personality, and the other heroes of Dostoyevsky do even less so. The only thing that develops, vacillates, takes unexpected sharp turns, deviates completely to include new people and circumstances, is the plot. Let us always remember that basically Dostoyevsky is a writer of mystery stories where every character, once introduced to us, remains the same to the bitter end, complete with his special features and personal habits, and that they all are treated throughout the book they happen to be in like chessmen in a complicated chess problem. Being an intricate plotter, Dostoyevsky succeeds in holding the reader's attention; he builds up his climaxes and keeps up his suspenses with consummate mastery. But if you reread a book of his you have already read once so that you are familiar with the surprises and complications of the plot, you will at once realize that the suspense you experienced during the first reading is simply not there anymore. The misadventures of human dignity which form Dostoyevsky's favorite theme are as much allied to the farce as to the drama. In indulging his farcical side and being at the same time deprived of any real sense of humor, Dostoyevsky is sometimes dangerously near to sinking into garrulous and vulgar nonsense. (The relationship between a strong-willed hysterical old woman and a weak hysterical old man, the story of which occupies the first hundred pages of ''The Possessed,'' is tedious, being unreal.) The farcical intrigue which is mixed with tragedy is obviously a foreign importation; there is something second-rate French in the structure of his plots.

>>25113809
Those four years of penal servitude Dostoyevsky spent in Siberia he spent in the company of murderers and thieves, no segregation having been yet introduced between ordinary and political criminals. He described them in his ''Memoirs from the House of Death'' (1862). They do not make a pleasant reading. All the humiliations and hardships he endured are described in detail, as also the criminals among whom he lived. Not to go completely mad in those surroundings, Dostoyevsky had to find some sort of escape. This he found in a neurotic Christianism which he developed during these years. His emotional life up to that time had been unhappy. In Siberia he had married, but this first marriage proved unsatisfactory. In 1862-63 he had an affair with a woman writer and in her company visited England, France and Germany. This woman, whom he later characterized as ''infernal,'' seems to have been an evil character. Later she married Rozanov, an extraordinary writer combining moments of exceptional genius with manifestations of astounding naivete. (I knew Rozanov, but he had married another woman by that time.) This woman seems to have had a rather unfortunate influence on Dostoyevsky, further upsetting his unstable spirit. It was during this first trip abroad to Germany that the first manifestation of his passion for gambling appeared which during the rest of his life was the plague of his family and an insurmountable obstacle to any kind of material ease or peace to himself. Just as I have no ear for music, I have to my regret no ear for Dostoyevsky the Prophet. The very best thing he ever wrote seems to me to be ''The Double.'' It is the story - told very elaborately, in great, almost Joycean detail (as the critic Mirsky notes), and in a style intensely saturated with phonetic and rhythmical expressiveness - of a government clerk who goes mad, obsessed by the idea that a fellow clerk has usurped his identity. It is a perfect work of art, that story, but it hardly exists for the followers of Dostoyevsky the Prophet, because it was written in the 1840's, long before his so-called great novels; and moreover its imitation of Gogol is so striking as to seem at times almost a parody. Dostoyevsky characterizes his people through situation, through ethical matters, their psychological reactions, their inside ripples. After describing the looks of a character, he uses the old-fashioned device of not referring to his specific physical appearance anymore in the scenes with him. This is not the way of an artist - say Tolstoy - who sees his character in his mind all the time and knows exactly the specific gesture he will employ at this or that moment.

>>25112829
> Alas, it seems that only a genuine retard, or one who has the intellect of a pre-pubescent boy, can appreciate Dos
You’ll probably want to discontinue your Joyce readings. Or idk, maybe you’re fine with reading authors you consider retards.

>>25114536
Dubliners is great, I disagree with him there. He too praised his skill for merging the dreaming and waking as well as his “multitudinous diversity of
styles”. One thing to remember is that Borges was a man who favoured brevity in writing, which of course led to him finding Ulysses in particular daunting (in his “A Fragment on Joyce” he admits he hadn’t read the full thing, just parts of it) I think he had more respect for his writing than you seem to imply. But i know he hated Finnegans Wake and its neologisms, but who fucking didn’t back then? Borges is great, I really do enjoy him, but I agree with >>25114562

>>25114711
damn that sucks learning borges didn't have the spine to finish ulysses, i always liked him and don't enjoy losing respect for him

>>25114686
Yeah yeah shallow mouthpieces and ghastly rigmarole we get it Vladdy boy.

File: peperoni2.jpg (54.3 KB)

54.3 KB JPG

>>25114699
The clowns of this board really do spend all day trashing their favorite authors favorite authors.

>>25114427
The problem with Joyce's writing is that it's emotionally impotent. His works are essentially just regurgitations of all the reading he's done. He was much too reliant on the work and ideas of others, which is why he resorted to writing pretty sentences, employing specific methods, and demonstrating ideas. Stripped of its flashiness his writing is rather lifeless. In the opinion of this reader anyway :)

>>25114752
>no emotion
skill issue, filtered, stick to anime, automaton

>>25114752
I could maybe understand someone reading Ulysses and getting filtered like this, but I cannot imagine anyone who's read Dubliners thinking that Joyce's writing is "lifeless"

>>25114752
you have to be incredibly gullible and naive to think that literary devices and techniques make a work less emotional or are some kind of posturing veneer. joyce is by far one of the most emotive and sincere writers i've ever encoutnered. maybe you're neurodivergent?

>>25114562
>>25114722
>>25114699
>prefer Joyce over Borges
holy mental retardation

>25114801
>im not smart
damn, sucks. anyway

>>25114801
trvke

>>25114779
that's easy, just imagine a black youth

Borges: Perhaps Ulysses tells us more about its characters than any other novel—on one page we're given detailed information about Bloom's diet, on another about how many buttons his coat has—but that information doesn't help us imagine them. Why write a book that mentions every shop in Dublin? Joyce's ideas, as Stuart Gilbert relates them, weren't lucid. The stories in Dubliners are very silly. Müller said that Ulysses wasn't a book written to be read, but to be discussed; not for readers, but for critics. I don't know if there isn't a certain analogy between Rabelais and Joyce.

Borges: Joyce's books are idiotic, but they allow for critical commentary.

Borges: Let's not kid ourselves. However intelligent he may be, Joyce is in the same league as Tzara and Marinetti.

Borges: How could a man with purely verbal talent, like Joyce, fail to grasp that what he shouldn't write was a novel? I hope Joyce's fame fades, because it is truly a calamity: it makes writers idiots and even leads them to lamentable imitations. Often, I find it impossible to engage in conversation because of the praise my interlocutors heap on Ulysses and Finnegans, and especially because of their quiet certainty that I share their enthusiasm… And why do these same people who admire Ulysses admire those sentimental and stupid stories in Dubliners?

Bioy Casares: I tell him about Joyce's letters and say that, if they reveal the author's true character, according to the Times Literary Supplement reviewer, they reveal intellectual poverty and undoubtedly a rather common soul. BORGES: "It doesn't surprise me: what a mistake Joyce made to write such a detailed book." BIOY: "It's typical of human stupidity to bore people with the demand that every writer's work must be 'engaged' and to admire Ulysses with equal passion, in both cases being wrong."

Google Translate was used

greentext next time, newbfag

>>25114427
I didn't find Dubliners particularly moving. And I'm not some emotionless golem, I cried multiple times over the Aeneid.

I am glad I started with Ulysses and followed it with FW, probably would have never read either if I had started with Dubliners or Portrait.

>>25114788
>joyce is by far one of the most emotive and sincere writers i've ever encoutnered.
This can't be possible. What's a part of his work that moved you?

was it some kind of irish affirmative action like did sth bad happen in ireland around joyce's time so the literary powers that be decided they needed elevate an irish voice or sth? cuz dubliners is fucking ass.

>>25114952
please go back

>>25114788
Understanding literary devices and techniques well enough that you can be moved by them is neurodivergent.

>>25114859
What makes you say that? I started with Portrait and thought it was great, it only motivated me to check out the others.

>>25114957
not really, that's just having a high school diploma. or are you a black burger?

>I don't understand what I'm reading so it must be bad

>>25115220
Both Dubliners and Portrait are perfectly legible. He only starts experimenting with Ulysses and FW.

>>25115220
Tell me smart guy, what was there for me to understand? What did I miss?

The boring stories of Dubliners or the borefest of Portrait?

The sewer part of the Les Miserables is a joy to read compared to these.

>>25114801
You must be baiting.

>>25114956
So none?

>>25115394
>Joyce is in the same league as Tzara and Marinetti
>t. Borges

go back now.

File: loadedquestion.jpg (258.9 KB)

258.9 KB JPG

>>25115517

>>25116339
>>25116476
>Examples of what you're talking about?
>Heh not about to fall for that trap!
The absolute state lmao

You will never be smart and you will never win debates on the world web

I was also impressed by how mediocre Dubliners is.
Only three of the stories are good.
I think he's one of those authors you'll only like if English is your first language and if you're a really pretentious midwit.
Basically all British authors of the 20th century fall into this category.