" been made to depend On the most
tenuOllS
of
Hart-Clive-1962-Structure-and-Motif-in-Finnegans-Wake
wWdt,thoughlOme (;l the public.
paw foI1o.
.
.
ed by Joyce will nrely ha"" been trodden by his readen.
) A larsc part of the excitemenl Qf Fi/Uttg6/U Wdt dc:JI'!
'ndi un the pubating temloo betwcen the inward-looM!
: and outwud-lookin!
: aapeclS or eY<<y rymbol and theme in the book.
Joyce oould a\wa)'l feel cuy aboul the in n u f"ee ofhis ma terials; he was a praclised CT"f\aman with few dn.
.
.
bll about lUI ability to OOII,trnet a utid'ying and propuly Oldered _thetie whook_ But when it came to the OUl(r raa, whkh .
.
.
as to mal<e alOntewhat ,",ting OOntacl with the world, Jnyce Wat lesa oornfor~ble.
He could ne"".
be JUre that he had
digested hi! . materiaLsufficienuy to inttgnlte the oonglom<:no_ tion ofa leT1laL relCrence into a ". ". . ;. I\y meaningful docwnenl, but ",frered oolUtantly from inlcllcctu. l . . . neu inea akin to thooe intellJe redinp Qf pel"loOn. al inadequacy whkh mad. him to n:ticenl, defensive, and unapproachable. Though joyce ICkIom . poke about hit book', inner excellent<:, he needed comtant reauo. u-anct nfir, . dcva"ee to the nu~de world. This relevance he tried to emure by malcing ilS KDJI'! ' as wide as
poslible to lhat il mi! :hl include nol only aU gi\'Cn Cl<JI'! 'rienoe but every possible Jl'! 'nnutation of experience u well. He was desJl'! 'raldy concerned In make bis diffic. . . lt book intelligible tn the on:Iilu. ry reader; the bil~r sorrow he upcrienetd at lhe world't uncomprehending 100m Qf 'Wn. k in Prog'u ,' wu thoroughly genuine, if imperceptive, and rlIe dapair of his Jalt two yean was dttpcnro by the a\m<)SI: univemol Lack cflntemt shnwn in ! . be oomp\e(~ Fu-lUI It'dt.
joyce intended that FWuliIICI W4kt Ihnuld never he out of dal(. He wal delighl~ when it proved prophetic, thnugh it _uk! be difficu]11Or a book which Opelll ilS :onnt so wide not 10 be propbellc in tome direction nr olhe? . When the Finn awoke from oppressiou and ,hot the R. ,. . ,;an General jnyce smiled ; lind in ber 'Out of My 0. "'111" Mn. Gluht(:n, laking j nyce al IUs word, hat included Lon! . Haw_Haw (William joytt) among the dtaracten - a tlep nf which the author wnuld lu<<Ly
, A. Gto. ht<n, '0. . . of My 1. . lauuI', n. Aoo{nI, . . . . . XVIJ, '9W, p. 69- '7
? Some Mpt&ts ofFinMgans Wakt
ha~ approved. Had he tivro 10 hear him,Joyce wvuld limon certainly have ebimM thai biJ hatro expatriate namesake . . . . . . in mrospcct, ODe ci the eh. . . . . cU:r'l ci "iai/,ftJ WOW. So general and ""gue is ill polentially predict;'. . , COOIen. 1 that one might find il lempting to compare FimuKIDU Wd. with the T(:"""nding but woo\1y prophecies of the old almanacken, alwa)" cenain of some rncasuT(: ci fulfilment-tempting, that is, ifJoyce had not himso:lf anticipated the complln. on. Shorn tile Pcrunan is an anulgam of Bickcntaff and his equal and opposite oounlerpan, Panridgc. Tile ianer, 'kiUed' by Swift yet living 0 0 as a oouIlcsJ body, is of 00II. . . . , a richly ryrnbolic figuT(: rorJoya--the bird? like soul of the Partridge having fled. ",-,as W. t? Sbotm'. "'am riddle-is, like an almanad,
both trulh and f. aJ. . ,bood, inspired but nonsenskal; it is epitomised in almanack lIyle on pag<: '75.
From the beginning of his ",rur Joyce wu alwa)" lust luccc;aful as an artiOi when atlempting a direct approach 10 his lubjcct_rnallcr. Slephen'l defence of, and prcl". . -ena for, the dramatic genT(: . pringa ultimaldy fromJoyec', fundamentlll n<<d to pul himself . . 1 a ro","lcrablc distance from anything
. boul which be wanl<:<! to write with full emotional rontrol, . nd the"""",, immediate the experience the greater tbot _
oary distance. Slephen'. bold and uwubtle propooition to Emma in SltpAnI H. . . (SH '96-9) i, a k. ind of sJIDbolic p;ttOdy of" Ihe OOTltr. ilSting direct approach, and proves to be ? complete failuT(:. The fuble Iyric",m of Pomu P"'ft<I'k-Joyce'l only attempt at unambiguou, . . . If-cxpr. . . ion- forIN an aesthelic counterpart 10 Step~n'l limpl. nai~ry and i, equally uruu<:? emfui. Fi""'K41U W. . . u, the opposite ""tremc 0( . . . If_assured obliquity, rontaitts perhapol evet! moT(: personal involw:mtot than do the PIJItIC, and hcn<;e in writing it J oyce inevitably condtnuted hiIIIKIf to ". ,. 111. a giddy ridge ICpar. Uin, the twin abY"'" of IW nightma~the inwmpubenoihility of tou. ! indirection and me, ICntimcnt:. olily which alwaY"' ch. . . . . meriw:d his Itrong emotional commitments. Though for mOlt of its length Filllltg41lJ W". b is dd i,atdy poioed between th. . . , dangen, it i. s not without its weak points 1I which J oycc h. . overbalanced
"
? Some Asptcts rif Finmgans Wake
one way or the other, More disturbing than its notoriously impenetrable pa"agcs art\ those oc(Alional paragraphs of unuJ! ual lucidity where Joy<< $ettru 10 have capitulated all 100 eMily 10 a moment of undi"inguishrd lyricism. Such moments ~ to me rather too frequent in the much-praised 'Anna Livia Plurabdle' (1. 8) which, except fur the bravura ronchl_ sion, I find less ronvincing than the excitingly penpicaciollJ sketch"" of Anna'. rounlerpart, Issy (I'B-3, 457-61). Senti_ mentality w"-l al",aY' Ihe grealest hazard fOT Joyce. By ron_ ,inent u'" ofparody and ,atire he managed to awid its pilfalls mOl! t of the li,ne, lhough perhap! not quite ofien enough in FilllUgatU Wake. One may W<lnder how ,ueeC$lful he W<luld have been in hi, projectrd I"-It book, which was to have been charac_ tcriv. d by a return 10 lucidity. I ! ll$pr:cl Ihal there was rath~. r more than a bitler jibe at the adulato,. . in Joyce'. re_ mark to Nino Frank: 'Co: &Crait dr6le que je faw: un petit J"(Iman mondain a la Bourget . . . lis leraient bien attrapc. . ,
hein? "
Th:opile its undoubled complexity and abundant contenl, I
bdiev<: Fitwgmu Wah to have been . omcwhat extravagantly ovt:rl"(:ad by a number of . . . :cenl rommentatOTl, T oo <>ficn its <:onvolulions have been treated . . " a kind "rendless verbal equivalent of the Rorschach Ink-blot Test. The limits of . . . :Ie_ vancy ha. . . , been pu. hrd furthCl" and further back and thematic analysis h. .
" been made to depend On the most tenuOllS of
I find it impoMib1c to believe and fruitl= to ,uppost, for example, Ihal we are meant 1<> find 'Mallarme in every 1!
J.
ru.
,yllahle word containing two m's, as one wriler claiIIlll.
' Explication ofFinnegaos Wakt threaten.
, indeed, to g<:t altogelhCl" out of hand.
It i, hardly .
urpriting thaI the joyce industry' iL< a whole ,uffers the 100m of the unconvcned when
we have the unhappy . pectacle of a critic and acquaintance of J oyce'. devoling almoot a page to the proud elucidation of a word which does not, in fact, OCCur in the hook. ' In the partial
, K F. Ink, ? Sou,-m;" ,m Jonu:. Joyc. o:', L. . -r. lt. _ . 0>0. ~" p. ,686.
'94! J.
? 0. H. yrn. . . n. J_ " M. It. m. J, Par". '956, V<)i. II,p, "9?
? M. ? 00 p, Cotwn, 0", F,itoJJ-'Jo/a, Londoo, '9
'9)~p. ,ro.
? SIJTI! ( AsjJ<<ts rif Finmgans Wake
""~whicba~includedinthis. tudyIbavealwaY'pre. ferred to err on the aide of comervatiam rather than fullow up unlikely aUu';on? . r ~li. "" that lOme of the publilhed over? reading deriv. . from all. exaggerated idea of lh<: bonk', per.
venity, which h. . in turn led to an e"<<:so of zeal in the wrr:sde with word. and meanings. Jo)'<:<:', method. of word_formation and thematic allusion aJe almnst always very runple, and the
bonk'. d<:I1oted content is fairly . "-Iy to ~cogrWc. The ,. . ,ader of FilUltganJ W. . . . . can ""ually be et:rtain that if he exercise, ,. . ,awnable (arc he will have little trouble in picking up any major all. w. on to ide. . and thing. wilb which he ;" familiar. The dilfu:ulty in understanding what went into the bonk Ii. . mainly in the intuprccalion of allusions to unfamiliar material, fur it is ! lO1 alway> e. . . y to know jmt where to look for the cxplanati(ln <>f an obscurity. Although b~ wanted 10 be read
and appre<:iattd, Jore<' also aimed at giving hi< audience the imprt:";Qn Ibat Ibere w. . . always IOmething more beyond what they had undt:r. ltood, >(Im. thing more to be Itriven for, and this is et:rtainly one realDn fur the 1:>o<,k'l gr<:at load of all. w. on and rcferenr,c. A< ~tr. J . S. Atherton h. . . pointed oul,' when J oy"" attempted to create a microoosmi~ equivalent of God's macro- <<osm, he forced hi""elf into the position of having 10 write a
work which w1>l1ld ~flect the ultimale ioucrucability of the unive. . . along with all its other characteristics, but tbis constant awattne>l on the part (If the reader that he h. . not grouped everything can be irritating, and iCe"" to accounl for some of the choleric ombu. . . ! :! againlt the book. I do nOI, howe""r, want to rcopen that tired old debate about whether it ;, all worth the dfon and whether ,nch intentional obKurity can be
artistically justified. It mwt by now, I dunk, be evident to all thaI there arc great literary tre~ures buried in Fimrtgmu Wake and that potentially al any n. te il is in the lame clau . . . Ulyms- whicl' immediately pu! :! it among the great bonk. . ofthe CC! llury - bul whether the riches are . ullicient to ""pay tbe coruider. ahle labour which m""t be expended to bring them 10 Ihe . urface mlUt very likely alway1 remain a malter of talle and
, Alh<t1on, p. "9.
"
? Sa~ kptfts ofFi1ll1t8ans Watt
ICmperamcnt. Fortunau:ly, like the lobotcn devoured by H. C. Ear. . . . . d:cr, the lw-dcst part ofFiatpM Wdt is iu shell. Beneath \. he l'IU. IIive superstructureofintcn'lOven motifs t. huciI a fundamental syntactical clarity and . implicity-KI much so, indeed, that oomp~ with \. he n. dicalliu:rary cxperimenu of the 1920', and 30'S Fin~ttQIIS Wab is almost conventional in style. All its technical advances arc dcvdopmentt-rcmarkable only in the ""ten! to which j oyce has pU$ho:d thc:TJ>--OI" ts\ab. lisbcd pra~ticc. joy<:e makes no a! tempt, for eumpLe, to break up the normal pror. . . . . . . . of word-. . ! OC;ation, nor to dispense with d aUIC-StruCture,'" do S<cin,j ol. . . . or the Dadais11. This under- lying oonxrv:aw,n is very dearly revealed in the nunu$Cripl3,
wheremostof\. hefirstdrafu,whichwn"C tobeencnutedlater with glittering o rnamentation, prove to have been wrillon 0 01 \ in the f1alles! communiutive proae.
I I : A R T O F P A N N I N G ( 18. j. . ~. . )
joyce Ita, been . "3Iiously praised and ""iled fOT filling hi. iatet" book:s witb litenory rubbish--<atci'? phr. ues, clicha, jour. naltle, popular lOngs, and the WOnt kind of guob from girll' . . . ? <<ltliel. II it undt:nU. ble that he round considcnblc dcLijjht in such trash, and a delight that was not alw. o. }", criticil. Some commentaton have certainly been too charitable to j oyce in implying that the bad operas, windy rhetoric, and . . ,ntiment,l dillieJ ,",re collected purely as lIylillie aunt-sallies, though at
us. . . l j oy" tU"'<<<Is, by hi. devious methods, in making functional ntaBity and uncritical delight go hand in haDd.
The primary energy which maintain. the highly cha r p poIaritiQ ofFu-gas Wdt iI su. mlted by cydeJ ofconstantly varied rcpetition- 'Thc Kim anew', u j oya pUB it (2 tS. 2S). The: ttronger the prc. . . ,. tablished tapectancy, the wider can be
the variations played on a word or motif. A pun u effective oaly when itt lint term is vividly prcpar.
digested hi! . materiaLsufficienuy to inttgnlte the oonglom<:no_ tion ofa leT1laL relCrence into a ". ". . ;. I\y meaningful docwnenl, but ",frered oolUtantly from inlcllcctu. l . . . neu inea akin to thooe intellJe redinp Qf pel"loOn. al inadequacy whkh mad. him to n:ticenl, defensive, and unapproachable. Though joyce ICkIom . poke about hit book', inner excellent<:, he needed comtant reauo. u-anct nfir, . dcva"ee to the nu~de world. This relevance he tried to emure by malcing ilS KDJI'! ' as wide as
poslible to lhat il mi! :hl include nol only aU gi\'Cn Cl<JI'! 'rienoe but every possible Jl'! 'nnutation of experience u well. He was desJl'! 'raldy concerned In make bis diffic. . . lt book intelligible tn the on:Iilu. ry reader; the bil~r sorrow he upcrienetd at lhe world't uncomprehending 100m Qf 'Wn. k in Prog'u ,' wu thoroughly genuine, if imperceptive, and rlIe dapair of his Jalt two yean was dttpcnro by the a\m<)SI: univemol Lack cflntemt shnwn in ! . be oomp\e(~ Fu-lUI It'dt.
joyce intended that FWuliIICI W4kt Ihnuld never he out of dal(. He wal delighl~ when it proved prophetic, thnugh it _uk! be difficu]11Or a book which Opelll ilS :onnt so wide not 10 be propbellc in tome direction nr olhe? . When the Finn awoke from oppressiou and ,hot the R. ,. . ,;an General jnyce smiled ; lind in ber 'Out of My 0. "'111" Mn. Gluht(:n, laking j nyce al IUs word, hat included Lon! . Haw_Haw (William joytt) among the dtaracten - a tlep nf which the author wnuld lu<<Ly
, A. Gto. ht<n, '0. . . of My 1. . lauuI', n. Aoo{nI, . . . . . XVIJ, '9W, p. 69- '7
? Some Mpt&ts ofFinMgans Wakt
ha~ approved. Had he tivro 10 hear him,Joyce wvuld limon certainly have ebimM thai biJ hatro expatriate namesake . . . . . . in mrospcct, ODe ci the eh. . . . . cU:r'l ci "iai/,ftJ WOW. So general and ""gue is ill polentially predict;'. . , COOIen. 1 that one might find il lempting to compare FimuKIDU Wd. with the T(:"""nding but woo\1y prophecies of the old almanacken, alwa)" cenain of some rncasuT(: ci fulfilment-tempting, that is, ifJoyce had not himso:lf anticipated the complln. on. Shorn tile Pcrunan is an anulgam of Bickcntaff and his equal and opposite oounlerpan, Panridgc. Tile ianer, 'kiUed' by Swift yet living 0 0 as a oouIlcsJ body, is of 00II. . . . , a richly ryrnbolic figuT(: rorJoya--the bird? like soul of the Partridge having fled. ",-,as W. t? Sbotm'. "'am riddle-is, like an almanad,
both trulh and f. aJ. . ,bood, inspired but nonsenskal; it is epitomised in almanack lIyle on pag<: '75.
From the beginning of his ",rur Joyce wu alwa)" lust luccc;aful as an artiOi when atlempting a direct approach 10 his lubjcct_rnallcr. Slephen'l defence of, and prcl". . -ena for, the dramatic genT(: . pringa ultimaldy fromJoyec', fundamentlll n<<d to pul himself . . 1 a ro","lcrablc distance from anything
. boul which be wanl<:<! to write with full emotional rontrol, . nd the"""",, immediate the experience the greater tbot _
oary distance. Slephen'. bold and uwubtle propooition to Emma in SltpAnI H. . . (SH '96-9) i, a k. ind of sJIDbolic p;ttOdy of" Ihe OOTltr. ilSting direct approach, and proves to be ? complete failuT(:. The fuble Iyric",m of Pomu P"'ft<I'k-Joyce'l only attempt at unambiguou, . . . If-cxpr. . . ion- forIN an aesthelic counterpart 10 Step~n'l limpl. nai~ry and i, equally uruu<:? emfui. Fi""'K41U W. . . u, the opposite ""tremc 0( . . . If_assured obliquity, rontaitts perhapol evet! moT(: personal involw:mtot than do the PIJItIC, and hcn<;e in writing it J oyce inevitably condtnuted hiIIIKIf to ". ,. 111. a giddy ridge ICpar. Uin, the twin abY"'" of IW nightma~the inwmpubenoihility of tou. ! indirection and me, ICntimcnt:. olily which alwaY"' ch. . . . . meriw:d his Itrong emotional commitments. Though for mOlt of its length Filllltg41lJ W". b is dd i,atdy poioed between th. . . , dangen, it i. s not without its weak points 1I which J oycc h. . overbalanced
"
? Some Asptcts rif Finmgans Wake
one way or the other, More disturbing than its notoriously impenetrable pa"agcs art\ those oc(Alional paragraphs of unuJ! ual lucidity where Joy<< $ettru 10 have capitulated all 100 eMily 10 a moment of undi"inguishrd lyricism. Such moments ~ to me rather too frequent in the much-praised 'Anna Livia Plurabdle' (1. 8) which, except fur the bravura ronchl_ sion, I find less ronvincing than the excitingly penpicaciollJ sketch"" of Anna'. rounlerpart, Issy (I'B-3, 457-61). Senti_ mentality w"-l al",aY' Ihe grealest hazard fOT Joyce. By ron_ ,inent u'" ofparody and ,atire he managed to awid its pilfalls mOl! t of the li,ne, lhough perhap! not quite ofien enough in FilllUgatU Wake. One may W<lnder how ,ueeC$lful he W<luld have been in hi, projectrd I"-It book, which was to have been charac_ tcriv. d by a return 10 lucidity. I ! ll$pr:cl Ihal there was rath~. r more than a bitler jibe at the adulato,. . in Joyce'. re_ mark to Nino Frank: 'Co: &Crait dr6le que je faw: un petit J"(Iman mondain a la Bourget . . . lis leraient bien attrapc. . ,
hein? "
Th:opile its undoubled complexity and abundant contenl, I
bdiev<: Fitwgmu Wah to have been . omcwhat extravagantly ovt:rl"(:ad by a number of . . . :cenl rommentatOTl, T oo <>ficn its <:onvolulions have been treated . . " a kind "rendless verbal equivalent of the Rorschach Ink-blot Test. The limits of . . . :Ie_ vancy ha. . . , been pu. hrd furthCl" and further back and thematic analysis h. .
" been made to depend On the most tenuOllS of
we have the unhappy . pectacle of a critic and acquaintance of J oyce'. devoling almoot a page to the proud elucidation of a word which does not, in fact, OCCur in the hook. ' In the partial
, K F. Ink, ? Sou,-m;" ,m Jonu:. Joyc. o:', L. . -r. lt. _ . 0>0. ~" p. ,686.
'94! J.
? 0. H. yrn. . . n. J_ " M. It. m. J, Par". '956, V<)i. II,p, "9?
? M. ? 00 p, Cotwn, 0", F,itoJJ-'Jo/a, Londoo, '9
'9)~p. ,ro.
? SIJTI! ( AsjJ<<ts rif Finmgans Wake
""~whicba~includedinthis. tudyIbavealwaY'pre. ferred to err on the aide of comervatiam rather than fullow up unlikely aUu';on? . r ~li. "" that lOme of the publilhed over? reading deriv. . from all. exaggerated idea of lh<: bonk', per.
venity, which h. . in turn led to an e"<<:so of zeal in the wrr:sde with word. and meanings. Jo)'<:<:', method. of word_formation and thematic allusion aJe almnst always very runple, and the
bonk'. d<:I1oted content is fairly . "-Iy to ~cogrWc. The ,. . ,ader of FilUltganJ W. . . . . can ""ually be et:rtain that if he exercise, ,. . ,awnable (arc he will have little trouble in picking up any major all. w. on to ide. . and thing. wilb which he ;" familiar. The dilfu:ulty in understanding what went into the bonk Ii. . mainly in the intuprccalion of allusions to unfamiliar material, fur it is ! lO1 alway> e. . . y to know jmt where to look for the cxplanati(ln <>f an obscurity. Although b~ wanted 10 be read
and appre<:iattd, Jore<' also aimed at giving hi< audience the imprt:";Qn Ibat Ibere w. . . always IOmething more beyond what they had undt:r. ltood, >(Im. thing more to be Itriven for, and this is et:rtainly one realDn fur the 1:>o<,k'l gr<:at load of all. w. on and rcferenr,c. A< ~tr. J . S. Atherton h. . . pointed oul,' when J oy"" attempted to create a microoosmi~ equivalent of God's macro- <<osm, he forced hi""elf into the position of having 10 write a
work which w1>l1ld ~flect the ultimale ioucrucability of the unive. . . along with all its other characteristics, but tbis constant awattne>l on the part (If the reader that he h. . not grouped everything can be irritating, and iCe"" to accounl for some of the choleric ombu. . . ! :! againlt the book. I do nOI, howe""r, want to rcopen that tired old debate about whether it ;, all worth the dfon and whether ,nch intentional obKurity can be
artistically justified. It mwt by now, I dunk, be evident to all thaI there arc great literary tre~ures buried in Fimrtgmu Wake and that potentially al any n. te il is in the lame clau . . . Ulyms- whicl' immediately pu! :! it among the great bonk. . ofthe CC! llury - bul whether the riches are . ullicient to ""pay tbe coruider. ahle labour which m""t be expended to bring them 10 Ihe . urface mlUt very likely alway1 remain a malter of talle and
, Alh<t1on, p. "9.
"
? Sa~ kptfts ofFi1ll1t8ans Watt
ICmperamcnt. Fortunau:ly, like the lobotcn devoured by H. C. Ear. . . . . d:cr, the lw-dcst part ofFiatpM Wdt is iu shell. Beneath \. he l'IU. IIive superstructureofintcn'lOven motifs t. huciI a fundamental syntactical clarity and . implicity-KI much so, indeed, that oomp~ with \. he n. dicalliu:rary cxperimenu of the 1920', and 30'S Fin~ttQIIS Wab is almost conventional in style. All its technical advances arc dcvdopmentt-rcmarkable only in the ""ten! to which j oyce has pU$ho:d thc:TJ>--OI" ts\ab. lisbcd pra~ticc. joy<:e makes no a! tempt, for eumpLe, to break up the normal pror. . . . . . . . of word-. . ! OC;ation, nor to dispense with d aUIC-StruCture,'" do S<cin,j ol. . . . or the Dadais11. This under- lying oonxrv:aw,n is very dearly revealed in the nunu$Cripl3,
wheremostof\. hefirstdrafu,whichwn"C tobeencnutedlater with glittering o rnamentation, prove to have been wrillon 0 01 \ in the f1alles! communiutive proae.
I I : A R T O F P A N N I N G ( 18. j. . ~. . )
joyce Ita, been . "3Iiously praised and ""iled fOT filling hi. iatet" book:s witb litenory rubbish--<atci'? phr. ues, clicha, jour. naltle, popular lOngs, and the WOnt kind of guob from girll' . . . ? <<ltliel. II it undt:nU. ble that he round considcnblc dcLijjht in such trash, and a delight that was not alw. o. }", criticil. Some commentaton have certainly been too charitable to j oyce in implying that the bad operas, windy rhetoric, and . . ,ntiment,l dillieJ ,",re collected purely as lIylillie aunt-sallies, though at
us. . . l j oy" tU"'<<<Is, by hi. devious methods, in making functional ntaBity and uncritical delight go hand in haDd.
The primary energy which maintain. the highly cha r p poIaritiQ ofFu-gas Wdt iI su. mlted by cydeJ ofconstantly varied rcpetition- 'Thc Kim anew', u j oya pUB it (2 tS. 2S). The: ttronger the prc. . . ,. tablished tapectancy, the wider can be
the variations played on a word or motif. A pun u effective oaly when itt lint term is vividly prcpar.