It would Iud you 10 believe t1ut he had in mind
rymbolism
or ideafum, the .
Hart-Clive-1962-Structure-and-Motif-in-Finnegans-Wake
.
!
l'd:t: If"<< and rlOne become washel"W(lmen, h<:wme Shem and Sbaun, become tree and .
tone once againi tN: milellone smiia, the r~lver barb, IN: barn:l ornt.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
m ract, 'the dumb optak'.
As, with thc lan- guage, ew:ry vUible or audible rymbol in FilllltltJIU Wdt prO'la to be a many-levt:lkd thing, and Joyce'.
conc~m to keep the horizontal lina of meaning flowing al all o;osts acCOunts for the a u d a c i t y o f m a n y o f h i s a w w - i a t i o n s o f J ) ' m b o l , a s ; t doo: : o f o r h i s radical, ~ _cAe-approach to the pun.
Allbough in everyday mallcn Joyce app"an to have lived, andverylargdytohaw:thought,asr. . . . "'JW"~. he wall, Iii<<: Bauddairc and Mann btfo", him, ever more disposed
?
,. ,
? Corusporultru:(S
as he grew older to look on life--spiritual and ph~ca1-. . . a complex of motif. and <ymbol. which mwt be recogni>cd, named, and organised an paper. A. w. . know- ifonly on the auth<>rity of the biogno. phies and lette. --the mature Joyce'. v;"ian was of a world pc::rmeatcd by corre. pondences; and if he did not alrow thi. intelleclllal visian to have any radical effect on h;" way of life he was, neverthd=, perp<tIIally and in- ordinately . upc::ntilia"" and sUp',. . . tition is nothing if nat an
intuitive admiMion of the validity of cof"",pondence.
Became ofJoyce'. wellknawn sensitivity to what he believed 1<> be . ignificant correspondences in the world around him, it would be easy to misinterpret h. . usc of and attitude to eOr- =ponderu:es in literature. Two things, therefore, need to be
made clear at the outset: fil":'lt, that Jove<' paid very little attention to 'traditional' oor=pondenc. . except for what he could get out of them on hi< own terms, and >ecnnd, that, whatever his personal habi'" and belie! ! may have been, he made no appeal in hi< boob to the unconocious mind or to irrational scnsibiliti. . , and never ddibe. . . . lely played On the IIIbliminal re,porues of h. . readen.
While it . . true that the reader coming to Fin"""", Wake for the first time tends to be aware oflittle mOre than a . . a ofv:>gue and dream_like symbols looming dimly before the mind, later familiarity dispeb any idea that J ove<', like Yeals or SOme of the surreal. . ", is trying t<> build up a work cfart out ofarchetypal symbol. . which can pc::neU"atc directly into the uncomci<>u. whe,. . , their 'ignificance will be immediately apprehended by the psyche. FinntgflliS Wah i. full cf allusions to, and emploY'
techniques broadly ba. . d on the theory of, a cOmmOn psychic sub:sttatum in which individuality i, dissolved, but, as with hi. nsc of psychoanalytic theory, J oyeto', application of th" idea is entirely imerna! . All J oyce "'qnire. of hi, 'ideal reader', betides patience, . . intelligence, good. _",~ll, a eerta. io amount ofiearning, and common scnsitivity; this i, the level at which he worked and from which it is mOi! t profitahle to approach him. There is nOqu. . tian afJoyce's . ymbols' being informed with &ignificaru:e by the ",ader', uncon,cioul re'pona<:l, or at le. . . t not more so
,. 6
? ClJfTupmulmces
than il the <:ac with any literary art-form. An analogow informing prMA:SS d<>t:$ indeed go:> o:>n in Finn'l,a. . . WMe, but it takes pla<:e within til<: work, external to the uadcr (except for his normal, oonaciotU respoN<: to language) and entirely con- trolled. by the defining eircumsLmces o:>f the text. J oyce was not one intentionally to kave the functioning ofhit material tQ the vagaries of anybody'~ mind. He was, in any caJe, tempcrn- mentally incapable of committing himself to any world-view, leallt of aU 50 prett"ntio\lll a throry as that of aTChetyp<:S, If arclJ. etyp<:Swere to b< rnerl_nd they were attractively rdevant to J nyc<:'. themcs--rnen not a traditional, nor a . aentificaliy established, but a Jnyce-dictated significance was indicated. The great majority nf the . ymbnb are tmany, if imprecisely, a. . igned. The an;hetyp<:S hold gu<>d fnr Earwicker, for Anna, for Sil<:m and Shaun; whether they are valid as psychological aTChet)'f>l';S for the reader is largdy irrelevant. In fact Joyce
took on a task at once safer and more arduo\lll than that which the later Yea. . set himself: that of creating for the reader'. wntemplation a oompletc working? model of a collective un- ooruciou. in which his symbols could function. All tlu: characters and even the inert 'ymbnlic obj<:<:u are steeped in a fluid medium of geoeralised dream? oonsciQ\llIness; the motifS and motif. . . ymbob, t<:<:urring again and again ill this compntdium nf all mind>, arc subtLy shaped and defined by their eoviron_ ment so that they finally COme to have a signifi~ance, reiatiVt; to the frames "f rdierence nf the book, analogou. to that which i. alleged for the Yeatsian orJ1lngian symbols. Such a Ulting and annealing prot. ,. . takes time and--despite all Joyce', com?
prouive p""",. ,. . . . . . . . pace. The book had to be a long and involved one if this $low reaction of ,ynthetic mental chemistry was to take place. It has often been regretted thatJoyc<: did not leave F;n1ItlaJU W. . J:, as it wa. in thc early, aborter dmfu. TItere are two major, and I think overwhelming, ohj~ctions to thi,: fin! ,
though the early dran. . are tlillier to un<ler1tand in the &C',"e that each sentence ream. more Q f I. ,. . like 'normal' F,nglith, thei, total rneanffig i, never in any important scnac cleafcr, and ! ICCOnd, only the Vi'St, muhidimen. ;. ,nal and minutely particulariscd
'"
? Coms/'On(UnttJ
final teXt un provide that impresaion of endless rymbolic interplay which is ow 'ry 10 inflQe life and lUllOnorny into the 'archetypes'. TI>cic meaning is built up little by little by the nelWOtu of COtt ('ponden",," wbose: mesh ) oyce ~ t:ftI" more finely. He expeeted his 'c"derl 10 know IOmething about what corre. pondenc'" a u , but not to have any speeialknowledge or, ar (""ling fo. , traditional meaningJ, and to this extent Fi_,altl
Wakt i. , I think, more immediately accessible than worlo:. based on a received symbolism. 'Stephen Hero' thought that
'II", artis! who could dioc:ntangle the . ubtle lOul of the image from ill mesh of defining circullUUoUC'" moet c>:actly and re- embody it in artistic eircunut"n<<I chosen as the most elIaCl
lOr iu new office, he was the lu~me "rtiJI,' (SH 78)
The statement is both trite and vague, but it h. as a oenain inverted applicability to F""llW lYakt, into which)oy<:e pr0-
jected the whole mesh of defining circumatancn . . long with the . ubde IOUI. Defining circum. tance. have become Ihe mOSI important ihing in a book which il pieced together on the analogy of the 'coIJideon<:ape' and which reli. ,. on relativity
(oe the . . . tablishmenl of ill valuet:
'. . . to amc:cotnote solely on tile \iler-. . l ICt'IIC or C'ICfl the psy<:hologiul content of any docUlllfllt to the *On: neglect of the enveloping faco tho:nuelves circumstantiating it is ? . ? hurtful to oound senor. . . ' (log. llI)
In dilCussiDg hi. . . . . thetie theory, Stephen d i$;tvows any anagogiul aignificancc in the word c/ari/as:
'The connotation of the word, Slephen ~d, is . . . . . ther vague. Aquinas u. c:s a lerm which . . :ems 10 he inexact. It bAlRed me for a kmg lime.
It would Iud you 10 believe t1ut he had in mind rymbolism or ideafum, the . upreme quality or beaUty being a light from lOme otheT world, th~ idea of which the mailer if but theahadow, the realily ofwtticlt is but the symbol.
I thought he might mean that d"';us ;, th~ artistic diKovery and n:preoentation ofth. divine purpose in anything or a fOl'Ce or generalisation which would make the ",thetic image a univcnal one, make il ouuhine ill proper conditions. BUI Ihat i, literary t,l. lk. ' (AP ~t~)
,. ,
? ColTtspondmces
The rdated idea. of S~Dborgian COI'I'e:<pondenca is out- rageously parodied in Stephen'. ridiculous celestial mechanics : '0. 1 rima h;" senoe of such immediate repeT<;n! ;Sion wat SO lively that he seemed to fed hu ",ul in devotion pr<:S$ing lib: fingers the keyboo. r<! . of a g",at cash register and 10 "'" the amount of hi. pureha$<: . tart forth immediately in hoa,? en, not a. a nUlnber hut as "- frail column of incense or as a slender 1I"""r'. (AP 1(8) In his TM IillTa'. ) Symbol Mr. W. Y. Tindall has provided an interesting diaocu. uon of the tendency fur correspondences in J oyce, as in other modern w,;le. . . . , to become a matter of 'as here, so the",', rather than 'as above, SO helow'. By denying that da,itas implies a . bowing forth of divine <ssence, Stephen <fum;"es all talk of art's pcnclr. 1ting to a different order of reality, but in devdoping hi, own th<<>ry of (L;rTiMs, or the
'epiphany', Stephen merdy ,nbolituta ho,;tontal for vertical correspondence. If the work of art no lnng<:r fundio", as a catalyst betwe<:n man and divine r<:Veialinn, it ;" ,till able to perfOTm an analogow function fur man and his potential
inoight into the world around him. As Mr. 1'indall saY" : 'Joyce: tUed =eapondente:l to . how the connection kcwe<:n
man and man, man and society, man and nature, and, at ifto prow: himself a romantic, between past and present . . . To provide an image ofthis world, to pr<:scnt the feding ofit, and, ifw<: mar change the metaphor, to not<: the harmony of parto the modified oor=pondencc seemed eminently . ui! able. '
TItit is true of the large body of externally orientated oor=_ pondences in Fill1ltgllM Wakewhich, as I have ,uggt1oted abow:,' wtIe intended 10 eruure that the book , hould ta h ito plat<: . . . a miCIOC<>:! mic unit wholly integmted into the macrocosm. It is not true, ho. . . . . = ,of the equally importatll narciMistic cor_ respondences which function enlirdy within th;" book, building up iu internal harm(mics and \ertliOn! . These operate at all pocible levels and in all possihle directioru--back and forth in time, in 'pace, in planes ofeoI1l<:inUln~, and up and down the ,pi,;tual Kale, which J oycr h", reinstated by his \lIC of Vico',
I W. Y. Tindall, TN. w. . ',:,Spob. i. No. . . York, '9~, p. ~9. ? P. o6.
'<9
? CorrujJonJm,u
graded Agel- The mechlani. "", ~mploy~d to ~",ur~ the prop"I fUIIClion of the intemal . . . . . "espondencu . . . , ~ varied, but
Ih~ great majority of them a"" """,Iy verbal. Mr. J\ccUII" ralher uugid . lalemenl Ihal '1m, writillg ~ not IIbowi somelhing; ;1 ;1 IMt ftIIIttI/tiJI, itstl! ,' "<;COUIIl! r. . only one half ofFiUigas
Wd , but it ~ certainly lIUe 10 the exlenl that Ihe all_important inlemal correspond~ unl. iie th~ bulk of tM. e in Ulyun, hlave bttn almosl enti""ly ? ? :t f= from Ih. exigc-ncies of """,Iy narn. ti"" ront. t:nl.
Although)oya did not reply on traditional correspondcn~ fur the purpoles ofeornmunicatiQn, he w q quite knowl<<lgt:ablc aboul the . . . . . nycarlicr . . . TiICn who had drawn on thio tradition and, wilh h. . usual <:declie;"m, he included wilhin Fppas
Wah much that he fuund of value in lheir work. In Manh'. Library, Dublin, be had ""ad J oachim de Flora, perhaps the g""ato;l devole. of Old and New Teltament to"''''dUJ (U 36; 33. ~8 210(_' 1 4~"3); he had probahly ""ad Hoehm. '. Sip4tua Rnw. . on whkh Stephen ponders (U 33). though h. coukl 1101 h""" don~ IIQ in MaTlh'. which did nOI poM<:U a copy' ; he . hows a~ . . . . . knowledgeofPlato,SirThomalBrowne,'andElipb. . . l. . tvi (244. 35), wal well"""d in Blau,' Swedenborg (AI' 256), and BIa~. . . W:y, and wu, ofeoW"3e, ramiu. . . r with Baudeb. ire and Rimbaud. There aln be no doobl thalJoyre knew wh. . . h~ . . . . . . .
about when h~ louch~d on cOIT. . pondenc. . .
Mosl of this know~ WllI acquired ""ry early, in lhe daY'
when JOl"'C liked to parade ru. learning in unUlualand obocure fieldl,butitWllInotuntill'in",,~1U W",hthathefullydeveloped allIhepotentialitiaoftheo:onapondcnccu aliteraryd. yju. As wilh '" many alpccu of his iall book, ho,",""VCI", clear ~arly tneeI of the technique a"" to found ev1:n aJ far back ao the potnu, Consciow oft}. . , ulterior ';g";fican~ ;I'\ ) oya', nru. . 1 and appaN:ntly . impl. ,. 1 writing, that "rdent . ymbol,hun~r,
, S. 1Icdc<. "aI. , Ow L q " orin, ""rio, 1<)09, P. ,~. (11. ,,11<. . ', italia. ) ? I :. m . . . . . . '"rul '0 M,. :\1. PoIh<d, i\ui,Ia. l' 1;"'",_ of Manh'" h
~ ~ ! be Llbtvy', ooIl<<:tion in J"! ""'" limo.
? s. . . , for . ,. . ". . . . . , u 371i.
, s. . . E.
Allbough in everyday mallcn Joyce app"an to have lived, andverylargdytohaw:thought,asr. . . . "'JW"~. he wall, Iii<<: Bauddairc and Mann btfo", him, ever more disposed
?
,. ,
? Corusporultru:(S
as he grew older to look on life--spiritual and ph~ca1-. . . a complex of motif. and <ymbol. which mwt be recogni>cd, named, and organised an paper. A. w. . know- ifonly on the auth<>rity of the biogno. phies and lette. --the mature Joyce'. v;"ian was of a world pc::rmeatcd by corre. pondences; and if he did not alrow thi. intelleclllal visian to have any radical effect on h;" way of life he was, neverthd=, perp<tIIally and in- ordinately . upc::ntilia"" and sUp',. . . tition is nothing if nat an
intuitive admiMion of the validity of cof"",pondence.
Became ofJoyce'. wellknawn sensitivity to what he believed 1<> be . ignificant correspondences in the world around him, it would be easy to misinterpret h. . usc of and attitude to eOr- =ponderu:es in literature. Two things, therefore, need to be
made clear at the outset: fil":'lt, that Jove<' paid very little attention to 'traditional' oor=pondenc. . except for what he could get out of them on hi< own terms, and >ecnnd, that, whatever his personal habi'" and belie! ! may have been, he made no appeal in hi< boob to the unconocious mind or to irrational scnsibiliti. . , and never ddibe. . . . lely played On the IIIbliminal re,porues of h. . readen.
While it . . true that the reader coming to Fin"""", Wake for the first time tends to be aware oflittle mOre than a . . a ofv:>gue and dream_like symbols looming dimly before the mind, later familiarity dispeb any idea that J ove<', like Yeals or SOme of the surreal. . ", is trying t<> build up a work cfart out ofarchetypal symbol. . which can pc::neU"atc directly into the uncomci<>u. whe,. . , their 'ignificance will be immediately apprehended by the psyche. FinntgflliS Wah i. full cf allusions to, and emploY'
techniques broadly ba. . d on the theory of, a cOmmOn psychic sub:sttatum in which individuality i, dissolved, but, as with hi. nsc of psychoanalytic theory, J oyeto', application of th" idea is entirely imerna! . All J oyce "'qnire. of hi, 'ideal reader', betides patience, . . intelligence, good. _",~ll, a eerta. io amount ofiearning, and common scnsitivity; this i, the level at which he worked and from which it is mOi! t profitahle to approach him. There is nOqu. . tian afJoyce's . ymbols' being informed with &ignificaru:e by the ",ader', uncon,cioul re'pona<:l, or at le. . . t not more so
,. 6
? ClJfTupmulmces
than il the <:ac with any literary art-form. An analogow informing prMA:SS d<>t:$ indeed go:> o:>n in Finn'l,a. . . WMe, but it takes pla<:e within til<: work, external to the uadcr (except for his normal, oonaciotU respoN<: to language) and entirely con- trolled. by the defining eircumsLmces o:>f the text. J oyce was not one intentionally to kave the functioning ofhit material tQ the vagaries of anybody'~ mind. He was, in any caJe, tempcrn- mentally incapable of committing himself to any world-view, leallt of aU 50 prett"ntio\lll a throry as that of aTChetyp<:S, If arclJ. etyp<:Swere to b< rnerl_nd they were attractively rdevant to J nyc<:'. themcs--rnen not a traditional, nor a . aentificaliy established, but a Jnyce-dictated significance was indicated. The great majority nf the . ymbnb are tmany, if imprecisely, a. . igned. The an;hetyp<:S hold gu<>d fnr Earwicker, for Anna, for Sil<:m and Shaun; whether they are valid as psychological aTChet)'f>l';S for the reader is largdy irrelevant. In fact Joyce
took on a task at once safer and more arduo\lll than that which the later Yea. . set himself: that of creating for the reader'. wntemplation a oompletc working? model of a collective un- ooruciou. in which his symbols could function. All tlu: characters and even the inert 'ymbnlic obj<:<:u are steeped in a fluid medium of geoeralised dream? oonsciQ\llIness; the motifS and motif. . . ymbob, t<:<:urring again and again ill this compntdium nf all mind>, arc subtLy shaped and defined by their eoviron_ ment so that they finally COme to have a signifi~ance, reiatiVt; to the frames "f rdierence nf the book, analogou. to that which i. alleged for the Yeatsian orJ1lngian symbols. Such a Ulting and annealing prot. ,. . takes time and--despite all Joyce', com?
prouive p""",. ,. . . . . . . . pace. The book had to be a long and involved one if this $low reaction of ,ynthetic mental chemistry was to take place. It has often been regretted thatJoyc<: did not leave F;n1ItlaJU W. . J:, as it wa. in thc early, aborter dmfu. TItere are two major, and I think overwhelming, ohj~ctions to thi,: fin! ,
though the early dran. . are tlillier to un<ler1tand in the &C',"e that each sentence ream. more Q f I. ,. . like 'normal' F,nglith, thei, total rneanffig i, never in any important scnac cleafcr, and ! ICCOnd, only the Vi'St, muhidimen. ;. ,nal and minutely particulariscd
'"
? Coms/'On(UnttJ
final teXt un provide that impresaion of endless rymbolic interplay which is ow 'ry 10 inflQe life and lUllOnorny into the 'archetypes'. TI>cic meaning is built up little by little by the nelWOtu of COtt ('ponden",," wbose: mesh ) oyce ~ t:ftI" more finely. He expeeted his 'c"derl 10 know IOmething about what corre. pondenc'" a u , but not to have any speeialknowledge or, ar (""ling fo. , traditional meaningJ, and to this extent Fi_,altl
Wakt i. , I think, more immediately accessible than worlo:. based on a received symbolism. 'Stephen Hero' thought that
'II", artis! who could dioc:ntangle the . ubtle lOul of the image from ill mesh of defining circullUUoUC'" moet c>:actly and re- embody it in artistic eircunut"n<<I chosen as the most elIaCl
lOr iu new office, he was the lu~me "rtiJI,' (SH 78)
The statement is both trite and vague, but it h. as a oenain inverted applicability to F""llW lYakt, into which)oy<:e pr0-
jected the whole mesh of defining circumatancn . . long with the . ubde IOUI. Defining circum. tance. have become Ihe mOSI important ihing in a book which il pieced together on the analogy of the 'coIJideon<:ape' and which reli. ,. on relativity
(oe the . . . tablishmenl of ill valuet:
'. . . to amc:cotnote solely on tile \iler-. . l ICt'IIC or C'ICfl the psy<:hologiul content of any docUlllfllt to the *On: neglect of the enveloping faco tho:nuelves circumstantiating it is ? . ? hurtful to oound senor. . . ' (log. llI)
In dilCussiDg hi. . . . . thetie theory, Stephen d i$;tvows any anagogiul aignificancc in the word c/ari/as:
'The connotation of the word, Slephen ~d, is . . . . . ther vague. Aquinas u. c:s a lerm which . . :ems 10 he inexact. It bAlRed me for a kmg lime.
It would Iud you 10 believe t1ut he had in mind rymbolism or ideafum, the . upreme quality or beaUty being a light from lOme otheT world, th~ idea of which the mailer if but theahadow, the realily ofwtticlt is but the symbol.
I thought he might mean that d"';us ;, th~ artistic diKovery and n:preoentation ofth. divine purpose in anything or a fOl'Ce or generalisation which would make the ",thetic image a univcnal one, make il ouuhine ill proper conditions. BUI Ihat i, literary t,l. lk. ' (AP ~t~)
,. ,
? ColTtspondmces
The rdated idea. of S~Dborgian COI'I'e:<pondenca is out- rageously parodied in Stephen'. ridiculous celestial mechanics : '0. 1 rima h;" senoe of such immediate repeT<;n! ;Sion wat SO lively that he seemed to fed hu ",ul in devotion pr<:S$ing lib: fingers the keyboo. r<! . of a g",at cash register and 10 "'" the amount of hi. pureha$<: . tart forth immediately in hoa,? en, not a. a nUlnber hut as "- frail column of incense or as a slender 1I"""r'. (AP 1(8) In his TM IillTa'. ) Symbol Mr. W. Y. Tindall has provided an interesting diaocu. uon of the tendency fur correspondences in J oyce, as in other modern w,;le. . . . , to become a matter of 'as here, so the",', rather than 'as above, SO helow'. By denying that da,itas implies a . bowing forth of divine <ssence, Stephen <fum;"es all talk of art's pcnclr. 1ting to a different order of reality, but in devdoping hi, own th<<>ry of (L;rTiMs, or the
'epiphany', Stephen merdy ,nbolituta ho,;tontal for vertical correspondence. If the work of art no lnng<:r fundio", as a catalyst betwe<:n man and divine r<:Veialinn, it ;" ,till able to perfOTm an analogow function fur man and his potential
inoight into the world around him. As Mr. 1'indall saY" : 'Joyce: tUed =eapondente:l to . how the connection kcwe<:n
man and man, man and society, man and nature, and, at ifto prow: himself a romantic, between past and present . . . To provide an image ofthis world, to pr<:scnt the feding ofit, and, ifw<: mar change the metaphor, to not<: the harmony of parto the modified oor=pondencc seemed eminently . ui! able. '
TItit is true of the large body of externally orientated oor=_ pondences in Fill1ltgllM Wakewhich, as I have ,uggt1oted abow:,' wtIe intended 10 eruure that the book , hould ta h ito plat<: . . . a miCIOC<>:! mic unit wholly integmted into the macrocosm. It is not true, ho. . . . . = ,of the equally importatll narciMistic cor_ respondences which function enlirdy within th;" book, building up iu internal harm(mics and \ertliOn! . These operate at all pocible levels and in all possihle directioru--back and forth in time, in 'pace, in planes ofeoI1l<:inUln~, and up and down the ,pi,;tual Kale, which J oycr h", reinstated by his \lIC of Vico',
I W. Y. Tindall, TN. w. . ',:,Spob. i. No. . . York, '9~, p. ~9. ? P. o6.
'<9
? CorrujJonJm,u
graded Agel- The mechlani. "", ~mploy~d to ~",ur~ the prop"I fUIIClion of the intemal . . . . . "espondencu . . . , ~ varied, but
Ih~ great majority of them a"" """,Iy verbal. Mr. J\ccUII" ralher uugid . lalemenl Ihal '1m, writillg ~ not IIbowi somelhing; ;1 ;1 IMt ftIIIttI/tiJI, itstl! ,' "<;COUIIl! r. . only one half ofFiUigas
Wd , but it ~ certainly lIUe 10 the exlenl that Ihe all_important inlemal correspond~ unl. iie th~ bulk of tM. e in Ulyun, hlave bttn almosl enti""ly ? ? :t f= from Ih. exigc-ncies of """,Iy narn. ti"" ront. t:nl.
Although)oya did not reply on traditional correspondcn~ fur the purpoles ofeornmunicatiQn, he w q quite knowl<<lgt:ablc aboul the . . . . . nycarlicr . . . TiICn who had drawn on thio tradition and, wilh h. . usual <:declie;"m, he included wilhin Fppas
Wah much that he fuund of value in lheir work. In Manh'. Library, Dublin, be had ""ad J oachim de Flora, perhaps the g""ato;l devole. of Old and New Teltament to"''''dUJ (U 36; 33. ~8 210(_' 1 4~"3); he had probahly ""ad Hoehm. '. Sip4tua Rnw. . on whkh Stephen ponders (U 33). though h. coukl 1101 h""" don~ IIQ in MaTlh'. which did nOI poM<:U a copy' ; he . hows a~ . . . . . knowledgeofPlato,SirThomalBrowne,'andElipb. . . l. . tvi (244. 35), wal well"""d in Blau,' Swedenborg (AI' 256), and BIa~. . . W:y, and wu, ofeoW"3e, ramiu. . . r with Baudeb. ire and Rimbaud. There aln be no doobl thalJoyre knew wh. . . h~ . . . . . . .
about when h~ louch~d on cOIT. . pondenc. . .
Mosl of this know~ WllI acquired ""ry early, in lhe daY'
when JOl"'C liked to parade ru. learning in unUlualand obocure fieldl,butitWllInotuntill'in",,~1U W",hthathefullydeveloped allIhepotentialitiaoftheo:onapondcnccu aliteraryd. yju. As wilh '" many alpccu of his iall book, ho,",""VCI", clear ~arly tneeI of the technique a"" to found ev1:n aJ far back ao the potnu, Consciow oft}. . , ulterior ';g";fican~ ;I'\ ) oya', nru. . 1 and appaN:ntly . impl. ,. 1 writing, that "rdent . ymbol,hun~r,
, S. 1Icdc<. "aI. , Ow L q " orin, ""rio, 1<)09, P. ,~. (11. ,,11<. . ', italia. ) ? I :. m . . . . . . '"rul '0 M,. :\1. PoIh<d, i\ui,Ia. l' 1;"'",_ of Manh'" h
~ ~ ! be Llbtvy', ooIl<<:tion in J"! ""'" limo.
? s. . . , for . ,. . ". . . . . , u 371i.
, s. . . E.
