) A larsc part of the
excitemenl
Qf Fi/Uttg6/U Wdt dc:JI'!
Hart-Clive-1962-Structure-and-Motif-in-Finnegans-Wake
art'.
-sakc ,.
nd penonal confeSlion in Hn.
.
.
,~1tS Wd-t.
The critics have alWII.
YS been a1o.
.
" to appreciate the U"U~ quality of the penonal conlenl in J oyce.
work.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
fact which
has led to a . . ,rious nWundenWlding of the fundamental
double? talk inherenl in his rymbolic language. Yel,
h<<n misunderstanding, Joyce " hinuelfvery largcly to blame. H. obscwm his own position- no doubt intentiooaily-- by his <:<>rutant championing ofallihat WOUI nol cbauvini. nic in litera. ture. by Jill interest in late nioetetnlh CtnlUry fiamhoyanl, decorative style, and by m. a. king Stephen propound a KIf? sufficient aesthelic in A I'liI"lI"ml. Joyet'S position has been obecured htcause tllt:oc U\lu. . nca Ita"" oftl":fl h << n thought the
'f
if
~ Iw
? Some Asp<<ts '? /Finntgans Wake
,(. . ndard. by which w. . m. . y bat judge. hU work. The great",( fallacy of all h. . . ~ en the asoumption that hU theories never changed, that he always thought in tcTTIU of 'lyric, epic, and dramatic', '~piphanies', 'th~ thing well made. It h. . . variously hc<:n , upp""'d that, in J oycean terms, A P",/Tail i. lyric, tflyms epic, andFinntg. vu Waktdramatic,or that all thre~ arc dramatic, that Fj""'gaIU Wak. mark! an unfortunate return to the lyric manner, and 50 on- the three booh pr"viding a plamihle houi_ for neat tripartite IIChcm. ,. . . . . . "nd y<:t therc i. ! no evi&nce that by the time he W aJ writing A Portrail Joyce held the vicw. ascribed 10 Stephen, that he held ,uch view; in later maturity or, more importAnt, that he oonsiderffi. hi. ! vario". book! aJ forming any ,ort of "esthetic progress at all. T he", is, on the contrary, mud, evidence to mggcst that Joyce wa> n"""r ",ri? oudy intere,ted in anything other than the book on which he wa. engaged at the moment and that once he bad completffi. a work he ceased thinling about it and even di. liked it. He alm"'t prevented the publication of Chamh", Musil,' and Mrs. Maria J ola! tell! me that while he WaJ busy with P;""'gans W~h Joyce grew v"ry umympa,hetic to what he had done in Ulyn. . and talkd about the book with considerable dist""tc: 'Ulyss. . ? Chef Who wrote ulysStsr
Joyce', works are all in the nam", of self. purgations. Mr. Ellmann', detailed biography h"" no! only emphasised that
e""rytbing in Joyce'. boob, down to the smallest matters of detail, is drawn di=tly from his pcrr. onal experience, but has also ",,,,,aIffi. to what a remarkable extent those boob a", the tJIpr""ion of a scmibility haunted by emotional conflicts ",. quiring the most powerful . ymbolic exorcism. This penonal- often uncomfortably pcrr. onal-art w"" the only kind Joyce could c",ate or un&rstand, and, "" hi. lel1ers and the panially serio", thcory of HamUt ",veal, he Wa. 'l never able to accept that the method of Olher artist! could be anytbing bUl aUlobio- graphical. As roon a> lhe pcrsonal tJIpcrience had hc<:n exter? naliud by commiuaI to papcr and by the open confession in the market. place wruch publication ",presented, the dri"". and
, EIlmann, 1'_ ' 70-
'5
? SonuAsjJ<<tstifFinnegaru Wake
conflicts temporarily evaporated and intereot tfusolved. Joyce, a little muocbistic, inclined to "" mal perversion, and in exile from a homeland he both loved and d. . pUed, could, ofcourse, never rid hi"""lffor long of his deep-seated emotional conflicts, but whenever the need for arrutic purgation arue again, fre,h techniqu. . were neceMarY; the ume magic could not ~ made to work twice. On each occasion a more potent exorcism was called for, involving greater complexity, more difficult Iahy- riot'" from whicb to =ape, and, above all, the objectification and rationalisation of more and more personal involvement.
Hi. imaginary, God-like arti:ol was placed 'within Or ~hind Or ~yond or above his handiwork, invisible, rdined out of exiSlence, indiflerent, paring hi. ! fingunaih' (AP 245), but Ihi. welt known Dcdalism by no means repr=ntsJoyce'. own pooition. Far from indifferent, he was possened by an alm. . . t paranoid need to anlwer bad; he mUIt altad and utirise in his highly . ublimated way not only the penonal slights of indi_ viduah hut abo Ihe personal and impersonal ilightsofthe world at large, fur Joyce was nevu content, as ",me have thought and as he liked to pretend, mudy to justifY the Arti,,'. ways to Man, buI was obsessively concerned wilh his position in society at all lev. 1I. 1 1b e result of this constant involvement_exorci. m
proces, i. that joyce'. symbols, especially those of FitJ. ",g~", Wdt, are always two-faced. In his Ia. t workjoyce left Stephen'? ? malI-5Cale ,. . . theti", Car ~hind and attempted to bring about the intimate marriage of two great and fundament. ally oppo>ed. artistic uniti. . , one of these is introvened and ",lip. ist, con- tinually converg. . on itsdf, is ",]E"'l! raining, h"" IlO loose end. , is . . truly global whole; the other, built from exactly the ,arne materials, is extroverted, continually mOve. out from it. centre toward the world ofmen, is a m. . . . . of. pecific cxtemal . . . ferenc. . . Not only a. . . joyce'? ? ymboI. taken from life but, unlik. thooe of Mallarme, they lead straight back to it. {This distinction ~tween ioternal and extornal reference is not to ~ confused with that ~tween public alld private level. of mealling. Both
, "The . ut<>bi~pI>. icaI upccI ofj O)'<< . , ,. . ,. . k ;. . t pno",,' l><:ing . . . . ,. ted aha"'tiv<ly by ~ln. . Ruth """ ! 'hul.
"
? &meAsptctsofFinntgans Wakt
fa""" ofJoya'? ? ymbob belon, to the p. . . blic world. Indeed, thereis~rylitdethaIitprivaleinF~I. 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 <WOcialive linb. 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.
has led to a . . ,rious nWundenWlding of the fundamental
double? talk inherenl in his rymbolic language. Yel,
h<<n misunderstanding, Joyce " hinuelfvery largcly to blame. H. obscwm his own position- no doubt intentiooaily-- by his <:<>rutant championing ofallihat WOUI nol cbauvini. nic in litera. ture. by Jill interest in late nioetetnlh CtnlUry fiamhoyanl, decorative style, and by m. a. king Stephen propound a KIf? sufficient aesthelic in A I'liI"lI"ml. Joyet'S position has been obecured htcause tllt:oc U\lu. . nca Ita"" oftl":fl h << n thought the
'f
if
~ Iw
? Some Asp<<ts '? /Finntgans Wake
,(. . ndard. by which w. . m. . y bat judge. hU work. The great",( fallacy of all h. . . ~ en the asoumption that hU theories never changed, that he always thought in tcTTIU of 'lyric, epic, and dramatic', '~piphanies', 'th~ thing well made. It h. . . variously hc<:n , upp""'d that, in J oycean terms, A P",/Tail i. lyric, tflyms epic, andFinntg. vu Waktdramatic,or that all thre~ arc dramatic, that Fj""'gaIU Wak. mark! an unfortunate return to the lyric manner, and 50 on- the three booh pr"viding a plamihle houi_ for neat tripartite IIChcm. ,. . . . . . "nd y<:t therc i. ! no evi&nce that by the time he W aJ writing A Portrail Joyce held the vicw. ascribed 10 Stephen, that he held ,uch view; in later maturity or, more importAnt, that he oonsiderffi. hi. ! vario". book! aJ forming any ,ort of "esthetic progress at all. T he", is, on the contrary, mud, evidence to mggcst that Joyce wa> n"""r ",ri? oudy intere,ted in anything other than the book on which he wa. engaged at the moment and that once he bad completffi. a work he ceased thinling about it and even di. liked it. He alm"'t prevented the publication of Chamh", Musil,' and Mrs. Maria J ola! tell! me that while he WaJ busy with P;""'gans W~h Joyce grew v"ry umympa,hetic to what he had done in Ulyn. . and talkd about the book with considerable dist""tc: 'Ulyss. . ? Chef Who wrote ulysStsr
Joyce', works are all in the nam", of self. purgations. Mr. Ellmann', detailed biography h"" no! only emphasised that
e""rytbing in Joyce'. boob, down to the smallest matters of detail, is drawn di=tly from his pcrr. onal experience, but has also ",,,,,aIffi. to what a remarkable extent those boob a", the tJIpr""ion of a scmibility haunted by emotional conflicts ",. quiring the most powerful . ymbolic exorcism. This penonal- often uncomfortably pcrr. onal-art w"" the only kind Joyce could c",ate or un&rstand, and, "" hi. lel1ers and the panially serio", thcory of HamUt ",veal, he Wa. 'l never able to accept that the method of Olher artist! could be anytbing bUl aUlobio- graphical. As roon a> lhe pcrsonal tJIpcrience had hc<:n exter? naliud by commiuaI to papcr and by the open confession in the market. place wruch publication ",presented, the dri"". and
, EIlmann, 1'_ ' 70-
'5
? SonuAsjJ<<tstifFinnegaru Wake
conflicts temporarily evaporated and intereot tfusolved. Joyce, a little muocbistic, inclined to "" mal perversion, and in exile from a homeland he both loved and d. . pUed, could, ofcourse, never rid hi"""lffor long of his deep-seated emotional conflicts, but whenever the need for arrutic purgation arue again, fre,h techniqu. . were neceMarY; the ume magic could not ~ made to work twice. On each occasion a more potent exorcism was called for, involving greater complexity, more difficult Iahy- riot'" from whicb to =ape, and, above all, the objectification and rationalisation of more and more personal involvement.
Hi. imaginary, God-like arti:ol was placed 'within Or ~hind Or ~yond or above his handiwork, invisible, rdined out of exiSlence, indiflerent, paring hi. ! fingunaih' (AP 245), but Ihi. welt known Dcdalism by no means repr=ntsJoyce'. own pooition. Far from indifferent, he was possened by an alm. . . t paranoid need to anlwer bad; he mUIt altad and utirise in his highly . ublimated way not only the penonal slights of indi_ viduah hut abo Ihe personal and impersonal ilightsofthe world at large, fur Joyce was nevu content, as ",me have thought and as he liked to pretend, mudy to justifY the Arti,,'. ways to Man, buI was obsessively concerned wilh his position in society at all lev. 1I. 1 1b e result of this constant involvement_exorci. m
proces, i. that joyce'. symbols, especially those of FitJ. ",g~", Wdt, are always two-faced. In his Ia. t workjoyce left Stephen'? ? malI-5Cale ,. . . theti", Car ~hind and attempted to bring about the intimate marriage of two great and fundament. ally oppo>ed. artistic uniti. . , one of these is introvened and ",lip. ist, con- tinually converg. . on itsdf, is ",]E"'l! raining, h"" IlO loose end. , is . . truly global whole; the other, built from exactly the ,arne materials, is extroverted, continually mOve. out from it. centre toward the world ofmen, is a m. . . . . of. pecific cxtemal . . . ferenc. . . Not only a. . . joyce'? ? ymboI. taken from life but, unlik. thooe of Mallarme, they lead straight back to it. {This distinction ~tween ioternal and extornal reference is not to ~ confused with that ~tween public alld private level. of mealling. Both
, "The . ut<>bi~pI>. icaI upccI ofj O)'<< . , ,. . ,. . k ;. . t pno",,' l><:ing . . . . ,. ted aha"'tiv<ly by ~ln. . Ruth """ ! 'hul.
"
? &meAsptctsofFinntgans Wakt
fa""" ofJoya'? ? ymbob belon, to the p. . . blic world. Indeed, thereis~rylitdethaIitprivaleinF~I. 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 <WOcialive linb. 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.
