Content deleted Content added
→Humphrey Chimpden Earwicker (HCE): Added a reference to Finn Fordham, who makes the case for this association of HCE and Childers, and cut back Childers info that has no bearing on FW |
m →Literary significance and criticism: hyper-linked DH LAwrence insult |
||
Line 215:
The value of ''Finnegans Wake'' as a work of literature has been a point of contention since the time of its appearance, in serial form, in [[Literary magazine|literary reviews]] of the 1920s. Initial response, to both its serialised and final published forms, was almost universally negative. Even close friends and family were disapproving of Joyce's seemingly impenetrable text, with Joyce's brother [[Stanislaus Joyce|Stanislaus]] "rebuk[ing] him for writing an incomprehensible night-book",<ref>[[#refEllmann1983|Ellmann 1983]], p. 603</ref> and former friend [[Oliver Gogarty]] believing the book to be a joke, pulled by Joyce on the literary community, referring to it as "the most colossal leg pull in literature since [[James Macpherson|Macpherson's]] ''[[Ossian]]''".<ref>Quoted in [[#refEllmann1983|Ellmann 1983]], p. 722, from "the ''Observer'', 7 May 1939".</ref> When [[Ezra Pound]], a former champion of Joyce's and admirer of ''[[Ulysses (novel)|Ulysses]]'', was asked his opinion on the text, he wrote "Nothing so far as I make out, nothing short of divine vision or a new cure for the [[Gonorrhoea|clap]] can possibly be worth all the circumambient peripherization."<ref>[[#refEllmann1983|Ellmann 1983]], p. 584, from a letter from Pound to Joyce, dated Nov, 15, 1926.</ref> H.G. Wells, in a personal letter to Joyce, argued that "you have turned your back on common men, on their elementary needs and their restricted time and intelligence [...] I ask: who the hell is this Joyce who demands so many waking hours of the few thousands I have still to live for a proper appreciation of his quirks and fancies and flashes of rendering?"<ref>[[#refEllmann1983|Ellmann 1983]], p. 688</ref> Even Joyce's patron Harriett Weaver wrote to him in 1927 to inform him of her misgivings regarding his new work, stating "I am made in such a way that I do not care much for the output from your Wholesale Safety Pun Factory nor for the darknesses and unintelligibilities of your deliberately entangled language system. It seems to me you are wasting your genius."<ref>quoted in [[#refParrinder1984|Parrinder 1984]], [http://books.google.com/books?id=WcCWdSwa7bsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=james+joyce&as_brr=3#PPA205,M1 p.205]</ref>
The wider literary community were equally disparaging, with [[D. H. Lawrence]] declaring, in reaction to the sections of the ''Wake'' being published individually as "Work in Progress", "My God, what a clumsy ''[[Olla podrida|olla putrida]]'' James Joyce is! Nothing but old fags and cabbage-stumps of quotations from the Bible and the rest, stewed in the juice of deliberate journalistic dirty-mindedness – what old and hard-worked staleness, masquerading as the all-new!"<ref name="modernworld" /> [[Vladimir Nabokov]], who had also admired ''Ulysses'', described ''Finnegans Wake'' as "nothing but a formless and dull mass of phony folklore, a cold pudding of a book, a persistent snore in the next room [...] and only the infrequent snatches of heavenly intonations redeem it from utter insipidity."<ref name="modernworld" /> In response to such criticisms, ''[[Transition (literary journal)|Transition]]'' published essays throughout the late 1920s, defending and explaining Joyce's work. In 1929, these essays (along with a few others written for the occasion) were collected under the title ''[[Our Exagmination Round His Factification for Incamination of Work in Progress]]'' and published by [[Shakespeare and Company (bookshop)|Shakespeare and Company]]. This collection featured [[Samuel Beckett]]'s first commissioned work, the essay "Dante... Bruno. Vico.. Joyce",<ref>''The Complete Critical Guide to Samuel Beckett'', David Pattie, Routledge, 2000, ISBN 041520253 [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fQ-oBQcLmJgC&pg=PA15&dq=Samuel+Beckett%27s+first+published+work+%22Dante...+Bruno.+Vico..+Joyce%22&ei=q5WVSYuOI52EzgTguYGYDw#PPA14,M1 p 14]</ref> along with contributions by [[William Carlos Williams]], [[Stuart Gilbert]], [[Marcel Brion]], [[Eugene Jolas]] and others.
Upon its publication in 1939, ''Finnegans Wake'' received a series of mixed, but mostly negative reviews. [[Louise Bogan]], writing for ''Nation'', surmised that while "the book's great beauties, its wonderful passages of wit, its variety, its mark of genius and immense learning are undeniable [...], to read the book over a long period of time gives one the impression of watching intemperance become addiction, become debauch" and argued that "Joyce's delight in reducing man's learning, passion, and religion to a hash is also disturbing."<ref>Bogan, Louise. ''Finnegans Wake'' Review. ''Nation'', cxlviii, 6 May 1939. pp. 533–535. Quoted in ''James Joyce: The Critical Heritage'', [http://books.google.com/books?id=SJd3z17taC0C&pg=PA667&lpg p.667]</ref> Edwin Muir, reviewing in ''Listener'' wrote that "as a whole the book is so elusive that there is no judging it; I cannot tell whether it is winding into deeper and deeper worlds of meaning or lapsing into meaningless", although he too acknowledged that "there are occasional flashes of a kind of poetry which is difficult to define but is of unquestioned power."<ref>Muir, Edwin. "Finnegans Wake Review" in ''Listener'', 1939. Quoted in ''James Joyce: The Critical Heritage'', [http://books.google.com/books?id=SJd3z17taC0C&pg=PA677&lpg p.677]</ref> B. Ifor Evans, writing in the ''Manchester Guardian'', similarly argued that, due to its difficulties, the book "does not admit of review", and argued that, perhaps "in twenty years' time, with sufficient study and with the aid of the commentary that will doubtless arise, one might be ready for an attempt to appraise it." Taking a swipe at many of the negative reviews circulating at the time, Evans writes: "The easiest way to deal with the book would be [...] to write off Mr. Joyce's latest volume as the work of a charlatan. But the author of ''[[Dubliners]]'', ''[[A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man|A Portrait of the Artist]]'' and ''[[Ulysses (novel)|Ulysses]]'' is not a charlatan, but an artist of very considerable proportions. I prefer to suspend judgement..."<ref>Evans, B. Ifor. ''Manchester Guardian'', 12 May 1939. Quoted in ''James Joyce: The Critical Heritage''. [http://books.google.com/books?id=SJd3z17taC0C&pg=PA678&lpg p.678]</ref>
| |||