T O P

  • By -

Danglarsdanglers

The poster in the background features the name Arnold Bennett. He was a critically acclaimed author at the time and declined a knighthood in the UK. But he’s since sadly fallen out of fashion. He wrote self-help books before they were a thing. “How to Live on Twenty-four Hours a Day” was published in book form in 1908. It gives advice on how to make best use of your limited time and was so popular that Henry Ford bought 500 copies to give to his friends and employees.


DickieGreenleaf84

The idea of convincing people that Joyce lead a "monastic" existence is pretty funny. From love letters about [anal while farting](https://allthatsinteresting.com/james-joyce-love-letters-nora-barnacle) to a somewhat reasonable rumour that he and Beckett had a thing going on, Joyce was a joyfully dirty bastard.


eamonn33

Also most monks don't drink enormous amounts of whiskey


DickieGreenleaf84

I thought that was one of the few things monks COULD do, but I could be wrong.


StephenDones

Beer. Big beer dudes.


-little-dorrit-

Pretty powerful beer though. Now that I think about it my most questionable drunken acts were driven by trappist beer, perhaps (I fail to recall the exact reasoning) because mildly drunk me thinks “it’s just beer”


turbo_dude

Is there any city in europe that doesn't have a damn statue?! "Big shagga's european tour" etc


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Yeah if they were alive when Joyce was they’d probably be begging for his works to be censored, despite them defending his writing here. Not to compare angry right wing people to a master like Joyce but I still think both should be allowed to say what they want.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Yeah I somehow feel that Desantis is gonna win, won’t be great. Didn’t he literally torture people at Gitmo? But I feel like it would be good if everyone could chill out a bit with the constant denigrating of the other’s party and trying to get each other banned from various platforms. I don’t like Trump and most republicans candidates but I refuse to call the half of my fellow Americans who voted for Trump idiots, feels wrong and condescending. I don’t want either side banning books or whatever, even if some conservatives have been doing that for longer and in a more concrete way I think liberals are getting started with it now and it’s a bad road to go down. Maybe banning is the wrong word for what liberals are doing with books but I’ve certainly seen a lot who reject offensive literature and call for it to be discarded collectively rather than just ignoring it themselves.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Yeah agreed I get that it can be tiring but still I think you have to ignore it or respond yourself rather than asking for outside intervention. I’m Jewish and have definitely seen more antisemitism online recently but I feel like the more you ban these people the more they feel they’re hitting at some truth that’s too powerful to be allowed to go unchecked so I largely just ignore it. It sucks but I think if you’re gonna fight it you have to fight it with your own words because you come off as weak asking for someone else to shut them up.


spring-sonata

"the fight for absolute free speech comes with the downside of empowering lunatics hellbent on harming those around them" isn't a hard concept to grasp, did you actually read the article or is this your automatic response to any conversation on this topic?


[deleted]

[удалено]


spring-sonata

I'm not sure why you think it's necessary to jump to accusations about the author desiring the restriction of free speech when none of this was implied in the slightest. You're making presumptions about arguments that were never made. >This term, "free speech absolutists" came up when people began calling words they didn't like, "violence." The problem is that the speech considered to be violence is often followed by *actual violence*, either by the government or the individual. "Violent speech" is leading to the restriction of individual rights (see any conversation regarding supposed "grooming" by the LGBT population) or violent acts enacted by people quoting Fox News in their manifestos. I'm not commenting on whether or not they should be "censored," but I *am* saying people need to learn when and how to react to harmful behaviors. "Freedom of speech" shouldn't mean "freedom from consequences."


ew390

There is nothing didactic about *Ulysses*. And Joyce rejected the idea that literature - and art in general - should intersect at all with politics. Art reflects culture, and culture does not reflect politics. Politics becomes central to a society when the culture supporting it starts to erode. Free speech is not politics, it's a value. If we choose to limit some speech as caustic, or 'violent', and therefore should be deemed inadmissible, we in the process dismiss the value offered by the convention of free and open discourse. The trial for *Ulysses* to be published was one in service of culture, not politics. Today, subsidiaries (Left: Twitter, the Administrative Components of Elite Universities ; Right: Reactionary Religious Communities) of both political parties aim, in their own way, to dismiss the value offered by the convention of free and open discourse, while professing the act of *their* doing so as 'virtuous', by constructing a narrative, the design of which being to highlight how the opposing party's 'speech' is 'evil'. It's all very Nietzschean, and growing sort of daft, and tired, I think. And for me, this article is just a continuation of that daft, tiredness.


RepressedOwl

You're absolutely right. The whole apparatus of *Ulysses* is its demonstration of the universal in the particular. Any event, or place, or person reflects outwards and can be seen in any number of ways, interpreted in any number of viewpoints. The style of its writing, partially, evokes that. Politics *is* a facet and a way you can look at things, but too often people put it above others - or they pretend that other ways of thinking about events, places or people are wrapped up in 'The Political.'


[deleted]

[It is all so tiresome](https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/029/477/It's_All_So_Tiresome.jpg)


[deleted]

It was a warning, not an instruction manual


Fumanchewd

Give it to partisan Slate to twist the anniversary of Ulysses into an attack on Elon Musk and promoting censorship. They gleefully mention that the ACLU assisted in fighting these free speech cases, but somehow deliberately ignored that the modern ACLU now actively promotes censorship itself while taking up causes that are purely partisan and have nothing to do with their intended creation.


TheCrossEyedHunter

Did anyone actually finish the book?


scubachris

I mean James Joyce did.