This is a part of the series.
All women are essentially the three nymphs. And each of us move through all phases of these like the moon moves through phases in the night skies.
It truly takes a lifetime of being …in order to become … People seldom ever allow us that right. Moments make us difficulties that we aren’t really given the change to transcend beyond them.
Nature does this …naturally.
*When we let her of course. She changes. Some people like to make one or the other and move to keep her there. Like clipping a flower and placing it in a vase, or an arrangement.
All women are all three and much like art, she is subjective according to the eye, and it’s need to see her as such.
Absolutely brilliant. Brilliant! You’ve lit a fire in my mind. I’ve got to watch this whole series. I often wonder about the inherent differences between the roles of men and women, and this was a fantastic explanation. Yes, my nature made me a woman - to be honest, before I even could imagine what that meant. For men, though - it’s different. Women are made to be women - men must become men, with intent. And yes, women have all three within them - as long as they’re allowed to fully express themselves. Thank you for this!
As an aside, I’m going to dive into Joyce, but I’m thinking chronologically (starting with Dubliners). Would you agree?
No, I wouldn’t actually begin with the Dubliners. That’s the assumed place to begin. But I think the whole process should start with his Portrait of the Artist as a young man. The Dubliners I think should be sort of like Star Wars, you motion backward and forward.
I say this mostly because Joyce can be a terribly difficult read, and I want you to love it, not to struggle with it.
I’d say to end with Finnegan’s Wake because of it being a dream sequence, it can be difficult to make sense of, and also because the language is so difficult. I don’t want you to become disinterested or to give up like so many people tend to do. I think Portrait first, because it’s the simplest of the lot language wise.
(Meaning it’s best to not attempt to read them in order of publication as a linear thing) *If I had it to do all over again, this is what I would have done having spent years reading the lot knowing now, what I wish I had known then. Because I didn’t get them at all despite the order, until I listened to Campbell and then they all opened like flowers. And I understood. So that is the reason why I mixed the order of reading (which may be preferential?)
…And the rest in any order you like.
*Much for the same reasons that I adore Nabokov’s Butterflies. Chamber music is a favorite of mine of Joyce’s.
In that order. Unless of course you’re older, and from Country Cork and you understand the vernacular This is the order an American bibliophile should approach the works.
This is something to fall in love with, not something to struggle through. And if you can get your hands on them, find Campbell’s lectures on them. It makes it so much more simple to appreciate. I think the two men were twin souls? No one explained Joyce better than Campbell.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! A million times, thank you. I’m excited to begin this literary journey - and I’ll do my best to find Campbell’s lectures. Twin souls = so beautiful. Yes!