> To whom was Joyce writing "Ulysses" and "Finnegans Wake"?
Well, there are so many a questions like this, huh. One that young pale-faced scholars are asked to shed ink over regarding the latter is 'Whose dream is it?'. But I think FW is designed on the kind of talmudic or alchemical notion which means it was intended to be read as code by someone wishing to boot the universe from scratch - after the end of time .... and the extinction of man<g>.
> Why?
It's about time for a reboot.
> 3)
Oh, c'mon. This isn't lit 101 here. 'Novel' is a fairly flimsy term without context. I think most would agree that some kind of narrative should be found in a novel - both the books mentioned contain (or betray) some narrative - the latter just has *all narratives occuring at the same time:-)
> 4)
No.
> 5)
'Complete' enlightenment is beyond comprehension, so too with FW.
> 6)
No. Really, no.
> 7)
Because they are very rich texts and it is easy and fun to make original discoveries.
> 8)
For me, he has confirmed many a suspicion - that the course of time and events that come round are cyclical, repeated in many forms on many levels, and perhaps that the present life we are embedded in really is more significant than one might suppose. That everyday life is important. And milum, have a mulled wine on me will you;)
