English Prof. Carol Shloss’ suit against James Joyce’s estate for the permission to quote passages from the Irish author’s 1939 novel “Finnegans Wake” and letters between the famous novelist and his daughter Lucia Joyce was settled in her favor.
Shloss’ 2005 biography, “Lucia Joyce: To Dance in the Wake,” aims to alter the longstanding view of Joyce’s mentally ill daughter by showing that the author did not actually consider her to be crazy but rather unique and original. In order to do so, Shloss needed the passages from Joyce’s novel and letters as evidence, but her initial request to quote the materials was denied by Joyce’s estate, a move that Shloss attributed to Joyce’s grandson Stephen Joyce, who is protective of the memory of Lucia Joyce, his aunt.
As much as I sympathize with Stephen Joyce he seems a bit reactionary when it comes to protecting the Joyce family and James legacy. Lucia did donate her letters to a library, surely she meant them to be read.
And I came across this recently, Cheat’s guide to Joyce’s Ulysses
A weary Bloom takes Stephen to a cabman’s shelter where they listen to the ramblings of a tattooed sailor who makes little or no senzzzzzzz
Q. What happens next?
A. Bloom and Stephen walk back to Eccles Street. Bloom offers Stephen a bed for the night but Stephen refuses and leaves. Bloom goes to bed. The section is written in a question-and-answer format like a religious catechism.
Just a note to any student that might pass by here: do not use this as a substitute for your own research if you care at all about getting a good grade.
BAGHDAD, April 8 — Nearly two months into the new security push in Baghdad, there has been some success in reducing the number of death squad victims found crumpled in the streets each day.
And while the overall death rates for all of Iraq have not dropped significantly, largely because of devastating suicide bombings, a few parts of the capital have become calmer as some death squads have decided to lie low.
But there is little sign that the Baghdad push is accomplishing its main purpose: to create an island of stability in which Sunni Arabs, Shiite Arabs and Kurds can try to figure out how to run the country together. There has been no visible move toward compromise on the main dividing issues, like regional autonomy and more power sharing between Shiites and Sunnis.
It is too early to tell, but as Lawyers, Guns and Money points out that also goes for declaring the surge an unqualified success, It’s Working!
It’s magical, this Surge; no matter what happens, the evidence demonstrates that the Surge is working. It can’t fail! Any behavior taken by anyone in Iraq is a positive by-product of the Surge.
I’ve made reference to the Right’s semi-new tact of referring to whoever or whatever it is in Iraq as “them”. Well the wingers have moved on and finally come up with a name “untermenschen” or in English – “sub-human.” The right-wing brain in action
Yes: “untermenschen” — that, as Reynolds and Ledeen so sincerely lament today, is how “they” think — the “they” being not the “they” who want to drop more and more bombs and incinerate more and more of the “untermenschen” beyond the extraordinary numbers who have already died as a result of their warmongering — the Michael Ledeens and Glenn Reynolds who call for more and more slaughter due to “the limitations of the people in that part of the world” — but rather, the people who oppose that.
Five months ago, Glenn Reynolds called for “more rubble, less trouble” — meaning more indiscriminate slaughter of the Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East — because there seemed to be no hope for the people in that part of the world to evolve beyond their savage, primitive ways, their “stone-age tribalism.” Today, Michael Ledeen scornfully said that that’s how the vile people on the Left think. Glenn Reynolds linked to that and said “He’s right. That’s how they seem to think.”
This speaks to multiple stories over the years about how the Right has tried to dehumanize anyone that doesn’t tow the right-wing line. That the extremists that call themselves conservatives have not just made it known that they feel that way about liberals, but are proud of the fact and see that position as a morally valid point of views. It speaks volumes about the moral vacuum of the right-wing mental state. The only way to solve the problems of Iraq or the rabid Right’s domestic political adversaries doesn’t hint at the “ultimate solution”, but rather is pushes to the front – an idea that must be acted on in order for the Right to win. The similarities between the Right and the worse of the jihadists and the WW II era European Right is striking.
For example, experience tells us that the intensity of fear is not directly proportional to the objective character of the specific threat. Adversity, acts of misfortune and threats to personal security do not directly produce fear. Rather, our responses to specific circumstances are mediated through cultural norms, which inform people of what is expected of them when they are confronted with a threat; how they should respond, how they should feel.
Arlie Hochschild, in her pathbreaking study in 1979 of the sociology of emotions, described these informal expectations of how we should respond to things as ‘feeling rules’ (23). These ‘feeling rules’ influence behaviour; they instruct us on what we ought to fear, and how we ought to fear it. According to Anthony Giddens, ‘people handle dangers and the fears associated with them in terms of emotional and behavioural formulae which have come to be part of their everyday behaviour and thought’ (24). But the transformation of anxious responses into fear also requires the intervention of social forces, of what I have labelled ‘fear entrepreneurs’ (25).
The Right wants us all to live in fear. To define what to be afraid of and how we should react. Since fear is such a strong motivator it can also be a way to control people, to use them to accomplish an agenda that silences those who will not tow the line. It is a case of wash and repeat. Its the same old story of every authoitatrian movement of the last hundred years.
” Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.” Bertrand Russell: