Has any Buffista read it? I've never met anyone who has.

Yeah, right here. I have to say that I'm surprised by the apparent pride some of y'all are exhibiting in admitting that you skipped one of the most important works of literature in the English language. I mean, I understand not reading it; it's definitely not for everybody. Sure, it's tedious in parts, and the structure is deliberately confusing. But, y'know, it's a profound and extremely well-written statement about the concept of heroism in general, one of the earliest attempts to treat genre as a tool to exploit for additional meaning, and a hell of a funny and entertaining story, too.

Illuminatus! is a great alternative to acid--all the sensory goulash without the nasty physical side effects.

Ohhhhhh, yes. Must re-read. Soon. Pref. not on plane to Alaska, for must greet grandparents at end of flight. But soon.

I'm really, really impressed with all the Buffistas who've read Ulysses. I find even Joyce's linear stuff to be over my head.

The gauntlet is down! Woolf may have pioneered the language, but with Ulysses, Joyce perfected the form.

You're certainly entitled to your wrongheaded crazytalkopinion, hayden! But I think _The Waves_ holds up under scrutiny as a better crafted novel than anything Joyce wrote. _To The Lighthouse_ does, too, now that I think of it.

And why are we comparing Woolf and Joyce? Different cases of beer, at least in my head.

Because people often refer to Joyce as the Head Modernist In Charge, and I dispute that. I appreciate his talent, certainly, but I think Woolf gave more to the genre, and to literature in general.

I want a Voyage Out Day or something, damnit.

Maybe I should read it some day like a big girl instead of giggling "Words! Foamy!" But I'm busy with Infinite Jest at the moment.

But I'm busy with Infinite Jest at the moment.

erika, when you're done, will you let me know what you think? Z was obsessed with it for a while last summer, and I just couldn't get through it. I'd like to hear someone else talk about it.

I'm not going to dispute that Woolf is a bad ass, Jen. Tell you the truth, I think that Pynchon ought to be King Modernism. He's more conventionally wittier than the rest by half ('cause who gets most of Joyce's jokes other than Joyce?), and he's gone to the trouble of proving that Modernism is relevant to the postmodern novel.

Because people often refer to Joyce as the Head Modernist In Charge, and I dispute that. I appreciate his talent, certainly, but I think Woolf gave more to the genre, and to literature in general.

Ah. This is where it helps to not give a damn about classifying them; I love them both. Where Maysa says Joyce's linear stuff goes over her head, I can honestly say that what goes completely over mine is when people start classifying the stuff.

Because - I'm not being snarky, I really don't get it - why does that matter? I read the book or don't read it; dig it or loathe it; consider or ponder or get stoned from it, or think it's a wet mess. Or something in between.

But I can't take part in the "who's the best in the school of" conversations; I'm completely ignorant on that level.

I just read the stuff. I can't dissect it, or it loses its magic for me.

I've read some Joyce, including Ulysses (Dubliners, Finnegan's Wake, Portrait). I think he's a keystone to modern "British" literature. Ulysses may be a tough place to start with him, but I do think it is a must-read.

And I apologize for coming across as a scold upthread. I thought I smelled anti-intellectualism in some of those posts, but they don't look that way on a re-read. I'm sorry for the insinuation.