Joyce, what do you think?

[fausTVR]

I have read Ulysses 3 times over the years and although a difficult and sometimes indecipherable tome I've actually enjoyed it. However, I've tried and failed to get far with Finnegan's wake or A Portrait of the Artist.

It's a bit like self flagellation, wading through this kind of dense and difficult material, I suppose I see it as self improving but is it just a waste of effort? In my case it may be like casting pearls before swine.

[hidetheelephants]

I've been having a similar thing with Somerset Maugham's 'Of Human Bondage'; I've picked it up, read a bit, then put it down and left it for a month or more several times as the central character is basically a with not many redeeming features. It's an interesting book(I'm perhaps 2/3 through it) but the aforementioned flaws make it painful to read at times.

[RDR 838]

I've read Ulysses once but found it a bit of a chore.

[Mobile Chicane]

Self-serving, self-congratulatory toss.

I've often heard it said that you need to be 'taught' Ulysses, something which I personally take umbrage with.

I think that if the writer can't make a direct connection with the reader, without the need for an intermediary to explain their genius, then they've failed at their job.

Plenty of other writers have explored the 'stream of consciousness' concept without resorting to wk: John Dos Passos' 'USA', for example.