the "undisciplined" cliche who wrote these gems? He may have a theme. The material may even be connected in his1st is edward wagenknecht reviewing the recognitions without bother- ing to finish it
2nd is dr joseph collins in the ny times
its his 5/28/22 review of
|
pro: |
con: |
"Ulysses" is the most important contribution that has been made to fictional literature in the twenti- eth century. It will immortalize its author. |
The average intelligent reader will glean little or nothing from it even from careful perusal, one might properly say study, of it save bewilderment and a sense of disgust. |
Mr. Joyce had the good fortune to be born with a quality which the world calls genius. |
It requires real endurance to fin- ish "Ulysses." I am probably the only person, aside from the author, that has ever read it twice from beginning to end. |
& adds: "I have learned more psychology and psychiatry from it than I did in ten years at the Neurological Institute" its neuropatho- logical to write that ulysses has no "orderliness, sequence or inter- dependence" & just as mad to make the same criticism of the recognitions
the legitimate question would be if the 2 books are overdisciplined,
i open the recognitions at random
its p593, well into esther's
no one who knows the recognitions at all would say its undisciplined. But the main fault of the novel is a complete lack of discipline.& bradley ("sprawling" "undisciplined and baffling prose"), burnette ("undisciplined and pretentious" "sprawling prose"), klein ("sprawling"), mcalister ("the writing is undisciplined"), o'hearn ("undisciplined and unfulfilled"), stocking ("vast, sprawling")2 the cliche is so tempting that when mccarthy wrote: tightly knit despite seeming nebulousness [sic]his headlineman, skimming thru the review as careless as the critics skimmed thru the recognitions, read it the way it should be: Brilliant Flashes Illuminethis cliche about this book is such a dead giveaway of not having really read it that their bosses must FIRE bradley demarest mcalister o'hearn parke rugoff simak & stocking, to mention only those not already axed 1not "superbly disciplined" like the waste land (Back) 2of course the prose in the recognitions is no less disciplined than the form
are critics disciplined?
eg, of 38 quotes of ten words or more from the
most misquotes were careless but involved at most meddling with commas & a misrepresentation prize to boss smith for making gaddis an ungrammarian:
|
the recognitions, p946 |
as quoted by smith (my italics) |
Any city that calls herself modern anticipates all her children's needs, even to erecting something high for them to jump from |
Any city which calls itself modern anticipates all her children's needs, even to erecting something high for them to jump from |
a quotesmanship award to the new yorker
hack for quoting p50 lines 9-15 out of context & without explaining the crossreferences, thus fraudulently giving the impression that all of the recognitions is esoteric, incomprehensible & just "words, words, words" & to bass who quotes a 5-line list of books from p23 & says "lists like the following for page after page after page after page" its a lie, no such list is more than a few lines long (Back) |