Eliot - Ulysses Order and Myth

ULYSSES, ORDER, AND MYTHl
Mr. Joyce's book has been out long enough for no more general
expression of praise, or expostulation with its detractors, to be
necessary; and it has not been out long enough for any attempt at
a complete measurement of its place and significance to be
possible. All that one can usefully do at this time, and it is a great
deal to do, for such a book, is to elucidate any aspect of the book -
and the number of aspects is indefinite - which has not yet been
~~:d·r~s~~::h~sja~ofo~~R;~ilM~ff6.t~li~liP~e~~~~~.~f~rit
deb&r~mwn1chng-n';·ofu';tc;~·'esca'"e~·These"·are--OStU
lates rdranythingth:itfhaveto say "about"itand I have n~ wish
to waste the reader's time by elaborating my eulogies; it has given
me all the surprise, delight, and terror that I can, require, and I
will leave it at that.
Among all the criticisms I have seen of the book, I have seen
nothing - unless we except, in its way, M. Valery Larbaud's
valuable paper which is rather an Introduction than a criticism -
which seemed to me to appreciate the significance of the method
employed - the parallel to the Odyssey, and the use of appropriate
styles and symbols to each division. Yet one might expect this to
be the first peculiarity to attract attention; but it has been treated
as an amusing dodge, or scaffolding erected by the author for the
purpose of disposing his realistic tale, of no interest in the
completed structure. The criticism which Mr. Aldington directed
upon Ulysses several years ago seems to me to fail by this over-
sight - but, as Mr. Aldington wrote before the complete work had
appeared, fails more honourably than the attempts of those who
had the whole book before them. Mr. Aldington treated Mr.
Joyce as a prophet of chaos; and wailed at the flood of Dadaism
which his prescient eye saw bursting forth at the tap of the
magician's rod. Of course, the influence which Mr. Joyce's book
may have is from my point of view an irrelevance. A very great
book may have a very bad influence indeed; and a mediocre book
1 This article appeared in The Dial, November, 192 3.

175
APPRECIATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL AUTHORS • 1918-1"930
may be in the event most salutary. The next generation is
responsible for its own soul; a man of genius is responsible to his
peers, not to a studio full of uneducated and undisciplined cox-
combs. Still, Mr. Aldington's pathetic solicitude for the half-
witted seems to me to carry certain implications about the nature
of the book itself to which I cannot assent; and this is the im-
portant issue. He finds the book, if I understand him, to be an
invitation to chaos, and an expression of feelings which are per-
verse, partial, and a distortion of reality. But unless I quote Mr.
Aldington's words I am likely to falsify. 'I say, moreover,' he
says;' 'that when Mr. Joyce, with his marvellous gifts, uses them
to disgust us with mankind, he is doing something which is false
and a libel on humanity.' It is somewhat similar to thy opinion of
the urbane Thackeray upon Swift. 'As for the moral, I think it
horrible, shameful, unmanly, blasphemous: and giant and great
as this Dean is, I say we should hoot him.' (This, of the conclusion
of the Voyage to the Houyhnhnms - which seems to me one of the
greatest triumphs that the human soul has ever achieved. It is
true that Thackeray later pays Swift one of the finest tributes that
~ man has ever given or received: 'So great a man he seems to me
that thinking of him is like thinking of an empire falling.' And Mr.
Aldington, in his time, is almost equally generous.)
Whether it is possible to libel humanity (in distinction to libel
in the usual sense, which is libelling an individual or a group in
contrast with the rest of humanity) is a question for philosophical
societies to discuss; but of course if Ulysses were a 'libel' it would
simply be a forged document, a powerless fraud, which would
never have extracted from Mr. Aldington a moment's attention. I
do not wish to linger over this point: the interesting question is
that begged by Mr. Aldington when he refers to Mr. Joyce's
'great undisciplined talent'.
I think that Mr. Aldington and I are more or less agreed as to
what we want in principle, and agreed to call it classicism. It is
because of this agreement that I have chosen Mr. Aldington to
attack on the present issue. We are agreed as to what we want, but
not as to how to get it, or as to what contemporary writing exhibits
a tendency in that direction. We agree, I hope, that 'classicism' is
not an alternative to 'romanticism', as of political pafties:'=Con-
servative and Liberal, Republican and Democrat, on a 'turn-the-
rascals-out' platform. It is a goal toward which all good literature
strives, so far as it is g60a;·~acer>rOirfgt()the"~'p6ssioilit'ie-s""o·r-its
pracea~d·~time:···()he·'can'"'t-be~'~chissilcal";'in··i··sense~-·by~turniii"'g'·aw·ay
frbillfilne:tenths of the material which lies at hand and selecting
1 English Review, April, 192 1.

'ULYSSES', ORDER, AND MYTH
only mummified stuff from a museum - like some contemporary
writers, about whom one could say some nasty things in this
connection, if it were worth while (Mr. Aldington is not one of
them). Or one can be classical in tendency by doing the best one
can with the material at hand. The confusion springs from the
fact that the term is applied to literature and to the whole com-
plex of interests and modes of behaviour and society of which
literature is a part; and it has not the same bearing in both
applications. It is much easierto be a classicistin literarY criticism
}~:~far;~~v~R~~~ii~~~~~1~
youcaii·aowli1i-maierial'whlcli'·o;/must~sim"l"~'acGept.'Anrin
thiSillaferiaJTinaudetliit"emorioiis-ari(rf.'eer.~~f the'mlter
himserr;wlUcfi;"ror~iliaf"write~aresi'rriI>1Y matefi-a1wliicli1iemust
ac~ce'
~ 'r=Onofvirtu"es'
. 'to'b'e_.
' e_
rilar~edor vi e"S'" t -:"'l;':'e<~aiminr"Jiea:-Tlie
..~ ."""..". <;>.""lG;.. ,.,"',.,'~.~>,Q",J),.'''''h'''' "." ....
questIon; then, about Mr. Joyce, is: how much living material
doesne-deal\Vith;<Nafrd'~how doeshe'deal'with'itideal'with.rnot'as a
legiSlafor"oi'<exhdr~er, 'but as an artist?" ,., '.. :" ,,'f,,',';' .';,,>,
"Ifishere thai ~ ft.Y$~~~!t~Ly;S~ •.Qf.t.l1~~Q~~has agreat

~~~~~~nh~~ ~tiIr¥~f~~~~~~e2~~'~fg~~YS;t~~%~~~~f1~ ~;
never fiefo.rp'e_~~Q~kn~~§~~iy'~~r 'am~~nof'b'eggifi'g~l1ieq uesliOilin
caIIIng UTysses a 'novel'; and if you call it an epic it will not
matter. If it is not a novel, that is simply because the novel is a
form whi~h-wiIr'n olan '·ef"serve;~"ifi§"·o·ecalrse11i.eiiover;msfea(i'of
oem a form, 'was'-siffi:ly'fhe'~expiession-or~naanot
smrfcie'ntlylosrallTornrto"'feerthe'need'of'Sometliin-stfict:eE'1'v1f.
Joyce has wri"ife"none-novel ':':""ihePOr1i;(i~ewis
has written one novel- Tarr. I do not suppose that either of them
will ever write another 'novel'. The novel ended with Flaubert
and with Ja~ It is, I think, because Mr. Joyce and-Mr~1:~wi~,
being ~_!-d,;~~~-~,~."._~.f"_!~.~.~E."_.!~!!1h'~?t:!~lfit. ,~~,~.~o~<?,j~h""~-. or pro y
unco~~£!QY,~~~~~),~l~~!~_gP:_,.~ltA."._~1~~. . ,,,2!m,t..Jn.,-t!..~J,,,~Ir, ...!lQY.~-.,§.,Jlre lQ.aj;l
more formless than those of,... a dozen
uJl.iiiare,vof.~its-'".oh,s:olescence. .'. '.....,
clever writers who p~re
<'"••.,"'.~"_,·..·_·P-"'..v""...,,~ ...,,• .-
'""'J ••,.".·.,....v,., ...
In using the myth, in manipulating a continuous parallel

betwe~n__c.Qn tern oraneil"·-·aiiQalffi-"uir"-Mr:-l(rce"'ls~·-ursuina
~d which'c!ihers····m~st'pursu;·afai·hi'm.·1h"'ey-;mn~
imItators, any morethan-"llie-scientiSfwliOUsesthe discoveries of
an Einstein in pursuing his own, independent, further investiga-
~~:;~ ~~~~a~~ij~lhc~~~Yt;'h~·?~~l~!gjfii~~~~~~:Vi~~d
aiiaiaiY'~whicn~is~coiiteiriporiry1iisior:-TtiSariieffioaaPr'ea((y
aaumorafedoy-:Mr:-veafs:-and"of'tIi?need for which I believe
Mr. Yeats to have been the first contemporary to be conscious. It
177
APPRECIATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL AUTHORS' 1918-193°
is a method for which the horoscope is auspicious. P_~~
(such as it is, and whether our reaction to it be comic or serious),
e.!.hnologY.2"~n,9."Th~ Golde1tB,Q.ttgb"pave "~Qg~~~~~~~ t2 _1J!.~k~. PQ§&l?L~
w~~"~"~!",~ .simpossible even afew ye.ars" ago. lris.!~a4--Q[ nar!ative
method, we may now use the mythicalmethod. It IS, I seriously
believe, a step toward makiIlg'the"riio'~efrr\V9r12 R2.~~~,LQle~fotar~,
t6watd~~'thar"brder and form··~·whi£~~~:t.~~:}\@jnitQ.U...SO-ea.t:Rest1y
desifes:-"Ahd'~"O'rily" tnose'\;vho"'hive won their own discipline in
secret'and without aid, in a world which offersvery little assistance
to that end, can be of any use in furthering this advance.

Eliot - Ulysses Order and Myth

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eliot - Ulysses Order and Myth

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eliot - Ulysses Order and Myth

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ULYSSES, ORDER, AND MYTHl

1 This article appeared in The Dial, November, 192 3.

1 English Review, April, 192 1.

"Ifishere thai ~ ft.Y$~~~!t~Ly;S~ •.Qf.t.l1Qhas agreat

In using the myth, in manipulating a continuous parallel

You might also like