TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

The Strange Case of the Missing Joyce Scholar

62 pointsby elemenoalmost 7 years ago

5 comments

gwernalmost 7 years ago
Sounds like a good cautionary example for &#x27;real artists ship&#x27;. If he had just declared his Joyce edition complete at some point, even if he felt it was radically incomplete, it would have likely superseded Gabler and the major errors which he hated so much, and he could&#x27;ve improved subsequent editions or others could&#x27;ve taken it on after he disappeared. But the perfect was the enemy of better, Gabler won by default, and now he&#x27;s spent decades on something else entirely. Odds aren&#x27;t good he&#x27;ll finish <i>that</i> either.
oskaalmost 7 years ago
I enjoyed this casual detail in the article:<p>&gt; she and a colleague were dedicating a book to him, a 31,802-page tome called “The Manual for the Advanced Study of James Joyce’s ‘Finnegans Wake’”<p>Academic studies of the Wake leaves Ulysses scholarship for dead :)
评论 #17299641 未加载
Amezarakalmost 7 years ago
I have never read ulysses, and didn&#x27;t realize this was an issue. So what is actually recommended for the non-academic reader now?
评论 #17298971 未加载
DrJohnKiddalmost 7 years ago
I have never claimed that I was on a quest to perfect Ulysses, or to edit a &quot;definitive Ulysses,&quot; or to concoct any &quot;perfect edition&quot;.<p>New York Times Magazine author Jack Hitt simply made that up, as he seems to have done with several other things attributed to me by him. Or maybe he has an uncredited source that inspired him to romanticize my mundane drudgery as a tropical textologist and translator.<p>The term I prefer is &quot;authoritative,&quot; which is not a claim of &quot;error-free input,&quot; something Hans Walter Gabler wrote that had attained in his 1984 &quot;Ulysses : A Critical and Synoptic Edition.&quot;<p>In 1986 the claim of non-erroneousness was repeated twice in a gushing review of Gabler written by Geert Lernout in the _Revue Belge de Philologie_, which ends with these words : &lt;&lt; It seems that Joyce finally got the error-free text he waited for in vain during his life-time. &gt;&gt;<p>One nice symmetry of Then and Now is that Lernout became the first academic in Europe to assail me as having weird ideas about Joyce. Gabler&#x27;s work is, we are told twice, &quot;error-free,&quot; and Kidd, we are assured, is an eccentric crank who &quot;has a whole series of pet theories . . .&quot;<p>1986, 2018, Nothing new under the sun, Gabler-Kidd-wise and Kidd-Gabler-wise. Lernout literally declares, &quot;Kidd is the kind of person who . . .&quot; It does not get more ad hominem than that.<p>I would be interested to learn if anyone can find online any pre-2018 claim that I sought to produce the impossible &quot;perfect edition&quot; of any book. That false claim seems to have appeared first on the web on June 12, 2018. The online version of Jack Hitt&#x27;s New York Times Magazine profile of me is called &quot;The Strange Case of the Missing Joyce Scholar,&quot; but the paper publication with a cover date of June 17 is titled “In Search of the Perfect Ulysses.”<p>What is stranger or more eccentric than I myself supposedly am, is a journalist of such high intelligence as Jack Hitt attributing to me beliefs that he does not sustain by a single quotation from my published work, whether it be Joycean or Jungian, or a even poem out of my youth.<p>Come to think of it, Jack Hitt&#x27;s beautifully written essay fails to give the title of any of my works. Those curious about what Hitt skimmed over without dipping his beak into the salt green sea, may consult an old CV of mine by Googling this phrase, enclosing it within quotation marks : &quot;Curriculum Vitae of John Kidd&quot;
cornholioalmost 7 years ago
Sounds like he tried to build an academic career on pathological grammar Nazism. The size of a dot? Come on, that&#x27;s at most a minor typographical error.<p>A text the size of &quot;Ulysses&quot; cannot, by definition, ever be &quot;perfect&quot;. There will always be an opportunity for a vacuous hack to assemble a &quot;catastrophic&quot; collection of minor mistakes that allegedly compromise the edition. This is usually much easier than actually producing a new edition, by orders of magnitude so, and this is why we hate grammar Nazis: they derail the conversation and in the end contribute nothing of substance.<p>I know it&#x27;s probably harsh, but every field has these guys, they should not be celebrated but marginalized. I find his ouster from academia not surprising. Kidd is obviously very competent but he chose to invest his vast knowledge and intellect into an ego match instead of contributing and expanding his field.
评论 #17302202 未加载