>>8160665
>the jumbled story line is hard to follow

>reading for plot

If you are enjoying the process of reading it

There isn't a test at the end so you don't need to have memorised anything

>>8160669
Part of me feels, what is the point if I can't remember much of the details. I've gathered that Stephen is basically the main character...but everyone else I'm having trouble with.

I can't stress the importance of guide books for Ulysses. I'm almost through oxen of the sun and its quickly becoming my fav book -- this after my second read 10 years apart.

The new bloomsday book is useful for chapter summaries. Ulysses annotated and re-Joyce podcasts are wonderful as well.

>>8160699
>Stephen is basically the main character.
Of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

Leopold Bloom is the main character. Stephen is a recurring character from anoher of Joyces works

>>8160707
Stephen is a central character in books I and III, don't be a fag.

>>8160732
Book 17 too. He isn't the main character though

Use flash cards, the paper kind.

>>8160665
Speaking of Ulysses, which edition(s) is/are /lit/ approved?

I've heard mixed reviews of the Gabler one from 1961.

>>8160665
>reading Ulysses for plot

top wew

ulysses is a book to be re-read. it'll be better the second time around, and subsequent times.

>>8161979

Gabler is the only edition.

>>8162033
But I read that he made changes, anon.

>>8162190
it's no secret that the original 1922 edition contained a plethora of errors, which joyce then worked with random house to emend for the 1934 us edition, that was later reprinted in 1961 by the modern library and forms the "standard" text

the highly unusual styling of ulysses meant there was copious room for error, esp from the copywriters/typesetters, and it showed abundantly in 1922. though thousands of errors were corrected by joyce himself in 1934, there were still many more he worked on, and often included as errata for later editions before being incorporated into the text. it's not unreasonable at all to think there were still more to come.

general academic consensus today states gabler likely overstepped a bit in his corrections, but it is not at all unreasonable for him to have done what he did. the controversy around the edition is, anyway, largely academic and completely irrelevant to the lay reader, and certainly not to pseuds on /lit/. bitching about gabler edition is apparently the "in" thing to do among pretentious pseuds who've never read joyce in their lives, ignore them

>>8162255
This is actually very well reasoned, good stuff.

Thanks a bunch. I'll set about getting a copy of the Gabler edition.

>>8162263
one of the main points in favor of the gabler edition is actually the existence of the excellent ulysses annotated book by don gifford. it annotates the gabler edition line by line and is extremely helpful. highly recommended if you care about reading ulysses and "understanding" it to some depth.

It's the kind of a book you read once and then read random sections of it, and learn something new from it every time

>>8161979
OG one from 1922 is the best.

>>8160668
>not reading for plot

>>8160665
If you're a
>reading for the plot
pleb then you won't enjoy Ulysses, no.