Ulysses, James Joyce and Jacques Derrida

Step 1. The proliferatious text

James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’ is a vast system of interlocking words and meanings, huge tracts of text consisting of sentences cut back to phrases, fragments of speech, words truncated into bits and glued together to make new portmanteau words, fleeting quotes, even sound effects, thousands of which recur over and again with subtle variations, rephrasings, reappearing hundreds of pages apart, often creating impenetrably difficult passages. If you don’t quite believe me, here’s the opening of chapter 11 (the Sirens chapter):

Bronze by gold heard the hoofirons, steelyringing.
Imperthnthn thnthnthn.
Chips, picking chips off rocky thumbnail, chips.
Horrid! And gold flushed more.
A husky fifenote blew.
Blew. Blue bloom is on the.
Goldpinnacled hair.
A jumping rose on satiny breast of satin, rose of Castile.
Trilling, trilling: Idolores.
Peep! Who’s in the… peepofgold?
Tink cried to bronze in pity.
And a call, pure, long and throbbing. Longindying call.
Decoy. Soft word. But look: the bright stars fade. Notes chirruping answer.
O rose! Castile. The morn is breaking.
Jingle jingle jaunted jingling.
Coin rang. Clock clacked.
Avowal. Sonnez. I could. Rebound of garter. Not leave thee. Smack. La cloche! Thigh smack. Avowal. Warm. Sweetheart, goodbye!
Jingle. Bloo.

You need to read the commentaries to understand that this opening passage is a kind of ‘overture’ or statement of themes, like a trailer for a movie, bringing together fragments which, when we read the main body of the chapter, we will encounter again only explained at slightly more comprehensible length.

This vast matrix, this treasure house of glittering fragments sets up tens of thousands of correspondences and contrasts, within itself and beyond itself, generating new types of meaning in all kinds of non-traditional ways.

Arguably, no final ‘meaning’ could ever be found for ‘Ulysses’ because it not only contains so many ‘meanings’ (at the obvious level of, say, theme and character) but because the huge interplay of broken words and phrases is remade every time a new reader reads it or an old reader reads it again. Although it’s a static text (although even this isn’t true, because there were thousands of textual errors in the original printing which, moreover, were exacerbated by the attempts of Joyce himself and subsequent scholars to fix them, generally introducing new ones) ‘Ulysses’ contains so many sentences made of fragments which don’t make any sense themselves but only in interplay with other, related fragments, that making sense of all these fragments in any one reading is impossible for one human being.

And the next time you (or anyone else) rereads it, you’re likely to notice a different range of fragments and allusions, thus creating an entirely new experience of the book. In this very real sense, the text is endless.

Step 2. The exegesis industry

Since its publication 124 years ago (1922) ‘Ulysses’ has gathered a small industry of commentators and exegetes (where exegesis means ‘critical explanation or interpretation of a text, especially of scripture’). There are no end of essays, PhD dissertations, academic papers, conferences, books, presentations, seminars, workshops and whatnot all adding innumerable new layers of interpretation and analysis to the original text every year.

In a very real sense (to coin a cliché again) there is no end to the Joyce industry because there will be no end to the millions of students and tens of thousands of academics writing papers about Joyce all year, every year, as long as there are literature courses, at universities all around the world.

So 1) the book itself was already endless in the ways I’ve suggested, but 2) its endlessness has been endlessly complexified by the endless reinterpretations offered by an endlessly expanding interpretation industry.

Step 3. The internet

Obviously the advent of the internet 30 years ago exacerbated all this even further, in the sense that it made many of these academic papers, seminars, PowerPoints, PDFs and whatnot publicly accessible in a way they hadn’t been before, thus making countless interpretations reinterpretable by a wider-than-ever-before audience of lay readers.

But it also introduced a whole new set of channels for readers to express their readings and misreadings through – on websites professional and amateur, in blogs (like this one), alongside the proliferation of streamed conferences and workshops and seminars and so on. A whole new layer of endless interpretation was added to the two existing ones.

Step 4. Social media

And then around 2009 along came social media, which allowed people much more easily to share their short Facebook and Twitter-sized opinions about any aspect of the book, opinions large of microscopic relating to their reading or reading of the many biographies or commentaries or guided tour round Joyce’s Dublin, or anything even remotely related, which all added to the vast cosmic cloud of meanings and thoughts and opinions and versions of this multitudinous text.

Step 5. Artificial intelligence

And now we have the arrival of artificial intelligence. To be precise (and to quote Wikipedia):

The AI boom started with the initial development of key architectures and algorithms such as the transformer architecture in 2017, leading to the scaling and development of large language models exhibiting human-like traits of knowledge, attention, and creativity. The new AI era began in 2020, with the public release of a scaled large language model (LLM) GPT-3, the predecessor of ChatGPT.

And:

ChatGPT was launched on 30 November 2022, marking a pivotal moment in artificial intelligence’s public adoption. Within days of its release it went viral, gaining over 100 million users in two months and becoming the fastest-growing consumer software application in history.

Current estimates are that some 2 billion people round the world have used AI at least once, with as many as 600 million people using it every day (I know I do).

So, how does this affect the reading of ‘Ulysses’. Sorry to be predictable, but it quite clearly is going to add yet another layer of complexification to interpretations of the never-ending book. To be more precise, two fairly obvious points:

1. Unstoppable proliferation

An AI like Chat writes new interpretations of the book every time it is asked a question about it. I would be amazed if students of Joyce aren’t asking it questions all day long (I know I am), so we can be fairly confident that new interpretations of Joyce (sometimes small scale, sometimes large scale) are being produced every day, every hour and every minute. The volume of new sentences being generated by AI about ‘Ulysses’ is probably incalculable. All this is fed back into the vast cyberscape via all the channels I’ve listed above, from student essays to amateur observations on social media, and this becomes part of the resource which AI subsequently bases its answers on.

2. Hallucinations

The key thing about AIs, as far as I’m concerned, is they make stuff up, all the time, about everything. As a civil servant I’ve used the carefully vetted, government-approved AI, Assist, and a security-cleared version of CoPilot, and have been genuinely taken aback by how much they get wrong and how often. We are, in my opinion, entering an age characterised by unmanageable amounts of digital slop, with vast tsunamis of hallucinated misinformation already washing over the worlds of discourse.

When it comes to the endless text of ‘Ulysses’, then, not only is AI producing vast amounts of summaries and explanations, but an unknowable amount of these will be rubbish – but will nonetheless go to form part of the evidence base from which the next generations of AI will be trained, and so on.

It’s hard to know whether Joyce would be weeping in his grave or laughing his head off.

Step 6. Enter Jacques Derrida

It’s a long time since I tried and failed to read the key works of the great French philosopher and celebrity thinker Jacques Derrida (1930 to 2004). I’ve easily understood the various summaries of his thought but found the books themselves very hard work, not least because the early ones, at least, are 1) running commentaries on other philosophers which you therefore need to be very familiar with to understand how he’s interpreting them; and 2) invoke the world of his post-structuralist peers (Lacan, Barthes, Cixous et al) who you also need to be very familiar with in order to fully follow, or half follow, or pretend to follow, the way he’s riffing off their ideas.

But I have always understood the basic idea of the school of thought he invented, which is generally called deconstruction or deconstructionism, to mean that the meaning of a word or phrase is always fugitive because it can only be generated by reference to other words and phrases, which themselves cannot be understood without reference to other words or phrases, and so on indefinitely.

Literally, indefinitely. The quest for a final definitive meaning can never be achieved in language because the mythical Final Word or phrase which anchors everything else in the system doesn’t exist. There is no centre. Or to put it another way, there is no outside. There is no world outside the text which offers a complete foundation and anchor point. There is no transcendent source of authority. From which it follows that no system of meaning can be stable or complete. All meaning is provisional and can at any moment be subverted by new eddies washing in from other parts of the universe of meaning.

(For me personally, this worldview maps easily onto my existing reading of David Hume, a ferociously sceptical British figure from outside Derrida’s continental culture; and with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s later idea of language games – both of which are intuitively easier to process than Derrida’s playfully impenetrable French.)

But back to Derrida and Joyce. Having followed my argument this far it occurred to me that not only Joyce’s original text, but all the proliferations it has been, and is still being, subjected to, bear out Derrida’s idea of the endless proliferation of deferred meaning. So I did what we all do nowadays and asked Chat GPT.

I asked: ‘Does James Joyce’s Ulysses embody Jacques Derrida’s idea of deconstruction?’ and within a few seconds it replied:

Yes, James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’ is frequently interpreted as an embodiment of Jacques Derrida’s ideas of deconstruction, to such an extent that Derrida himself suggested Joyce prefigured his theories. The novel is considered a prime example of dissemination, a key Derridean concept whereby language breaks free from a single, authorized meaning and plays uncontrollably.

Here is how Ulysses embodies deconstruction:

Différance and Interpretation: The ‘Proteus’ episode is often cited as a prefiguration of différance (the deferral and difference of meaning). The chapter emphasizes metamorphosis in which symbols, thoughts and language are in constant flux, preventing a stable, present meaning.

Destabilizing the Signified: ‘Ulysses’ challenges Western dichotomies (self/other, presence/absence, speech/writing) by placing words and sounds above fixed meaning. The text acts as a ‘decomposing form’, where language breaks down into its constituent units, similar to the digestive processes often mentioned in the book itself. [The ‘Lestrygonians’ chapter, in particular, is set at lunchtime and focuses on food.]

Il n’y a pas de hors-texte‘: This is a famous quote of Derrida’s, meaning that all reality is mediated through interpretation, context and language (through a ‘fabric of signs’) and that we cannot access an objective, uninterpreted reality independent of these structures. With regard to ‘Ulysses’, although the novel references a real place (Dublin) in mind-bogglingly accurate detail, along with quite a few real-life characters of its time, most of the actual text of the novel functions as a self-referential system where meaning is generated, not by any reference to an external reality, but through internal networks of words and allusions. In this way it forces the reader to engage with the text as a text rather than a representation of life.

Undecidability and “Yes”: In 1984 Derrida was invited to deliver the opening address at the
Ninth International James Joyce Symposium in Frankfurt and produced a long (two-and-a-half hours) rambling address titled ‘Ulysses Gramophone’. It makes many points but a recurring one is the importance of the ‘yeses’ uttered by Molly Bloom in her famous final monologue, as affirmations that embrace the undecidability of language, which acts as both a totalising generator of what we take to be ‘meaning’ but which in the long text which precedes her climactic speech, has also proven that full meaning is impossible to achieve; making language a controlling but also liberating force at the same time.

The ‘Gay Betrayer’: In a typically smartarse move, Derrida concludes that to be ‘faithful’ to ‘Ulysses’ is to constantly betray it (obviously himself referencing the novel’s central theme of marital fidelity and infidelity), as the text itself undermines its own structure and authorial intent.

Personally, I would disagree with that last point: I don’t think the text undermines its own structure because that suggests the text is staying roughly the same ‘place’, that the undermining is going on in the same space, just digging away at its own foundations. Whereas in my visualisation the text of ‘Ulysses’ amplifies itself, continually spawning concatenations of extra meanings completely out of Joyce’s control, out of anybody’s control, until the text and all its meanings are large enough to be seen from space, until it reaches out beyond this puny planet and colonises space.


Credit

‘Ulysses’ by James Joyce was published by Shakespeare and Company in 1922.

Related links

Joyce reviews

Ulysses by James Joyce: introduction

‘You have the cursed jesuit strain in you, only it’s injected the wrong way.’
(Buck Mulligan arguing with Stephen Dedalus)

Hold to the now, the here, through which all future plunges to the past.
(Stephen’s credo)

‘Your own name is strange enough. I suppose it explains your fantastical humour.’
(John Eglinton responding to Stephen’s lecture about Shakespeare)

Fabulous artificer. The hawklike man…
(Stephen’s self-mocking self description in the same scene)

I’ll tickle his catastrophe, believe you me.
(Simon Dedalus threatening to write a letter to Buck Mulligan’s mother exposing him, and demonstrating his vivid and generally comic turn of phrase)

—I beg your parsnips, says Alf.
(In the Cyclops chapter)

James Joyce is a world class literary giant on the basis of his 1922 novel ‘Ulysses’. It’s monster long – around 700 pages in most editions – and has a fearsome reputation for being a ‘difficult’. In many senses it is difficult, often very difficult, but I’m going to have a go at explaining it as simply as I can.

Joyce’s previous and much more conventional novel, ‘A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’, (published in 1916) told the life story of a transparently fictional version of Joyce himself, named Stephen Dedalus, from toddlerdom to university. When described like that it sounds very straightforward; what complicates it is Joyce’s phenomenal intellectual powers and his increasingly experimental way with prose.

As in his set of short stories, Dubliners (published in 1912), on the surface all is realism, with realistic characters pottering round Dublin, getting into realistic scrapes and having realistic conversations. However, what was clear to perceptive readers of Dubliners from the get-go was that these stories are extremely carefully organised: at a meta level they are arranged so that the collection as a whole describes different stages of life – from boyhood japes in the early stories, to young manhood, maturity, through to the final story, titled The Dead. And within each story, there is also careful structuring and symbolism: for example, the short story ‘Grace’ opens with a middle-aged man passed out pissed in the toilets of a popular bar. He’s helped home by some mates and put to bed while his pals work with his wife to persuade him to go on a religious retreat to try and help him give up the booze. So far so mundane, until someone points out that the three locations of the story – downstairs toilet, bedroom and church – can be seen as the three locations of the afterlife: hell, purgatory and paradise. And once you know this, you are able to spot further little clues which have been sprinkled about the story, symbols or Latin phrases which subtly reference and gesture towards this concealed structure.

Well, magnify this method a thousandfold and you have ‘Ulysses’. I’ll consider it in three ways: first, the literal story; then the structure which underpins (or has been imposed) on it; thirdly, (some of) the linguistic innovations introduced in ‘Ulysses’, innovations which start slowly but spread to become completely rampant. It’s these innovations in prose style and structure which are the real stumbling blocks of the novel, often making it hard to read on the sentence, paragraph and page levels, presenting countless challenges to comprehension, and from relatively early on. But first, a look at the structure:

Structure

‘Ulysses’ is divided into 18 chapters, which are themselves gathered into three parts: part 1 contains 3 chapters; part 2 12 chapters; part 3 has 3 chapters.

What happens

Part 1: Chapters 1 to 3

At 8am on Thursday 4 June 1904 young Stephen Dedalus wakes up in the Martello Tower on Dublin Bay where he’s been dossing with a friend, medical student Malachi ‘Buck’ Mulligan. He’s cross because he was kept awake by the noisy nightmares of a third guest, the Englishman Haines. He’s also in a bad mood because Mulligan teases him because his (Stephen’s) mother recently died, and Stephen refused, on principle, to kneel by the bedside of his dying mother, something which now haunts him with guilt. This trio of young bucks go for a quick dip in the sea (well, fastidious Stephen doesn’t take part) then (in chapter 2) Stephen goes on to the school where he teaches part time, takes a history lesson, gets paid by the pedantic headmaster. In chapter 3 we are alone with Stephen and his thoughts as he walks along the beach.

Part 2: Chapter 4 to chapter 15

Cut back to 8am in the household of Leopold Bloom in central Dublin. Bloom is a middle-aged seller of newspaper advertising, a job which involves tramping the streets of Dublin touting for business. He’s married to Molly. He makes her breakfast in bed, fries breakfast for himself and then sets off on his day’s work. His day includes:

  • a trip to the Post Office
  • attending the funeral of a friend
  • visiting the office of a newspaper to place an ad
  • popping into Davy Byrne’s pub for a sandwich lunch
  • going to the National Library to look up an ad in an old newspaper, where his path doesn’t quite cross Stephen who is in the office of the Head Librarian, delivering another one of his literary theories, this time about the true meaning of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, to representatives of Dublin’s literary elite
  • Bloom has dinner at the Ormond Hotel while listening to other characters playing the piano and singing
  • Bloom moves on Barney Kiernan’s pub where he meets a character referred to only as The Citizen who is a pugnacious Irish nationalist who ends up trying to attack him
  • Bloom wanders out to Sandymount Strand on the seashore, and watches a young woman, Gerty MacDowell, who’s with some friends; aware of him watching her, Gerty deliberately flashes her legs in a sexy way and arouses Bloom so much that, watching from a safe distance as night falls on the beach, he masturbates to a climax: although it’s a little difficult to make out through Joyce’s highly-mannered prose what’s happening, it was this chapter which got ‘Ulysses’ banned in America and Britain
  • Bloom visits a maternity hospital where a family friend named Mina Purefoy is giving birth, and finally meets Stephen, who has been drinking with his medical student friends and is awaiting the arrival of his frenemy Buck Mulligan
  • when the maternity hospital drinking party breaks up, Stephen and his friend Lynch walk into Nighttown, Dublin’s red-light district, where Bloom follows them into Bella Cohen’s brothel; everyone is quite drunk by now and the scene is extremely long and filled with grotesque hallucinations, climaxing with Stephen being kicked out onto the street where he manages to get into an argument with a British soldier who knocks him to the ground where Bloom comes to his rescue

Part 3: Chapters 16 to 18

  • To sober him up, Bloom takes Stephen to a nearby cabman’s shelter by Butt Bridge where they encounter a drunken sailor
  • Bloom takes Stephen back to his place, makes him a cup of cocoa and they have a post-drunk conversation about the educational and cultural differences between them; they both go outside to pee in the garden; Stephen refuses Bloom’s offer of a bed for the night and staggers off into the night while Bloom goes to bed next to his sleeping wife
  • Chapter 18 is famous because it consists solely of Molly Bloom’s thoughts as she lies in bed next to her passed-out husband: the 40 or so pages contain only eight paragraphs with no punctuation in a tour-de-force of the relatively unknown technique of stream-of-consciousness: she remembers her various boyfriends and reminisces about courting and having sex with them, before the novel ends with a description of her having an orgasm, marked by the words yes yes yes which conclude this vast epic novel

There is One Big Fact I haven’t found space to explain yet and this is that, right from the start of his day, Bloom has known that a rival of his, the music impresario and flashy man-about-town, Hugh ‘Blazes’ Boylan, is going to call by his house, at 4pm that afternoon, supposedly to discuss details of the concert tour he’s arranged for Molly, but in reality to have sex with her. Bloom knows she is taking Boylan as her lover and yet feels powerless to stop it. And so he spends his entire day in a state of anxiety and suspense, continually looking at the clock at every venue he visits, in anticipation of zero hour; and then, after 4pm, reluctant to return to his house afterwards 1) lest he encounters the couple still at it of Boylan just leaving and 2) because he won’t know what to say to his wife.

So it’s a long book, and there’s a lot of words to read but I hope this summary shows that, on a basic narrative level, the story is relatively straightforward. All the events are highly realistic and plausible, if not actively boring and mundane, and once you’re told that this is the sequence of events the book describes, you can approach it with a lot less trepidation. What daunts people is the buried symbolism and above all the difficult prose style. Next: the Greek myth connection, or: why is it called Ulysses?

Ulysses and the Odyssey

Like every educated person, Joyce had read the two great epic poems of the ancient Greek author Homer, The Iliad and The Odyssey. The Iliad is a tragic account of the key episode at the heart of the ten-year-long Trojan War when the Greek hero Achilles, furious at the Greek leader Agamemnon, retires to his tent and refuses to fight. This has tragic consequences because when the Trojans counter-attack and make it as far as the Greek tents, Achilles lets his friend and soul-mate Patroclus put on his armour and rally the troops; Patroclus does this until he comes face to face with the Trojan hero Hector who slaughters him like a beast and the rest of the poem describes Achilles’ immense fury and bottomless grief.

But if the Iliad is tragic, the Odyssey has a very different feel. After the ten-year Trojan War ended, the Greek hero famous for his wily cunning, Odysseus, the man who came up with the idea of the Trojan Horse which led to the final defeat of the besieged city, it takes him ten further years to get home to his wife Penelope and his young son Telemachus (i.e. Odysseus is away from his kingdom of Ithaca for 20 years).

The poem actually opens near the end, with his last adventure, washing up on the shore of Princess Nausicaa, being discovered, bathed and dressed, then invited to a feast in her palace and it is here that he tells all the other guests his amazing adventures – being enslaved by Circe the magician, being held prisoner by the one-eyed Cyclops, sailing past the twin perils of Scylla and Charybdis, having to be tied to the mast in order not to give way to the seductive song of the Sirens, and many more.

Meanwhile, back in Ithaca, the Odyssey tells us how, throughout these ten long years, Odysseus’s faithful wife Penelope remained at home in their palace, putting off the many suitors who wanted to marry her and so inherit Odysseus’s kingdom. And it tells us how towards the end of this long period his son, Telemachus, come of age during his father’s absence, sets out on a quest of his own to find his father.

So with that understood, back to Joyce. Apparently Joyce had begun a story which he intended to be another short realistic yarn to join a revised edition of his short story collection ‘Dubliners’, about a Jewish advertising salesman with an unfaithful wife who wanders the streets in a peculiar frame of mind as he knows his wife is preparing to meet her lover, in his marital bed.

One thing led to another as Joyce wondered what if this advertising salesman met the young avatar he had created of himself in ‘A Portrait’, Stephen Dedalus? What would they discuss, what would they make of each other? And at some point he had the Eureka moment when it occurred to him that maybe this fellow Bloom’s wanderings around Dublin could be mapped onto Odysseus’s ancient adventures, maybe those ancient stories could give it a structure and, more than that, a kind of deep literary resonance, of the kind he was used to concealing in his Dubliners stories (like ‘Grace’, as described above),

When I tried to read ‘Ulysses’ at school I found it a great struggle because 1) I had no idea what was going on and 2) as the text progresses, the prose becomes difficult to read (see next section). You really need to know that the three central characters are modern avatars of Homer’s three characters: Bloom is wily old Odysseus; Stephen plays the role of his son, Telemachus; and Molly is the faithful Penelope waiting at home for her man. Except that they’re not a perfect match, are they? Stephen isn’t actually Bloom’s son and when, at the end, Bloom suggests a closer friendship Stephen mumbles something and wanders off into the night. No reconciliation there. And Molly, she is hardly the model of a faithful wife, in fact the whole point is that she is the exact opposite. And Bloom is hardly a macho Greek warrior, very much the reverse, he is a shy and diffident Jew in a Catholic country, liable to be discriminated against and picked on. So the novel’s central characters are in no way like-for-like matches of the Homeric epic, they are something more like ironic reincarnations, satirical avatars, reflecting the comic bathos of modern life.

But if I didn’t understand the roles played by these characters, the biggest single stumbling block to grasping the mythic resonances of the novel was the way the 18 chapters in Joyce’s text have no titles. Just giving them titles, and a sentence of explanation, would have transformed my experience.

As soon as I came across a book which explained that each of the chapters reflects or is based on a specific episode from the Odyssey, and clearly indicated which one was which, my whole reading experience was transformed. Augmented by the knowledge that the 18 chapters are further grouped into three parts which themselves are based on the main thematic elements of the Odyssey story, as follows:

  1. the first three chapters, describing Stephen waking in the tower, going to school and wandering into Dublin, are titled the Telemachia or wanderings of Telemachus
  2. the 12 central chapters can be thought of as the Odyssey proper, describing the many adventures of Bloom during the day
  3. the final three chapters, when Bloom takes Stephen home, can be grouped as the Nostos, Greek for return so the ‘Return’ part of the story, reflecting the final chapters of Homer’s poem which describe the homecoming of the long-absent hero

Why Ulysses and not Odysseus?

The ancient Romans not only co-opted many of the Greek gods, subsuming them into the existing Latin pantheon, they did the same with many of the mortal heroes of ancient Greece. When the Romans translated the Greek legends from Greek into Latin, they sometimes found it easier to change the names as well, to make them easier to pronounce. The early Latin translators of Homer probably adapted the Greek Ὀδυσσεύς into the Sicilian Οὐλίξης, and then the Etruscan Uluxe, before arriving at the shorter, more Roman-friendly Ulysses.

So that’s why you see two names being used for the same person: Odysseus is his original Greek name as used by Homer; Ulysses is the name used by Roman authors, such as Virgil, when describing the Tale of Troy.

So why did Joyce use the Latin name? Apparently, when he was a boy of 12, Joyce’s thoughts on the subject were crystallised when he first read the story in Charles Lamb’s book ‘The Story of Ulysses’ (1808), and that version of the name stuck. Having been brought up in a heavily Catholic school, Latin was all around him, in the Mass and liturgy and so on, and so he took to the Latinate forms (unlike late Victorian English Protestant private schools of the time, where there would have been as much emphasis on ancient Greek and so the Greek names are preferred by English writers).

Plot structure version 2

So here’s the chapter structure again, but this time indicating the episode from the Odyssey which each one is based on and explaining the parallels with the Homeric episode, such as they are:

Part 1: The Telemachia (the wanderings of Telemachus / Stephen)

Chapter 1: Telemachus

8am. Introducing Stephen Dedalus, bunking in the Martello Tower being rented by Buck Mulligan. Breakfast. Stephen should be mourning his recently dead mother and so borrows an all-black suit from Mulligan. In other words, he is dressed in mourning for the whole of the novel.

Chapter 2: Nestor (wise king of Pylos, advisor to the heroes)

Stephen’s encounter with school headmaster Garrett Deasy, who asks him to take a letter to the newspaper about foot-and-mouth disease. (Which gives rise to Stephen’s mortified expectation that Mulligan will mock him as ‘the bullockbefriending bard’, which becomes one of many recurring phrases, not to mention later cattle-related jokes such as someone being a bull in a china shop etc.)

[Myth parallel: Remember I mentioned that Bloom, Stephen and Molly are not direct avatars of their heroic predecessors but more like satirical, ironic modern versions. Well, as you can see here, the pompous Unionist headmaster Deasy is far indeed from being an avatar of wise old king Nestor of Greek mythology. Quite obviously he is a comic parody and yet there are commonalities: Nestor trained young horses, Deasy’s career is training teenage boys.]

Chapter 3: Proteus (the shape-shifting sea god from Greek myth)

Stephen wanders down to the seashore at Sandymount Strand and his mind wanders, free-associating ideas and memories from school and university, shreds of knowledge, quotes in various languages, perceptions and the rhythmic sound of the waves all melding in his mind to make this one of the most daunting of all the chapters to read, certainly in the first half.

[Myth parallel: You can see how the concept of the shape-shifting god maps nicely onto the endless shape-shifting of the protagonist’s mind.]

Part 2: the Odyssey (the wanderings of Ulysses / Leopold Bloom)

Chapter 4: Calypso

Cut back to 8am and Leopold Bloom, waking up, having breakfast, reading his mail, taking a letter from Blazes Boylan to his wife Molly in bed.

[Myth parallel: Calypso was a nymph from Greek mythology, famous for holding the hero Odysseus captive on her island, Ogygia, for seven years. Note that here, at the start of Bloom’s novel, Molly is Calypso. In the final chapter the same Molly stands in for the completely different figure of Penelope. Which shows you how Joyce’s parallels are exact in some respects but can be very loose if needs be.]

Chapter 5: Lotus Eaters

Bloom has an hour to kill before he has to attend Paddy Dignam’s funeral at 11am so he does a handful of chores in a lazy sensual mood: he goes to the Post Office, posts a letter, wanders into a Catholic church (incense and gold), buys a bar of lemon soap at a chemist and fantasises about paying a visit to Dublin’s Turkish baths.

[Myth parallel: The Lotus Eaters were a mythical people from Homer’s Odyssey, living on an island where they ate the narcotic lotus flower which caused blissful forgetfulness, a desire to stay, and loss of ambition. This is one of the more oblique of the Homeric parallels.]

Chapter 6: Hades or hell

Along with three friends, including Stephen’s father Simon Dedalus, Bloom attends the funeral of Paddy Dignam, taking the long journey by funeral carriage across Dublin to the burial in Glasnevin cemetery. This triggers in Bloom thoughts of his own son, Rudy, who died young, and of his father who committed suicide with poison.

[Myth parallel: This is one of the more obvious and direct allusions, matching Odysseus’s trip to the Greek underworld and a modern funeral.]

Chapter 7: Aeolus, the god of wind

This chapter is notable for the way the text is broken up by no fewer than 63 captions in the style of newspaper headlines, ironically summarising the content of each section.

At the office of the Dublin newspaper, the Freeman’s Journal, Bloom walks past the huge printing machines to the editor’s office where he attempts to place an ad for a client. Stephen arrives at the same office bringing (as promised) Deasy’s letter about foot-and-mouth disease. Bloom notices Stephen and that his boots are dirty but they do not actually meet. Instead the chapter mostly consists of long wordy conversations between half a dozen editors, hacks and scroungers, about each other, Dublin gossip, and racing tips.

[Myth parallel: In Greek mythology Aeolus was the keeper of the winds, ruling from the island of Aeolia where he held the violent winds captive in a bag. Control of the winds of information and opinion is an ironic or satirical way of thinking about a newspaper, and gassy windiness also describes the banter of the 7 or 8 characters gathered in the office.]

Chapter 8: Lestrygonians (a race of giant, cannibalistic ogres in Greek mythology)

Bloom wanders the streets feeling hungry, bumps into an old flame, Josie Breen, notices the (real life) author A.E. walking past him with a lady acolyte. He enters Burton’s restaurant but is overwhelmed by the smell and sight of so many people eating, so leaves and pops into Davy Byrne’s pub for a light lunch of a cheese sandwich and a glass of Burgundy wine. When he leaves, 4 or 5 other characters discuss his character.

Out on the street, he helps a blind man (who we later learn is a piano tuner) to cross the road and ponders at length all the implications of being blind – then walks on to the National Library. Thinking about food has led him to consider the human body as a machine, food in-poo out, which leads to the eccentric speculation whether traditional Greek statues were depicted with anuses. As he enters the National Library he has a quick squint up at the big statues flanking the entrance, to check.

[Myth parallel: obsession with food links the classical reference and the modern chapter.]

Chapter 9: Scylla and Charybdis

Cut to Stephen in the head librarian’s office at the National Library delivering another one of his literary theories, this time about the true meaning of Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’, appropriately enough because he is dressed in mourning (though for a dead mother not a dead father, as is the case with the Danish prince). Stephen and Bloom’s paths nearly cross as the latter pops in to look up an ad in an old newspaper but, again, they don’t actually meet.

[Myth parallel: In the Odyssey Odysseus’ ship has to sail the narrow channel between the twin monsters Scylla and Charybdis. I’ve read a clever interpretation pointing out that the two monsters can be mapped on to the two types of aesthetic theory dramatised in this chapter: Stephen’s theory of Shakespeare insists that the Bard’s great plays arose from the tribulations of his own sometimes squalid personal life but he’s presenting it to the older generation of Dublin critics who believe art should be about beautiful timeless spiritual ideals – so it’s these two opposing theories which represent the two legendary monsters, and which Joyce the author had to navigate between. Clever. There might also be a canny little micro-parallel because, as Bloom enters the Library, he walks between Stephen and his friend Mulligan exiting, who also represent two ends of a spectrum, Mulligan all glib flashy smartness, Stephen, deep but gloomy introspection.]

Chapter 10: Wandering Rocks

Nineteen short vignettes describe the movements of the central figures and about 30 secondary characters through the streets of Dublin. The episode begins by following kind-hearted Father Conmee, a Jesuit priest, walking north and stopping for a kind word for various parishioners, and ends with an account of the cavalcade of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, William Ward, Earl of Dudley, processing through the streets on his way to inaugurate the Mirus bazaar in aid of funds for Mercer’s hospital, and with the response of the 19 or so characters described in the preceding vignettes to his carriage as it passes.

[Myth parallel: Wandering rocks and wandering Dubliners.]

Chapter 11: Sirens

Bloom has dinner at the Ormond Hotel whose bar is dominated by the ministrations of two barmaids, dark-haired Miss Kennedy and brunette Miss Douce, while other characters gossip and then play the piano and sing some airs in the hotel’s dining room. Bloom gets a pen and paper to write a furtive reply to his lover Martha’s letter to him.

[Myth parallel: In Greek mythology the sirens were enchanting beings, half-woman, half-bird, who lured sailors to shipwreck and death with their irresistible songs; so the sirens are represented by the two barmaids, who don’t themselves sing but the scene is full of characters playing and singing, not least Stephen’s father, Simon.]

Chapter 12: Cyclops

Up till now the chapters have been cast in what you could call basic stream of consciousness, albeit often difficult to follow. The remaining six chapters of the novel are all longer and each one has its own individual format. Chapter 12 breaks the convention of the novel up to now by being narrated by an unnamed Dubliner who has a completely different ‘voice’ or style from either Stephen or Bloom.

This narrator works as a debt collector and goes to Barney Kiernan’s pub where he meets a character referred to only as ‘The Citizen’ who is a vehement Irish nationalist. When Bloom arrives at the pub, he is subjected to an antisemitic rant by the Citizen and various other characters come to his defence.

[Myth parallel: The Cyclops in Homer’s Odyssey was Polyphemus, a giant, one-eyed son of the sea god Poseidon who captured Odysseus and his men in his cave. This monster eats several of the sailors before Odysseus manages to get him drunk then blind him with a sharpened stake, and escaping. So the Citizen is the Cyclops and the one-eyed reference is a satirical take on the bigoted monomania of Irish nationalism.]

Chapter 13: Nausicaa

Bloom wanders out to Sandymount Strand where he watches a young woman, Gerty MacDowell, who flashes her legs to excite him. The first half is written as a parody of a romance magazine, the second half more realistically from Bloom’s point of view.

[In Homer’s Odyssey, Nausicaa was daughter of King Alcinous and Queen Arete of Phaeacia, famous for discovering and helping the shipwrecked Odysseus, giving him clothes, food, and guidance to her father’s palace. So the reincarnation of the elegant princess as a flirty young woman is obviously full of ironies and a vivid example of the general idea of how ‘fallen’ or degraded the modern world is.]

Chapter 14: Oxen of the Sun

Bloom visits the maternity hospital where Mina Purefoy is giving birth, and finally meets Stephen, who has been drinking with his medical student friends. At the end the drinking party breaks up, Mulligan catching the train back to his tower while Stephen drunkenly blunders off to the red light district accompanied by his pal, medical student Vincent Lynch. Worried about him, a much more sober Bloom follows.

[In the Odyssey Odysseus and his men come to the island of the sun god Helios, and are warned not to touch his holy cattle. When Odysseus goes off to pray for guidance his hungry men slaughter, roast and eat some of the cattle. Odysseus returns and tells them to flee but their ships are pursued by the sun god’s anger and most of his men are wrecked and drowned. The parallel is loose here, as this chapter is famous for mimicking the growth of the foetus in its mother’s womb by parodying the evolution of English from the original Anglo-Saxon onwards.]

Chapter 15: Circe

Bloom follows Stephen and his pal Lynch into a brothel where they both experience a series of grotesque Rabelaisian hallucinations. After smashing the chandelier with his walking stick, Stephen is kicked out onto the street where he gets into a fight with a British soldier and is knocked down, leaving Bloom to pick him up and sort him out.

[In the Odyssey, Circe was a powerful sorceress who used her magic to turn Odysseus’s men into swine and keep them imprisoned for years. Obviously there are no years here, just one night, and there is no crew, just Stephen, Lynch and Bloom. But the monstrous brothelkeeper Bella Cohen is a fittingly grotesque parody of the beautiful magical Circe of Homer.]

Part 3: Nostos (the Return)

Chapter 16: Eumaeus

[Myth parallel: in the Odyssey, Eumaeus is the loyal swineherd of Odysseus, a man of noble birth kidnapped as a child who had become a trusted friend of the master and is the first point of contact for the disguised hero upon his return to Ithaca.]

In the novel, having saved Stephen from arrest after his altercation with the soldier, Bloom takes Stephen to the cabman’s shelter near Butt Bridge where they encounter a drunken sailor: so the drunken sailor is the parallel to Eumaeus.

Chapter 17: Ithaca

[Myth parallel: In the Odyssey, Ithaca is Odysseus’s kingdom to which he returns.]

In the novel Ithaca it is Bloom’s house, to which he brings Stephen for a cup of cocoa.

Chapter 18: Penelope

[Myth parallel: In the Odyssey, Penelope is Odysseus’s loyal wife who waits for 20 long years for her husband to return, spurning the advances of numerous eligible suitors to replace the husband they all claim is dead.]

In the novel, Penelope is reincarnated as Molly Bloom, and the novel ends by abandoning the men and the male perspective altogether and ending with the huge seamless stream-of-consciousness flow of Molly’s falling-asleep thoughts.

Technical innovations

So far I’ve talked about the ‘structure’ of the novel but I have barely mentioned the technical or style innovations which make it such a demanding read on the page, made it so notorious in its time, and for a generation afterwards made it feel as if Joyce had not just revolutionised the novel with his elaborate system of symbols and references, but had revolutionised English prose as well.

Two or three of these quirks or innovations had already appeared in ‘A Portrait’ but in ‘Ulysses’ they are cranked up to the max, along with new novelties.

1. Formal, studied prose

Not an innovation as such, just the foundation on which everything else sits: but Joyce’s prose, even at its least experimental, is surprisingly formal and stiff and mannered. He consistently writes sentences not as you’d expect them to flow but with a deliberate stiffness. He consistently puts words into a counter-intuitive order. After a while I realised he always puts the adverb where you don’t expect it, counter to its usual position in everyday English. As in: ‘He waited by the counter, inhaling slowly the keen reek of drugs…’ where putting ‘slowly’ after ‘inhaling’ makes you linger on it longer, process it more, gives it more weight. Or:

The carriage turned again its stiff wheels and their trunks swayed gently. Martin Cunningham twirled more quickly the peak of his beard.

You’d expect ‘again’ to come after ‘stiff wheels’; you’d expect ‘more quickly’ to come after ‘beard’ and so on. He does this even in his plainest sentences and it gives them a studied, calculated movement. You argue he does so in order to describe things, especially people’s actions, with a finicky super-precision. Here’s the start of chapter 6:

Martin Cunningham, first, poked his silkhatted head into the creaking carriage and, entering deftly, seated himself. Mr Power stepped in after him, curving his height with care.

Also, he enjoyed avoiding the common word and using the slightly more official or officious word or phrase. After helping him with his sums, Stephen watches Sargent hurriedly change and run out onto the sports field.

He stood in the porch and watched the laggard hurry towards the scrappy field where sharp voices were in strife. They were sorted in teams and Mr Deasy came away stepping over wisps of grass with gaitered feet. When he had reached the schoolhouse voices again contending called to him.

‘Where sharp voices were in strife‘ is not the easiest most colloquial way to describe a bunch of boys shouting on a football pitch. It is studied and formal. Ditto the third sentence which contains the odd phrase ‘voices again contending’. You or I might write ‘the sound of the boys arguing again’ but Joyce prefers this much more stiff and formal arrangement: ‘voices again contending’. And note ‘again’ in the unusual position, you or I would say ‘voices arguing again’, but putting it before the verb, this time, has the effect of making every word feel more studied and carefully presented, as at an exhibition of sentences.

So we must bear in mind that even when he’s trying to write relatively ‘straight’, before he got up to any formal tricks, Joyce’s prose style was already oddly stiff, spavined and constricted: highly self-conscious and ornately arranged. This lends even the most supposedly straightforward passages a certain stiff, presentational feel, before we get to any of his party tricks.

2. No speech marks

Joyce had a foible about/well thought-out intellectual objections (delete where applicable) to speech marks / quotation marks / inverted commas. In all the texts Joyce had final say over he replaced the conventional introduction of speech by double apostrophes with an em dash, with no indication where a piece of dialogue ended. Just this one change is surprisingly confusing. It has the cumulative effect of meaning you’re never quite sure where a piece of speech ends and the narrative, or a character’s thoughts, begin.

—Three, Mr Deasy said, turning his little savingsbox about in his hand. These are handy things to have. See. This is for sovereigns. This is for shillings. Sixpences, halfcrowns. And here crowns. See.

3. No hyphens

Just as he disliked speech marks, so Joyce early on decided to dispense with hyphens and just to run two hyphenated words together. ‘A Portrait’ is full of examples like illfated, selfrestraint, rosesoft and hundreds more. And so it is here, as indicated by the novel’s famous opening sentences:

Stately, plump Buck Mulligan came from the stairhead, bearing a bowl of lather on which a mirror and a razor lay crossed. A yellow dressinggown, ungirdled, was sustained gently behind him on the mild morning air.

Innocent though this foible first appears, like dispensing with speech marks it is the first stirrings of the disintegration of language the book is going to deploy on a massive scale. For just as dispensing with speech marks makes it increasingly hard to know where direct speech ends and free indirect speech (i.e. the character’s own thoughts) begins; so dispensing with hyphens where they ought to go marks the start of start of not knowing where one word ends and another begins; in practice, it marks the start of Joyce’s running words together in original and increasingly inventive ways.

It starts with dropping hyphens in a phrase like:

He passed an arm through the armstrap and looked seriously from the open carriagewindow at the lowered blinds of the avenue.'(chapter 6).

But then it moves on to sticking together words which should never be joined to create new words:

… an old woman peeping. Nose whiteflattened against the pane

You can see in this example how he realises he’s stumbled across a new piece of grammar, the portmanteau noun, and as the novel progresses, the technique of jamming 2, 3 or more words together becomes more outrageous. So as Stephen walks by the sea in chapter 3, he fancifully imagines everyone in the world linked back to their mothers via a ghostly umbilical cord:

The cords of all link back, strandentwining cable of all flesh…

And then drops the first of his made-up, portmanteau words, imagining the early Christian heretic Arius:

Warring his life long upon the contransmagnificandjewbangtantiality.

After all, if you can glue two words directly together, why not three or four or five words? This is a taste of things to come…

3. Learnèd allusions

We could be here all week describing this one but the basic idea is simple. Joyce was hyper well-read and developed the habit in ‘A Portrait’ of dropping allusions to his learning into the narrative bits of text. Quite regularly the supposed narrative in fact contains no narrative at all, just a tissue of allusions, as if giving you direct access to the flux of (super-literate) thoughts in the main protagonist, Stephen’s, head. So you have potentially three elements: 1) old-fashioned third-person narration; 2) speech without speech marks; 3) the protagonist’s thoughts reflected in indirect speech.

Example 1

The opening of chapter 2 demonstrates all three elements: both the abolition of speech marks, a brief appearance from a conventional narrator, then an abrupt jump into Stephen’s hyper-educated mind.

(1: no-speech-marks speech)
—You, Cochrane, what city sent for him?
—Tarentum, sir.
—Very good. Well?
—There was a battle, sir.
—Very good. Where?
(2: third-person narrative)
The boy’s blank face asked the blank window.
(3: straight into Stephen’s thoughts)
Fabled by the daughters of memory. And yet it was in some way if not as memory fabled it. A phrase, then, of impatience, thud of Blake’s wings of excess. I hear the ruin of all space, shattered glass and toppling masonry, and time one livid final flame. What’s left us then?

There has been no narrative lead-in or introduction, no text explaining that we are in a school classroom and Stephen is taking a lesson. Only from the dialogue can we deduce this is what is happening and that it is a lesson about ancient history. ‘The boy’s blank face asked the blank window’ is a neat way of describing the poor schoolboy’s blank ignorance of Stephen’s question, but look what happens next.

We are thrown straight into Stephen’s ‘stream of consciousness’. I admit I had to stop and puzzle this out and have only got parts of it. The two sentences using ‘fabled’ I think reflect Stephen thinking that the battle referred to has gone down in history and yet, he reflects, was probably not as ‘memory’ tells fables about it.

What battle? He will go on to quote the Roman General Pyrrhus who won a battle in 279 BC where the Romans losses were so bad he is supposed to have said: ‘Another victory like that and we are done for.’ This is where we get our phrase ‘A Pyrrhic victory’ from. Stephen is (I think) reflecting that this phrase expressed not so much the general’s despair as his ‘impatience’.

I know the poet William Blake wrote in praise of excess: in his ‘Proverbs of Hell’ he wrote that ‘The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.’ Maybe Stephen is conflating the disastrous outcome of the Roman battle, its excessiveness, with the ‘wisdom’ contained in the general’s phrase which led to it becoming a proverb.

As to the next bit, ‘I hear the ruin of all space, shattered glass and toppling masonry, and time one livid final flame’ I don’t think this is particularly tied to Pyrrhus or this history lesson, although I know it is a phrase which will be repeated throughout the novel at various moments. So it is more like an early appearance of an idée fixe of Stephen’s and, if we consider ‘Ulysses’ as a work of art, it is like a motif which is being introduced early on so that it can be repeated with variations later on.

There’s probably more going on here than I’ve indicated and I might have got some of this wrong, but you see how it works: just elements – bits of dialogue which are not at all clearly demarcated, minimal amount of narrative explanation, then chunks of Stephen’s internal monologue which is ferociously learned and allusive – are already combining to make it a tricky read.

Don’t panic

As a bookish person, who’s read a lot of the same books as Joyce, I get some of his references and/or I’ve taken the trouble to look (some of) them up – but there is one key principle to bear in mind here, which is: Don’t be afraid.

Tens of thousands of academics have spent their entire lives elucidating ‘Ulysses’ and nobody has got all the allusions buried in it. It doesn’t matter. If you like puzzles, you can stop at each paragraph and look up the allusions. Or you can read the novel with a page-by-page guide (online or hard copy) open beside it to explain them. (If you have the patience, that’s probably the way to get the most out of reading ‘Ulysses’.)

As Canadian academic Hugh Kenner puts it, the book’s innumerable correspondences and patterns ‘adds fun to our endless exploration of this book’ – if, that is, endless exploration of a vast tissue of learnèd references and internal echoes is your idea of fun.

But if you’re not that kind of person, don’t worry. Read at the book, forge on through it, and let its unusual methods creep up on you. At various points you’ll recognise the same quotes or allusions cropping up and begin to get a feel for them, how they recur and give structure to the text, like motifs returning in a long piece of music. As in the ‘Cantos’ of Ezra Pound you don’t even have to understand what they mean (quotes from foreign languages, for example) for their repetition to start to have a haunting and evocative effect.

Also: it is as well to be clear that Stephen is not a god, he is not the prophet of some challenging religion: he’s just a character in a book, and his character is that of a cleverclogs, a callow young man too clever by half. He’s read all the books in the world but has little or no life experience, and it shows. Therefore, to some extent his thoughts are probably intended to be offputtingly clever-clever.

Example 2

Here’s another example of the method. Stephen stays after class to help a poor schoolboy, Sargent, with his sums. But as he does so, his overworking, over-educated intellect reflects that the symbols used in algebra are Arab in origin, in fact the word ‘algebra’ is itself Arabic, and this prompts him to think of the two great medieval philosophers – Ibn Rushd (1126 to 1198) Latinized as Averroes, and Moses ben Maimon (died 1204), commonly known as Maimonides. This is at least part of what is going on in this passage:

Across the page the symbols moved in grave morrice, in the mummery of their letters, wearing quaint caps of squares and cubes. Give hands, traverse, bow to partner: so: imps of fancy of the Moors. Gone too from the world, Averroes and Moses Maimonides, dark men in mien and movement, flashing in their mocking mirrors the obscure soul of the world, a darkness shining in brightness which brightness could not comprehend.

The dance of symbols across the page is described as a ‘morrice’ which is an antique adjective for Moorish or Arab, but has echoes of Morris dancing, a connotation reinforced by the word mummery, which is an olde English word for acting. Both of them clearly refer to the algebraic symbols Stephen is trying to teach the boy Sargent about and which he fancifully envisions dancing hand in hand with each other, bowing to their partners and so on.

The second half of the paragraph is, as far as I can see, a poetic evocation of the effect of the medieval scholars’ writings, which was itself so complicated and full of learned allusions that Stephen envisions it as mirrors. Maybe the two wise men’s learning is referred to as a darkness because 1) they were both dark-skinned non-European men and 2) maybe Western Europe is the brightness and lightness in which their complex, dark-skinned wisdom made little impression. I’m not sure. Something like that…

Anyway, this kind of thing happens thousands and thousands of times throughout the book. It makes up most of the long the novel’s texture, so it helps if you yourself are bookish and like spotting allusions. But, as I keep emphasising, it’s not absolutely necessary to get every allusion to enjoy the book, in fact it’s probably impossible. It’s perfectly valid to read the whole thing without ‘getting’ any of the allusions because there is plenty of other stuff going on – the structure of the plot itself (as outlined above) but also tens of thousands of places where the prose is so unexpected and inventive that you can enjoy it on the surface, for it mysteriousness and multitudinous rhythms, as much as for this riddling Sudoku element.

The internet / AI changes everything

As I wrote the preceding paragraphs it began to dawn on me that nowadays, of course, the whole experience of reading, especially reading difficult or demanding books, has been transformed by the internet and not just the old internet but the shiny new world of artificial intelligence.

Nowadays if you’re puzzled by anything in ‘Ulysses’, from the overall structure to the tiniest word, you can ask an LLM like Chat GPT and chances are it will explain everything. For example, I was not understanding the scattered references to Bloom’s father in chapter 6 (Hades) and so I simply asked Chat GPT: ‘In James Joyce’s Ulysses, did Leopold Bloom’s father commit suicide?’ and Chat came right back with ‘Yes’ along with details such as the method (poison) and location (the Queen’s Hotel).

So there’s now the facility to look up everything – from the granular level of individual words, foreign quotes, odd phrases, through to the macro level of my Bloom query – on an AI (Chat, CoPilot, Gemini) and have answers delivered on a plate.

Whether this is an appropriate way to read the book, whether it short circuits the time and effort Joyce intended his readers to invest in it, whether it undermines the experience of slowly constructing your own version from the fragments you notice or understand, and replaces it with a fully explained, Sam Altman-friendly version, is open to debate. But there’s no denying AI’s help in immediately solving thousands of niggling details or impenetrable obscurities, for example: who is Hynes? What does ‘De mortuis nil nisi prius’ mean? Can I find a recording of ‘Those lovely seaside girls? (Yes – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4IpDMyox2Y).

After a while I began to rely on it more heavily because the broken-up prose and elliptical style of so many of the conversations often mean it’s very hard to figure out what’s going on, and even what people are saying to each other.

But academic books will remain useful…

Where books, even quite old guides to ‘Ulysses’, score over the internet, is that they will offer useful and interesting opinions and insights. Chat will 1) only answer the question you asked; it might answer it fully and give you more detail than you expected, but at the end of the day the answer is limited by how you phrase your initial question or ‘prompt’. And 2) it will only give you other people’s opinions, neatly summarised and tied up in a bow.

By contrast a book-length guide will tend to introduce you to ideas and interpretations you’d never thought of before. They let you share, and follow the logic behind, distinct and maybe idiosyncratic interpretations, by expert scholars. LLMs tend to repeat and confirm the biases or expectations you bring with you whereas (good) books open the mind to all kinds of new possibilities.

So AI has already revolutionised the process of reading difficult works of literature like ‘Ulysses’ (and many more). But good books of criticism or analysis or just good quality guides, will for the foreseeable future still have the advantage of opening your mind to new ideas. Which, back in the olden days, was often considered an element point of studying literature…


Credit

‘Ulysses’ by James Joyce was published by Shakespeare and Company in 1922.

Related links

Related reviews

Felicity Hammond: V3 Model Collapse @ the Photographers’ Gallery

The main reason for visiting the Photographers’ Gallery at the moment is to see the hugely enjoyable exhibition of wonderful photos of the 1970s society, reggae and punk rock by Dennis Morris. But if you’re there it’s worth making the effort to check out this much more challenging installation by contemporary photo-artist Felicity Hammond.

As ‘V3’ suggests this is the third of a series of four installations. They are about contemporary issues around the brave new world of digital imagery, artificial intelligence, and their real-world costs and implications.

The key concept is model collapse which has at least two meanings.

AI model collapse

In the digital realm it refers to the progressive deterioration in quality of AI outputs. First generation AI is trained on all the content of the internet (which contains plenty that is imperfect or misleading). AI then generates a new generation of content which contains all the errors it inherited and adds countless ‘hallucinations’ and errors of its own. The next generation is then trained on a totality of data which contains a large amount of errors, and in turn generates fresh errors. Thus the introduction of artificial intelligence tools will inevitably and unstoppably lead to the degradation of information on the internet.

With conscious irony, here’s a definition of model collapse generate by Google AI:

Model collapse in AI refers to the phenomenon where generative models, trained on their own or other models’ outputs (synthetic data), degrade in performance over time. This degradation manifests as reduced diversity, increased bias, and ultimately, the model producing nonsensical or repetitive outputs. Essentially, the model ‘learns’ to imitate its own errors, leading to a decline in its ability to accurately represent the original data distribution.

Environmental collapse

At the same time as the digital world is being irreversibly degraded so, of course, is the real world. Presumably everyone knows that making AI work requires enormous new datacentres, in vast air-conditioned warehouses which, of course, use up a lot of energy and a lot of water, which is an increasingly precious resource in our overheating world. But there’s also the well-known mining of rare and precious metals which are needed in our shiny digital gadgets, namely smartphones.

So ‘collapse’ has a double meaning, referring to both the collapse and degradation of quality in an AI-infested digital world, and also the environmental collapse and degradation required by our digital technologies.

As it happens there’s also a double meaning to the word ‘mining’. In the digital world, data mining refers to the process of extracting information from vast datasets (like the whole internet); but ‘mining’ also has its older meaning of referring to digging up stuff under the ground, namely the rare minerals and metals required for this technology, such as lithium.

Ditto ‘extraction’: data extraction refers, fairly obviously, to AI’s mining of the internet’s data resources, and has obviously been adapted or copied from the older real-world term which describes the extraction of actual mineral wealth…

One wall label explains that one particular form of mining exposes buried sulphides which oxidise a bright orange on contact with air, and is often washed by the water involved in mining operations into streams and rivers and lakes, creating large toxic orange swamps, obviously killing all forms of life. These toxic orange waste dumps dominate the palette of the exhibition.

Model collapse summary

To summarise, then: ‘model collapse’ is a technical term referring to the degradation of AI information, which also echoes the physical degradation of the natural environment caused by the real-world requirements of supporting the digital realm.

Model collapse depicted in art

So what about the art? Well it comes in roughly two forms: there are relatively flat images hung on walls, and then there are a couple of big installations set back from the viewer with space in front covered in mining detritus etc. The biggest one, with huge, digitally fragmented images of orange mudpools at the back and industrial scraps and sacking scattered around in the foreground, kind of speaks for itself.

But something more complex is going on with many of her images. Basically she uses digital feedback to distort, degrade and fragment the original imagery. Grasp this simple principle and you understand most of what’s going on.

Also, this being V3, it refers back to the earlier versions, V1 and V2, so here’s a brief recap.

V1. Content Aware, 24 to 27 October 2024, Brighton

Installation view of V1: Content Aware (Photoworks Weekender, Brighton, October 2024)

V1 was staged in Brighton in a shipping container, the kind used in their tens of thousands to move goods around the world. these standardised objects bear coded numbers so are part of a digital system. they criss-cross the oceans above the deep sea cables which carry all our digital data. And, seen from above and at a distance, they resemble the pixels which digital images are made out of. Hammond’s images play with all these intersections and ambiguities. So it was a kind of the investigation of the global infrastructure that supports the digital economy,

‘Content Aware’ is also the name of an image editing tool. Hammond likes these puns or multiple meanings.

The installation included cameras which recorded visitors movements and interactions.

V2. Rigged, 13 March to 15 June 2025, Derby

Installation view of V2: Rigged (QUAD Gallery, FORMAT festival, Derby, March 2025)

Rigged is another pun in the sense that a rig can refer to the enormous structures which drill for oil land gas at sea. But it’s also the term for the structures which hold cameras in a studio setting. there’s also a connotation of the game being ‘rigged’ because Hammond used images of visitors to V1 and fed them through AI algorithms to generate ‘mean’ or ‘average’ images of humans. As you might expect, these didn’t come out too well.

V3. Model Collapse gallery

So what does it all look like?

Installations

Installation view of V3 Model Collapse by Felicity Hammond @ the Photographers’ Gallery (photo by the author)

Installation consisting of a massive photo of open cast mining, surrounded by detailed photos, all presented at the back of a kind of sandbox of industrial detritus.

Installation view of V3 Model Collapse by Felicity Hammond @ the Photographers’ Gallery © Felicity Hammond

On the wall

Shards and fragments, visual representations of the fragmented outputs of AI and the environmental collapse involved in digital technology.

Installation view of V3 Model Collapse by Felicity Hammond @ the Photographers’ Gallery (photo by the author)

On a screen made up of 80 or so imperfect mirrors, further muddied by white smearing, are hung four images which were probably originally fairly straightforward self-portraits taken against Hammond’s emblematic green and orange designs, but have been distorted to represent AI degradation.

Installation view of V3 Model Collapse by Felicity Hammond @ the Photographers’ Gallery (photo by the author)

Portrait of the artist, through an AI glass, distortedly

Close-up of one of those four self-portraits showing how AI mostly captures the details of the original but with inexplicable ‘hallucinations’ and distortions.

V3 Model Collapse by Felicity Hammond @ the Photographers’ Gallery © Felicity Hammond

The video


Related links

Related reviews

J.G. Ballard: poet or prophet?

I’ll give the game away right at the start by stating that I think Ballard is much more obviously and convincingly a prose poet than he is a social ‘prophet’.

The argument

Ballard is routinely and predictably described as a ‘prophet’, by reviewers, critics, fans and academics. The Atrocity Exhibition is described on the back as:

One of the most prophetic, enigmatic and original works of fiction of the late-twentieth century.

The Atrocity Exhibition is Ballard’s most concentrated book – a prophetic masterpiece. (Introduction by V. Vale & Andrea Juno)

But was he a prophet, though? There are several reasons for thinking not:

1. A prophet of what, exactly?

Ballard’s work divides pretty neatly into two types: there’s the science fiction which includes his early disaster novels and most of his short stories, many of which are wildly speculative and set in catastrophic futures – and then the later novels, from around 1970 onwards, which are increasingly rooted in the reality of the present day with its motorways, high rise buildings, advertising billboards and gated communities in the South of France (although weird futures continue to crop up in his short stories…)

When people say ‘prophetic’ they’re generally talking about the latter works. What do they mean? They mean that Ballard described in searing, super-vivid prose the feeling of being overloaded by media stimuli, the alienating experience of inhabiting bleak modern concrete urban environments, the terror which sometimes comes over you when you find yourself trapped in an eight-lane highway packed with sleek metal boxes hurtling past at inhuman speeds.

He captured and conveyed that sense of nervous breakdown in a series of mind-blowing semi-experimental novels from 1970 to 75, being The Atrocity Exhibition, Crash, Concrete Island and High Rise. Each of these deals very intensely with nervous breakdown, physical and moral collapse which derives directly from the inhumane modern built environment.

And yet… forty years later, society hasn’t broken down, has it? People now accept modern architecture and the great sweep of motorway flyovers carving through their cities. It can still be painted as a dehumanising environment by artists and film-makers. But most people, most of the time, are not having nervous breakdowns and reverting to the primeval savagery depicted in High Rise.

And many of the specific aspects of his urban fiction feel very dated now.

Take the images of Vietnam which thread through The Atrocity Exhibition and Crash. Vietnam was the first TV war and in all probability the last, as every Western government saw what giving unfettered access to reporters and TV journalists did i.e. eroded domestic support. In my reviews of the career of Don McCullin I note that he several times says how disappointed he was not to be allowed to accompany the Falkland Islands task force: the government had learned its lesson; only tame journalists whose access could be controlled and monitored were allowed along.

The British have been involved in a number of conflicts since – Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, Iraq twice, Afghanistan – but they have been completely controlled and packaged by governments and willing broadcasters. The really bad craziness which spilled into the living rooms of the average suburbanite, and was an important component in the hysterical mood of those novels, is long, long gone.

TV itself has also been utterly internalised and neutralised. In his experimental books, television is new enough to prompt paragraphs of media studies-style shock and astonishment at the bizarreness of the medium itself interrupting footage of burning villages to bring us commercials about bath cleaner.

But both ends of this spectrum have been blunted. We rarely if ever see the kind of war scenes Ballard is invoking; and everybody has learned to tune out the ads. The advent of the internet means that you can binge watch entire series of dramas or soaps without ever seeing an ad. there are a lot of aspects to this, but one is that the average punter is much more in control, instead of being bombarded with shocking images like the subjects of some extreme social experiment, which is how people appear in those novels.

Similarly, huge roadside billboards were relatively new in the 1960s but, again, old hat by now. Even the TV-style moving ads on the Tube are easy to blank out and ignore.

In other words, a lot of the elements Ballard described with such fantastically super-charged prose poetry from 1966 to 1973 are now almost over-familiar and bereft of threat. Ask my kids if they feel the saturated mediascape is giving them a nervous breakdown and (if you can get them to lift their eyes from the latest Netflix binge-watch) they’ll laugh in your face.

But his fans – and others who plough the same kind of furrow, either as media studies-type academics or contemporary writers – persist in focusing on these aspects of his work.

In his introduction to the 2014 edition of The Atrocity Exhibition, the novelist Hari Kunzru doggedly repeats this idea, that Ballard’s books are mind-expanding, shock revelations which still ‘disturb’ and ‘interrogate’ and ‘undermine’ reality or modern society and all the other tired, familiar art house, would-be ‘radical’, art-curator terminology.

Kunzru slots Ballard into the same, tired old lineage, the same dusty avant-garde genealogy which reaches back to the French bourgeoisie-shockers, via Dada and the Surrealists, to the Beats in the 1950s, the Situationists in the 1960s, and so tiredly on.

But how can something be avant-garde if it’s 50 years behind the times?

I keep reading political commentators saying Labour lost the 2019 election because they were still talking the language of the 1960s, or even of the Victorian era – trapped in the delusion that there is one, homogeneous, cloth-capped, Northern working class which will always give them their vote, come what may. Wrong. The world has changed.

I can’t help feeling the same about the so-called avant-garde tradition. Nowadays talk of Dada and the Situationists feels like the treasured possession of old and out-of-date intellectuals, solemnly showing you a box of faded newspaper cuttings from the mid-1960s as if they bear any relation to the situation and experiences of the present day.

‘Look at the taboo-busting way his characters arrange prostitutes in the posture of car crash victims’, the ageing college lecturer tells us, everso proud of his yoof credentials.

The reality is that the future hasn’t shocked, disturbed, unsettled or traumatised the human spirit anywhere near as much as the solemn talk of transgressive avant-gardes would have us believe. The Archers is still running, as is Coronation Street. They still wave flags at the Last Night of the Proms. Top of the bill at this year’s Glastonbury? Paul McCartney and Diana Ross.

The future is now and people are loving it, streaming their favourite shows, chatting away to Alexa, listening to any music from anywhere at the click of a button, ordering up tasty Deliveroo meals, ordering an Uber to go home after a great night out, and generally living it up.

Compared to the wholesale way the vast majority of the population owns and revels in our technological present, Kunzru proudly telling us how excited Michael Moorcock was in 1966 when he found that the front room of Ballard’s flat was covered in a collage of pages cut out from Chemistry News seems ridiculous. Yes, granddad. We’ve seen your collection of 1960s literary magazines before, granddad. Yes, they’re very interesting, granddad. But now it’s time for your medication and your nap.

2. Two specific ways Ballard was not prophetic

Prophetic means: ‘accurately predicting what will happen in the future’. I’m now looking at the other strand in Ballard’s work, the overtly science fiction strand. Rereading these stories, mostly about dystopian futures, kept making me thing two obvious points.

1. Population boom 

In all of Ballard’s futures, the population has vanished. In the Ultimate City the population of the world has collapsed, in Low-Flying Aircraft humanity is dying out, in Cage of Sand whole areas of the world have been abandoned, in Chronopolis the big cities have been abandoned. Abandoned cities and terminal beaches, those are the familar zones of Ballard’s imaginarium.

My point is simple. The world hasn’t emptied. The human population hasn’t plummeted. The exact opposite has happened. In 1970 when the Atrocity Exhibition was published the global population was 3.7 billion. Fifty years later it has doubled to 8.3 billion and counting.

Insofar as Ballard’s imaginary futures depict a world emptied of humans it is not only not prophetic, it is diametrically wrong. A truly avant-garde prose would be trying to grapple, not with what it is to live in abandoned cities occupied by a handful of dazed inhabitants – but what it’s like to live in mega-cities like Tokyo, Delhi, Shanghai. Something more like William Gibson’s well-named ‘Sprawl’ trilogy.

2. Posh characters

To the end of his writing carer Ballard described posh, middle or upper-middle-class characters, typified by the large number of educated, open-minded doctors who litter his stories. In a way the typical thing about High Rise is not that the characters end up descending to the depths of bestial depravity, but that they are all such pukka, posh English chaps and chapesses.

This is indicated throughout by his rather haphazard way with names so that lots of the characters have very run-of-the-mill and very English names (Talbot, Vaughan, Clifton and Ransom spring to mind).

I’m not criticising him for describing an almost 100% white middle class milieu, not at all. I’m just pointing out that it is the other, large element of his writing which was diametrically wrong. Society hasn’t carried on consisting of pukka white chaps and chapesses. The exact opposite has happened. Britain has been inundated with immigrants (and I don’t mean just ones with different colour skins, but nearly a million Poles, for example). Our society, and most Western societies have become chaotically multicultural and multilingual and show every sign of continuing in this direction.

I am not criticising Ballard for writing about the social class and kind of people he knew best, not at all. I’m just saying that those of his private and academic fans who try to hold him up as a prophet, a predictor of the future, have to take account of the fact that two of the central imaginative pillars of his fiction didn’t only not come true, but the diametric opposite took place.

3. An argument against deifying writers

Anyway, in my opinion the deifying or worshipping of writers is to be resisted. It is a primitive psychological tendency, it is a way of abdicating our own responsibility to think for ourselves.

Writers should be credited as writers, but not necessarily as thinkers. As thinkers, writers are often very charismatic, but almost always wrong. Morally wrong, yes, though that’s open to endless debate. But more often plain, factually wrong.

Dickens thought that universal free education would eradicate poverty. Wrong. Morris thought a Marxist revolution would liberate the working classes. Wrong. Dostoyevsky though Russia must turn its back on the decadent West to assert its Slavic identity. Wrong. Tolstoy thought we should relinquish all our belongings and live like peasants. Wrong. Gorky thought Lenin was the saviour of the poor. Wrong. Pound thought Mussolini would be a patron of the arts like a Renaissance prince. Kipling thought the British Empire was vital to raise the lesser breeds in our countless colonies. Wrong. Eliot thought Britain would be better off as a religious and ethnically homogeneous kingdom, preferably with few if any Jews. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

In my opinion:

  1. Beware of taking any writer as a moral or political inspiration.
  2. Judge writers by the quality of their writing, not by their beliefs or pontificating–- their beliefs will soon become out of date or controversial or come to seem ludicrous: but their writing, if it genuinely contributes to the life of the language, will live.

As Oscar Wilde said, there’s no such thing as moral or immoral writing, there is only good or bad writing.

Ballard the prose poet

So for me, the thing to do is leave these political and ‘moral’ squabbles behind and focus on what Ballard undoubtedly is, which is a creator of some of the most astonishing prose poetry ever written.

What links every element of his career – the disaster novels, the sci-fi stories and the urban nightmare series – is his extraordinary ability to make the English language sit up and beg, dance to his tune, perform extreme sports, coasteer and freebase.

Somewhere Ezra Pound says you ultimately judge a poet by the integrity of his lines, and there are hundreds of breath-taking lines in Ballard, lines no-one else could have written and which take you into wonderful, liberating new realms of language and imagination.

All day he had been building his bizarre antenna on the roof of the apartment block, staring into the sky as if trying to force a corridor to the sun.

Meanwhile the quasars burned dimly from the dark peaks of the universe, sections of his brain reborn in the island galaxies.

Bonfires of Jackie’s face burn among the reservoirs of Staines and Shepperton. With luck he finds a job on one of the municipal disposal teams, warms his hands at a brazier of enigmatic eyes. At night he sleeps beneath an unlit bonfire of breasts.

An airliner rose from the runway four hundred yards to our left, wired by its nervous engines to the dark air.

Catherine peered into my face, as if squinting through the window of a diving helmet.

The nodes of glass scattered on the ground glinted like pieces of discredited coinage.

Laing remembered the stale air in his apartment, tepid with the smell of his own body. By comparison, the brilliant light reflected off the chromium trim of the hundreds of cars filled the air with knives.

The previous night, as he prepared to leave, settling his sons and testing the locks on the doors, Helen had suddenly embraced him, as if wanting him to stay. The muscles of her thin face had moved through an irregular sequence of tremors, like tumblers trying to fall into place.

He resented speaking to Charlotte or to anyone else, as if words introduced the wrong set of meanings into everything.

On page after page Ballard is capable of writing sentences which zing with linguistic verve but also push, exercise and stretch your imagination. Maybe he was a ‘prophet’, you can make a case for or against. but without doubt he was one of the most poetic writers of English prose who ever lived, so plain and factual in appearance, and yet so glitteringly brilliant.


Credit

All quotations are used for the purpose of criticism and review.

Related reviews

All I Know Is What Is On The Internet @ the Photographers’ Gallery

Some exhibitions I respond to personally and emotionally; some I respond to intellectually, picking up on ideas or theories; and some leave me stone cold.

This is the text from the press release for All I Know Is What Is On The Internet.

All I Know Is What Is On The Internet presents the work of 11 contemporary artists and groups seeking to map, visualise and question the cultural dynamics of 21st century image culture.

Importantly, it investigates the systems through which today’s photographic images multiply online and asks what new forms of value, knowledge, meaning and labour arise from this endless (re)circulation of content.

Traditionally, photography has played a central role in documenting the world and helping us understand our place within it. However, in a social media age, the problem of understanding an individual photograph is being overwhelmed by the industrial challenge of processing millions of images within a frantically accelerated timeframe. Visual knowledge and authenticity are now inextricably linked to a ‘like’ economy, subject to the (largely invisible) actions of bots, crowdsourced workers, Western tech companies and ‘intelligent’ machines.

This exhibition focuses on the human labour and technical infrastructure required to sustain the web’s 24/7 content feed. The collected works explore the so-called ‘democratisation’ of information, and ask in whose interest this narrative serves. Paying attention to the neglected corners of digital culture, the artists here reveal the role of content moderators, book scanners, Google Street View photographers and everyday users in keeping images in circulation.

The exhibition considers the changing status of photography, as well as the agency of the photographer and the role of the viewer within this new landscape. The artists involved draw attention to the neglected corners of image production, making visible the vast infrastructure of digital platforms and human labour required to support the endless churn of selfies, cat pics and memes.

Taking its title from a Donald Trump quote, All I Know Is What’s On The Internet considers the digital conditions under which photography is produced , and the bodies and machines which help automate the flow of visual content online. Set against Silicon Valley’s desire to automate the processing of human knowledge, the exhibition seeks to make visible ‘the human in the algorithm’.

All I Know Is What’s On The Internet presents a radical exploration of photography when the boundaries between truth and fiction, machine and human are being increasingly called into question.

#Brigading_Conceit

The enormousness of the subject they’re tackling meant that each exhibit, object or installation required a lot of explanation. Take #Brigading_Conceit (2018) by Constant Dullaart.

#Brigading_Conceit (2018) by Constant Dullaart. Aluminium, automotive coating, forex, SIM cards, vesa mounts. Courtesy of Upstream Gallery Amsterdam

#Brigading_Conceit (2018) by Constant Dullaart. Aluminium, automotive coating, forex, SIM cards, vesa mounts. Courtesy of Upstream Gallery Amsterdam

It’s a very big installation hanging on a wall and looks, to me, like the cover of a laptop computer. In fact:

#Brigading_Conceit uses some of the thousands of SIM cards the artist purchased while building an army of fake followers on Facebook and Instagram. The most valuable fake accounts are PVAs (Phone Verified Accounts) which are registered on phone numbers bought in bulk in multiple countries. After verifying the account via SMS message, the SIM cards are often sold for the scrap value of the gold in the chip. Providing physical evidence of the industrial scale in which fake accounts are made, Dullart embeds these SIMs in different materials, using arrangements reminiscent of army formations. The resulting compositions are representations of brigades made from artificial identities, a series of ‘standing armies’ to be deployed in ongoing and future information wars. Each image of the work tagged and uploaded to Instagram will attract the attention of Dullart’s army, who will bestow likes and automated comments. The semi-reflective surface reveals the form of each photographer whilst concealing their vanity in the effort of harvesting social feedback.

Quite a lot to take in, isn’t it?

And then, having read it all, looking back up at this butterfly made of silver laptop covers… what exactly are you to think? (It crossed my mind that Dullart might be a spoof name: Dull Art.)

IOCOSE A Crowded Apocalypse

IOCOSE A Crowded Apocalypse (2012).

IOCOSE A Crowded Apocalypse (2012)

This is, as you can see, a set of 18 photos arranged in three rows and six columns. As the wall label explains:

Crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk provide a means for outsourcing small, repetitive tasks (‘micro-tasks’) to a distributed online workforce. These platforms were used by IOCOSE to assemble a crowd which would create its own conspiracy and then protest against its protagonists and effects. Firstly, the artists hired hundreds of anonymous workers to generate a set of symbols, companies, religious groups and mythical creatures. These were combined into a series of slogans and conspiracy theories by another set of workers. In the final stage, further workers photographed themselves taking to the streets protesting against this global conspiracy.

By operating as ‘artificial artificial intelligence’ (as Amazon touts its platform) the workers transform a practice of activism into a mechanical process. The result is a collection of singular, anonymous protests, whose slogans and claims barely makes sense. The workers, and the people around them, appear at the same time as victims and beneficiaries, actors and spectators of network technologies.

Nothing Personal

Or take the wall of the gallery which was completely covered in a ‘wallpaper’ collage of imagery and texts from the brave new digital world, and titled Nothing Personal (2014-15) by Mari Bastashevski.

Nothing Personal (2014-15) by Mari Bastashevski

Nothing Personal (2014 to 2015) by Mari Bastashevski

Apparently,

In the past decade, the industry that satisfies governments’ demands for surveillance of mass communications has skyrocketed, and it is one of today’s most rapidly expanding markets. Most surveillance technologies are produced by American, European and Israeli companies and sold to anonymous clients and law enforcement agencies across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

While most of these products are undetectable by design, the industry has developed a collective corporate aesthetic using detached technical jargon, stock photography and sanitised clip-art. Nothing Personal presents material from over 300 surveillance companies, including fragment of correspondence between their employees and clients the artist found online.

On closer inspection, the people working within these companies – from the spaces they occupy – to the emails they send – seem to match the very image of the ‘enemy’ depicted by their own marketing.

World Brain

World Brain (2015) is an installation of logs of wood, scattered with wood chip surrounded by small piles of books, and video screens on the wall, the work of Degoutin & Wagon.

Installation view of World Brain (2015) by Degoutin & Wagon

Installation view of World Brain (2015) by Degoutin & Wagon

Explanation:

World Brain is a sprawling journey into the architecture of data centres, the collective intelligence of kittens, high-frequency trading and the creation of transhuman rats. Mixing documentary film and fiction, the artists explore the utopian dreams and ideologies which underpin the idea of a worldwide network and the development of collective intelligence.

The film is presented here is the film in two parts, with accompanying literature. Part one (21 mins 8 secs) is a journey into the physical spaces of the Internet exploring the complex structure of global Internet traffic. The second part (51 mins 54 secs) follows the wanderings of a group of researchers who try to survive in the forest using Wikipedia, with the ultimate aim of securing the survival of humankind.

World Brain is also available to watch online at: tpg.org.uk/worldbrain

Ironically, when I tried to access this URL, I found the video is unavailable and got this message:

This video contains content from Arte, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.

Which may, or may not, be part of the work itself. Or an ironic comment on the work. Or the internet. Or something.

So this is an intensely cerebral exhibition, in the sense that you really have to focus on each of the works, read the explanatory text carefully, and then bring quite a lot of intelligence and knowledge of the subject to bear on each piece to assess whether they ‘work’ for you.

A view

I have spent the past eight years working on the intranets and public websites and password-protected portals of four British government departments and agencies.

I have attended countless meetings, seminars and conferences about website design, data management and security, about government usage of social media, about how to convey messages or get users hooked on your website, and so on.

In fact I myself ran a 6-month programme of weekly seminars for the content team of a big government website on subjects like how to use Facebook and the rest of social media to transmit government messages, how to gather data about users, analyse and convey messages better, etc.

And for two years I was a data analyst on the password-protected portal of a major UK government portal, doing elaborate number crunching, producing infographics for all sorts of data, and merrily ‘repositioning’ the numbers to support the ‘official narrative’ put out by our department.

So I have a reasonable grasp of digital issues and I have, from the start, been extremely sceptical about the internet, about social media, and especially about mobile phone technology.

I refuse to own a smartphone because I a) don’t want to become addicted b) I want to relate to the world around me instead of staring at a tiny screen all the time c) I don’t want to be bugged, surveilled, followed and have all my personal data harvested.

All in all, I am confident that I understand the world these artists are portraying and that I understand a lot of the issues they’re addressing. I have grappled in person with some of them, as part of my job.

But I found it hard to get very worked up about any of the actual art on show and went away wondering why.

I think it’s something to do with accessibility. Web accessibility is a subject I’ve worked with personally, trying to present government information more clearly, both visually and textually. Even the dimmest of users must be able to read the text and use the transactions on a government website.

Whereas hardly any of the works on display here seemed very accessible. None of them leapt straight out ans made me think, ‘Yes, that’s the issue, that’s what we need to be saying / exploring / addressing’.

Instead I found it ironic that in the supposed Age of the Image, all of these works and installations required such a lot of text to get their point across.

There were quite a few younger visitors in evidence (unlike most of the ‘traditional’ art exhibitions I visit, which are dominated by old age pensioners).

Maybe this is art for a younger generation than me, accustomed to swiping screens, skimming information, cherry picking text. Maybe a lot of these issues and ideas will be new to them, or they are so accustomed to smartphones and apps and processing information, that the works will leap out and say something meaningful to them.

My over-riding sense of the Digital Age we live in is that most people, by now, know that Amazon, Facebook, twitter, and their phone providers are morally compromised, tax-evading, High Street-destroying, personal-information-harvesting creepy multinational companies, but…

It’s just so handy being able to order something from Amazon Prime, or send messages to your Facebook group, or share photos of your party on Instagram…

And none of the revelations about how smartphones track your movements and your conversations seem to have made the slightest dent in smartphone ownership or usage.

My sense is that most people just don’t care what iniquities these companies carry out, as long as their stuff turns up next day and they can share their photos for free.

It was a brave effort to put on an exhibition like this. I didn’t really like the works on show. Maybe others will.

Participating artists

  • Mari Bastashevski
  • Constant Dullaart
  • IOCOSE
  • Stephanie Kneissl & Max Lackner
  • Eva & Franco Mattes
  • Silvio Lorusso & Sebastian Schmieg
  • Winnie Soon
  • Emilio Vavarella
  • Stéphane Degoutin & Gwenola Wagon
  • Andrew Norman Wilson
  • Miao Ying

Related links

More Photographers’ Gallery reviews