James Joyce (1990), Dublin, O’Connell Street, por Marjorie Fitzgibbon (1930-)
Peter Kuch (ed.)
Irish Divorce/Joyce’s Ulysses
New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017, XXVIII+289 pp.
This engrossing, ground-breaking book challenges the long-held conviction that prior to the second divorce referendum of 1995 Irish people could not obtain a divorce that gave them the right to remarry. Joyce knew otherwise, as Peter Kuch reveals—obtaining a decree absolute in Edwardian Ireland, rather than separation from bed and board, was possible. Bloom’s “Divorce, not now” and Molly’s “suppose I divorced him”—whether whim, wish, fantasy, or conviction—reflects an Irish practice of petitioning the English court, a ruse that, even though it was known to lawyers, judges, and politicians at the time, has long been forgotten. By drawing attention to divorce as one response to adultery, Joyce created a domestic and legal space in which to interrogate the sometimes rival and sometimes collusive Imperial and Ecclesiastical hegemonies that sought to control the Irish mind. This compelling, original book provides a refreshingly new frame for enjoying Ulysses even as it prompts the general reader to think about relationships and about the politics of concealment that operate in forging national identity
Table of contents
1.- Reading Sex, Love, and Divorce in Ulysses as Certain Uncertainties
2.- “Not now”—Breakfast at No. 7
3.- Bloom in the Sexualized City
4.- “Bloowho” and Silence
5.- Sex, Pleasure, Guilt, and Divorce
6.- Money and Divorce
7.- Bloom Enters the Bed
8.- Will They or Won’t They?
Peter Kuch studied with Richard Ellmann and John Kelly at Oxford. Since then he has held posts at the University of Newcastle, Australia; Université de Caen, France; and the University of New South Wales, Australia. He has also held Fellowships at the Australian National University; Trinity College, Dublin; and Notre Dame, Indiana. At present he is the inaugural Eamon Cleary Professor of Irish Studies at the University of Otago in New Zealand.
Joyce in Court
London: Head of Zeus, 2017, 352 pp.
Books about the work of James Joyce are an academic industry. Most of them are unreadable and esoteric. Adrian Hardiman's book is both highly readable and strikingly original. He spent years researching Joyce's obsession with the legal system, and the myriad references to notorious trials in Ulysses and Finnegans Wake.
Joyce was fascinated by and felt passionately about miscarriages of justice, and his view of the law was coloured by the potential for grave injustice when policemen and judges are given too much power. Hardiman recreates the colourful, dangerous world of the Edwardian courtrooms of Dublin and London, where the death penalty loomed over many trials. He brings to life the eccentric barristers, corrupt police and omnipotent judges who made the law so entertaining and so horrifying.
This is a remarkable evocation of a vanished world, though Joyce's scepticism about the way evidence is used in criminal trials is still highly relevant.
Justice Adrian Hardiman was a judge of the Irish Supreme Court and generally acknowledged as the most brilliant lawyer of his generation. He died suddenly in 2016. His funeral was a major national event and he was mourned by thousands of people.
Mr. Justice Adrian Hardiman (1951-2016)