Harry Blamires (1916–2017)

Blamires' "The New Bloomsday Book" is an incredible scholarly achievement. Line by line he gives us all the background needed to understand the context and direction of Ulysses. With detailed references he also provides all the information necessary to delve even deeper into Ulysses. Blamires' work is both accessible to the reader and invaluable for any further study of Ulysses.

A question that did come to mind in reading Blamires was what is the distinction (if any) between providing information/context on a work and interpreting a work. Blamires does both.

In all honesty, I lack the expertise, intellect, and/or credentials to credibly challenge Blamires' interpretations of Ulysses. Yet, I do begin to chafe when Blamires begins to "interpret" and provide the "meaning" of sections. One could say, reasonably, that if I don't want interpretation, don’t read a "guide". I accept that charge.

However, that does leave me with another question. What is the validity of "interpreting" works of fiction? And, is a novel meant to be decoded or simply experienced? Is the author simply dressing up for show her/his theories and/or perspectives in the wardrobe of elaborate prose and plotting? Or, could it be that the author actually intends the ambiguity produced in their work as it reflects the ambiguity of life/experience? Do we do a disservice to the author and the work when we provide exegesis? Do we create the illusion of orthodox and heterodox interpretations of a work?

I lean to the position of experiencing the work. But I also realize that my extremely meager formal education in literature probably both supports and requires that position.… (more)