![\"Gilbert](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/culturedarm.com\/staging\/5793\/wp-content\/uploads\/Gilbert-Schema-2.jpg?resize=696%2C464&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When\u00a0Ulysses<\/em>\u00a0was published on 2 February, 1922, it was the culmination of a flurry of activity extending back to the previous summer. James Joyce had begun writing his novel in late 1914. By the spring of 1915, he was already onto the third episode, which would become \u2018Proteus\u2019. Yet it was not until the summer of 1921 that Joyce began receiving the proofs of these early episodes \u2013 having augmented the typescripts which he had previously provided for the serialisation of his novel in The Little Review<\/em>, then sent these off to Maurice Daranti\u00e8re, his printer based in Dijon.<\/p>\n At this point Joyce was still in the process of writing his novel\u2019s final two episodes, \u2018Ithaca\u2019 and \u2018Penelope\u2019. \u2018Penelope\u2019, the eighteenth and final episode \u2013 which comprises Molly Bloom\u2019s famous soliloquy \u2013 was completed first, on 24 September. \u2018Ithaca\u2019 \u2013 described by Joyce as a \u2018mathematical catechism\u2019 \u2013 took another month, and was completed 29 October. While he composed these episodes, Joyce began simultaneously \u00a0to revise the proofs which he was receiving from Daranti\u00e8re.<\/p>\n Joyce\u2019s revisions were copious. Across multiple galley and then page proofs, his novel grew by a third, solely through the augmentations which he scrawled upon the proof sheets. In this last surge of creative activity, Joyce focused especially on elaborating a series of correspondences throughout the episodes of his novel. According to Michael Groden, it was at this late stage of his work that Joyce \u2018added many new Homeric and other correspondences to the earlier episodes, and he \u201crecast,\u201d \u201camplified,\u201d or \u201cretouched\u201d them to resemble the later ones more closely\u2019.<\/p>\n From his earliest conception of the novel he was to write, Joyce had intended for Ulysses<\/em> to parallel Homer\u2019s Odyssey<\/em>. \u2018Ulysses\u2019, his work\u2019s title from the outset, is the Latin form of \u2018Odysseus\u2019; and from the first mentions of his work in letters to friends, Joyce referred to his episodes by appellations drawn from Homer. Yet through the early stages of composition, the parallel between his own work and Homer\u2019s was only broadly drawn. Leopold Bloom, a Jew, was to be his Odysseus, and would spend the day of 16 June, 1904, wandering about the streets of Dublin; Molly Bloom would be his Penelope; and Stephen Dedalus his Telemachus.<\/p>\n The nature and the extent of the correspondences which Joyce elaborated during his later work on Ulysses<\/em> is suggested by two schemata, which Joyce wrote as a means of explaining his novel to his closest acquaintances. The first of these schemata was sent to Carlo Linata on 21 September, 1920. Having left Trieste for Paris in July of that year, Joyce was keen to publicise his forthcoming novel back in Italy, where he had lived for eleven years \u2013 interspersed by a period in Zurich \u2013 after moving from Dublin in 1904. Linati had translated Joyce\u2019s play, Exiles<\/em>, into Italian; and Joyce was hopeful that Linati would use the schema he sent him to publish an article in Italy on Ulysses<\/em>.<\/p>\n In the schema Joyce sent to Linati, each episode of the novel was given a Homeric title, an hour of the day, a colour, person, technique, science, sense, organ, and symbol. In the end, Linati couldn\u2019t find the time or the impetus for an article, and he returned the schema to Joyce. Yet this first schema shows how the correspondences between episodes were coming to the forefront of Joyce\u2019s mind, shaping his understanding of the novel he was still writing, and compelling the spate of revisions which was to come.<\/p>\n Still, at this point Joyce was in the middle of difficult work on \u2018Circe\u2019, and \u2018Ithaca\u2019 and \u2018Penelope\u2019 were only in the early stages of planning. \u00a0After finishing \u2018Circe\u2019 and \u2018Eumaeus\u2019 by the spring of 1921, and working through recurring problems with his eyes, Joyce began on his final episodes. He had met the French critic and poet Valery Larbaud at the end of 1920, and\u00a0Larbaud\u00a0\u00a0\u2013 now a friend, and enraptured with Joyce\u2019s work, having read the episodes which had been serialised in The Little Review<\/em> \u2013 informed him that he planned to give a \u2018s\u00e9ance\u2019 on Ulysses. Larbaud hoped to read from Joyce\u2019s most recent\u00a0work, and to provide a contextual analysis of Ulysses<\/em> which he would later publish in the form of an article.<\/p>\n Eager to promote his novel, Larbaud\u2019s plans stirred Joyce to deviate from his writing and revision. Larbaud\u2019s s\u00e9ance was planned for early December; so in early October, Joyce asked Daranti\u00e8re\u00a0to pull proofs of \u2018Penelope\u2019 for Larbaud to read and translate\u00a0\u2013 even though this disrupted the order of printing, as Daranti\u00e8re\u00a0was still in the middle of pulling the proofs for \u2018Circe\u2019. To aid Larboud\u2019s interpretive endeavour, Joyce then produced a second schema, which he had typed and sent in early November. Later in the month, he sent a modified version of this second schema to Jacques Benoist-Mechin, who was working with Larbaud on translating \u2018Penelope\u2019 into French.<\/p>\n This second schema provides each episode\u2019s title, scene, hour, organ, art, colour, symbol, technique, and correspondences. In this latter category, Joyce makes explicit each of his characters\u2019 Homeric equivalents. Even relatively minor characters like Mr Deasy are Kevin Egan are related to figures from the Odyssey<\/em>. Naturally the second schema \u2013 \u00a0put together over a year after the first, with \u2018Ithaca\u2019 and \u2018Penelope\u2019 written, and the process of revision well underway \u2013 follows more closely the details of the novel as it was published. Significantly, by this point Joyce has clarified the temporal relationship between Stephen\u2019s first three episodes and Bloom\u2019s first three; while the schema for the later episodes is accurate rather than speculative.<\/p>\n Through this second schema in particular, which brought into focus the results of his\u00a0late work on Ulysses<\/em>, Joyce entrenched a reading of his novel which centred\u00a0upon its Homeric parallels. The lecture which Larbaud gave at his seance drew crucially upon the parallels explicated for him by Joyce. His lecture was expanded, and published in the journal La Nouvelle Revue Fran<\/em>\u00e7<\/i>aise<\/em> on 1 April, 1922. An English translation of the article appeared in the first edition of T. S. Eliot\u2019s The Criterion<\/em>, on 1 October. The piece opens by stating that \u2018The reader who approaches this book without the Odyssey<\/em> clearly in mind will be thrown into dismay.\u2019<\/p>\n Largely following Larbaud, T. S. Eliot would continue to stress a symbolist reading of Ulysses<\/em>, with a focus on its Homeric correspondences. Eliot\u2019s review of Ulysses<\/em> appeared in The Dial<\/em> in November, 1923. Entitled \u2018Ulysses, Order, and Myth\u2019, Eliot argues that \u2018Mr. Joyce\u2019s parallel use of the Odyssey\u00a0<\/em>has [\u2026] the importance of scientific discovery [\u2026] In using the myth, in manipulating a continuous parallel between contemporaneity and antiquity, Mr. Joyce is pursuing a method which others must pursue after him [\u2026] Instead of narrative method, we may now use mythical method.\u2019<\/p>\n Stuart Gilbert\u2019s book-length study James Joyce\u2019s Ulysses<\/em>, which appeared in 1930, published for the first time Joyce\u2019s 1921 schema. Gilbert\u2019s analysis of Joyce\u2019s novel rests heavily on the schema, interpreting each episode according to its claimed\u00a0correspondences; but it was supplemented\u00a0by Joyce himself, who encouraged Gilbert\u2019s work, and continually dropped hints directing Gilbert towards pertinent source material. Most notably, Joyce suggested that Gilbert read Victor B\u00e9rard\u2019s Les Ph\u00e9niciens et l\u2019Odyss\u00e9e<\/em>, a work published between 1902 and 1903, which argues for the Phoenician origin of Odysseus.<\/p>\n Joyce later lamented asserting all this symbolist apparatus upon his work. He told Vladimir Nabokov in 1937 that his use of Homer was a mere \u2018whim\u2019, and that he regretted his collaboration with Gilbert, calling it \u2018A terrible mistake, an advertisement for the book. I regret it very much\u2019.<\/p>\n It is worth noting that despite his schemata, Joyce ultimately published Ulysses<\/em> without headings, with its three parts and eighteen episodes only numbered. The practice of referring to the episodes by their Homeric titles is a dubious matter of practicality, rather than a critical evaluation of the importance of the Homeric motif.<\/p>\n For his part, Nabokov dismissed the importance of the Odyssey<\/em> for an understanding of Joyce\u2019s book. He regarded Ulysses<\/em> the greatest work of literature of the twentieth century. In his Lectures on Literature\u00a0<\/em>\u2013 drawn from over a decade of teaching literature at Cornell \u2013 he writes of Ulysses<\/em>, \u2018That there is a very vague and very general Homeric echo of the theme of wanderings in Bloom\u2019s case is obvious, as the title of the novel suggests [\u2026] but it would be a complete waste of time to look for close parallels in every character and every scene of the book\u2019. Calling Joyce\u2019s schema \u2018tongue-in-cheek\u2019, Nabokov concludes that \u2018All art is in a sense symbolic; but we say \u2018stop, thief\u2019 to the critic who deliberately transforms an artist\u2019s subtle symbol into a pedant\u2019s stale allegory\u2019.<\/p>\n Nabokov argues that \u2018Instead of perpetuating the pretentious nonsense of Homeric, chromatic, and visceral chapter headings, instructors should prepare maps of Dublin with Bloom\u2019s and Stephen\u2019s intertwining itineraries clearly traced.\u2019 This was precisely the sort of detail which Nabokov liked to provide: whether depicting the specifics of the larch and laurel garden in Jane Austen\u2019s Mansfield Park<\/em>; the fa\u00e7ade of Dr. Jekyll\u2019s house in Robert Louis Stevenson\u2019s\u00a0The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde<\/em>; or the diversity of train carriages in Leo Tolstoy\u2019s Anna Karenin<\/em>.<\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n Nabokov drew his own map of Joyce\u2019s Dublin, which is reproduced in Lectures on Literature\u00a0<\/em>and can be seen below. When viewing Nabokov\u2019s map, we should be aware that it focuses on Bloom\u2019s wanderings through the day of 16 June, 1904. What is marked as \u2018I\u2019 by Nabokov relates not to the first episode of Joyce\u2019s novel, which belongs to Stephen Dedalus, but to the fourth episode, \u2018Calypso\u2019, which is when Mr Leopold Bloom makes his first appearance. The map then charts Bloom\u2019s winding and criss-crossing path throughout Dublin episode by episode, until in \u2018Ithaca\u2019 he returns to his home at 7 Eccles street.<\/p>\n We can see, for instance, the long journey Bloom makes in \u2018Hades\u2019 \u2013 in a carriage alongside Martin Cunningham, Jack Power, and Simon Dedalus \u2013 across Dublin to Glasnevin\/Prospect Cemetery for the funeral of Paddy Dignam (on Nabokov\u2019s map, the journey of the episode \u2013 the sixth in Joyce\u2019s novel \u2013 is marked at beginning and end \u2018III\u2019). We see Bloom having made his way \u2013 by 8 p.m., several hours after the events of \u2018Cyclops\u2019, with neglected time having fallen in between \u2013 to Sandymount strand (X). And we see him following Stephen from the maternity hospital of \u2018Oxen and the Sun\u2019 (XI) to nighttown and \u2018Circe\u2019 (XII); before he begins his walk home, now accompanied by Stephen. Over\u00a0the course of one day, while taking circuitous routes, he covers the extent of the city.<\/p>\n Nabokov may \u2013 given that the two works do share the \u2018theme of wanderings\u2019 \u2013 or may not have allowed a comparison between the routes taken by Bloom and Odysseus. While Bloom\u2019s wandering is drawn over just a single day, Odysseus\u2019 journey back home to Ithaca after the Trojan War takes him ten years. There are a proliferation of maps of Odysseus\u2019 journey available on the internet, all differing depending on their scale, their precision, the points of interest they identify, and the exact course they suggest\u00a0Odysseus as having taken. The geography of the Odyssey<\/em> is disputed<\/a>, with some scholars holding that\u00a0it is a fiction which cannot be mapped; others arguing that Odysseus travelled to\u00a0Spain and even England; while others still take Odysseus only so far west as Tunisia.<\/p>\n The image below is from Gis\u00e8le Mounzer\u2019s interactive Esri map of Odysseus\u2019 journey<\/a>. Mounzer takes Odysseus to Spain, marking fourteen sites on his journey, from Troy to Ismara, the Island of Lotus Eaters, the island of Polyphemus (Cyclops), Aeolia, Telepylos, Aeaea (Circe), the Underworld, the Sirens, Scylla and Charybdis, Thrinacia (Helios and his daughters), Ogygia (Calypso), Scherio (Nausicaa), and finally to Ithaca.<\/p>\n This simplified map travels only to Tunisia, adding\u00a0Odysseus\u2019 return to Circe after visiting the underworld and the spirit of Tiresias, and splitting Scylla and Charybdis into two distinct points along Odysseus\u2019 journey:<\/p>\n There is this pictorial version, drawn from a school textbook:<\/p>\n This shapely offering from\u00a0the University of Pennsylvania:<\/p>\n And this, afforded via a poster called Arthur on Google Maps:<\/p>\n Finally, we can view Odysseus\u2019 journey as Victor B\u00e9rard envisioned it \u2013 locating Calypso, for instance, at the Strait of Gibraltar:<\/p>\n Aside from a very loose similarity in the way both works cluster the locales of \u2018Aeolus\u2019, \u2018Lestrygonians\u2019, \u2018Scylla and Charybdis\u2019, \u2018Sirens\u2019, and \u2018Cyclops\u2019, a comparison between the shape of Bloom\u2019s and Odysseus\u2019s wanderings appears to bear little fruit. However\u00a0there is a body of criticism devoted to tracing the specific journeys which we see Bloom make in\u00a0Ulysses<\/em>. While it is sometimes suggested that mapping all of Bloom\u2019s meanderings results in the emergence of a question mark, this is in fact the claim which some scholars make regarding \u2018Lotus Eaters\u2019. Boston College\u2019s \u2018Walking Ulysses\u2019 project<\/a> allows us to chart Bloom\u2019s course in each episode. The images below show the path Bloom walks in \u2018Lotus Eaters\u2019 (the image on the left uses a historical map, contemporaneous with Joyce; whereas the image on the right uses a map contemporaneous with us today):<\/p>\n Clive Hart, in A Topographical Guide to James Joyce\u2019s Ulysses<\/em>, notes that the description of Bloom\u2019s walk in \u2018Lotus Eaters\u2019 suggests two question marks, one below\u00a0the other. Don Gifford, in Ulysses Annotated<\/em>, writes that Bloom \u2018circles south toward the Westland Row post office (as though he were approaching it surreptitiously rather than directly)\u2019.<\/p>\n Indeed, in the action of \u2018Lotus Eaters\u2019, Bloom initially makes his way towards the post office to see if there are any letters for him: he has been clandestinely corresponding with a lady named Martha Clifford, using the pseudonym Henry Flower. The question marks which his feet apparently draw have been explained as products of his pondering over Clifford\u2019s mail; as evincing his own loss of personal direction; or\u00a0as signifying his inquisitive or\u00a0impenetrable nature.\u00a0Thomas E. Stazyk has offered another interpretation<\/a>, asserting that Bloom\u2019s path in \u2018Lotus Eaters\u2019 draws not two question marks, but the Christogram IHS, with Joyce intending for Bloom to invoke in this episode the Stations of the Cross.<\/p>\n![\"Nabmap\"](\"https:\/\/culturedallroundman.files.wordpress.com\/2014\/08\/nabmap.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n