小说与文学2012economist.com
詹姆斯·乔伊斯的《尤利西斯》：为什么你应该读这本书
James Joyce's "Ulysses": Why you should read this book
导读
这篇《经济学人》文章推介詹姆斯·乔伊斯的《尤利西斯》，讨论它为何值得读。对写作者来说，评论围绕导读的必要性、文本的幽默感和“为被解读而写”的争议展开，能帮助思考复杂写作与读者门槛。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
写复杂文本时，要预估读者对典故和文化背景的陌生程度，必要时用导读、注释或内在线索降低独立理解的门槛。
- 02
可以密集地埋双关、笑话和典故，但要让读者即使漏掉一部分，仍能被下一个笑点接住，而不是把阅读变成纯解谜。
- 03
动笔前想清楚作品是供人阅读还是供人解读：如果只剩智力练习，读者很难坚持，乐趣和情感入口同样重要。
- 04
追求厚度和重读价值，不等于放弃首次阅读的可进入性；复杂结构需要层次，但也需要让读者第一遍就读得下去。
HN 评论精选
《尤利西斯》高度依赖典故和文化背景，没有导读很难作为独立叙事读懂。
《尤利西斯》可能是除《圣经》外被写得最多的一本书，这本身就说明问题；它读起来也肯定更好。但作者漏了关键一点：普通人几乎不可能在没有导读的情况下读完它，因为把它当作独立叙事，很少能讲得通；对不熟悉爱尔兰历史和宗教文化的人尤其如此。我在研究生讨论课上每周读一两章，没有指导恐怕读不完。它更像为被解读、被当成谜题而写，而不是供人像小说那样阅读。
jseliger查看英文原文
"Ulysses" is perhaps the most written about book ever after the Bible, which should tell you something. It's definitely a better read. Sláinte! The writer is also missing something important: it's virtually impossible for a normal person, or even an abnormal person, to read Ulysses without a guide to the book that describes its allusions and what's going on. If you're trying to read Ulysses without the superstructure of a guidebook or guidebooks, or a class, you're almost certainly going to fail, because very little of it, taken as a free-standing narrative, makes any sense. This is doubly true for those without an in-depth understanding of Irish history and religious practices / cultures. I read Ulysses in a grad seminar, one or two episodes per week. Without that guidance, I don't think I would've finished. Or could have, in any meaningful sense of the word. Ulysses seems like it was written to be written about, or to be treated like a puzzle, more than to be read like a novel. Some people obviously enjoy this sort of thing. I don't think I'm one.
把《尤利西斯》当幽默狂欢、允许漏梗，才能从苦读变成享受。
对我来说，让这本书从苦差变成乐事的一刻，是我意识到它很好笑。我可以笑，也可以漏掉笑话和典故；笑话太多，一个从头顶飞过，下一个会直接飞进你张开的嘴。《新布鲁姆撒冷兴起》极其好笑。如果它只是智力练习，我肯定读不完。它是一场闹剧式的、充满双关的狂欢：有歌、舞、戏剧、打架、性（也许），还有用代数证明哈姆雷特是莎士比亚的祖父或反过来……它很好笑。
diiq查看英文原文
For me, the moment that transformed the book from a chore to a delight was the moment I realized it was funny. I was allowed to laugh, but I was also allowed to miss jokes, miss references. There are so many, that if one flies over your head, then next one will fly straight into your open mouth. The Rise of The New Bloomusalem is hysterically funny. I could never have made it through, if it were merely an intellectual exercise. It's a slapstick, pun-filled, over-the-top festival. There are songs, and dances, and plays, and fights, and sex (maybe), and proofs by algebra that Hamlet was Shakespeare's grandfather, or vice versa... IT'S FUNNY.
《尤利西斯》的价值在文本的内在丰富与复杂，值得为解谜和重读而读，而非功利性文化资本。
文学有内在价值，好文学比坏文学更有内在价值，《尤利西斯》又比一般好文学更好。这就是它所需的全部理由。如果你不同意第一个前提，就不该读它。博览群书和文化修养作为文化优越感或社交话题的标志正在消亡，所以那些功利目的并不成立。但如果你珍视写作的内在价值，那么《尤利西斯》值得一读。为什么胜过其他书？它纹理丰富、复杂，若你喜欢解谜，弄懂它很棒；它也足够深，经得起多次重读（我只读过一次，很棒，但绝不是轻松的海滩读物）。
scarmig查看英文原文
Literature has intrinsic value. Good literature has more intrinsic value than bad literature. Ulysses is even better than typical good literature. That's all the justification it needs. If you disagree with the first premise, you shouldn't read it. Being well-read and cultured is dying as a signifier of cultural superiority or as a topic of social conversation, so those utilitarian purposes really don't hold. But if you appreciate the intrinsic value of writing, then Ulysses is one book worth reading. Why over other books? It's a very textured, complicated book: figuring it out is great if you enjoy puzzles, and it's deep enough to survive multiple readings. (Just read it once, and it was great, but it's definitely not a quick beach read.)
“为什么该读”若沦为功利辩护就已失守；应让读过的人谈真实阅读理由。
他到底给出了什么应该读《尤利西斯》的理由？我没看到。更深层的问题是：如果你必须论证人文学科有超出纯娱乐的价值（“为什么该读《尤利西斯》”说到底就是这个），你已经输了这场战争，何必再打这一仗？我有时认为我们的文明在只信技术、抛弃伟大共同传统上转错了大弯；有时又记得关心这些东西的人一直很少。还是让读过的人说说：对我们没读过的人，为什么要读？
gruseom查看英文原文
Does he actually give any reason why one should read Ulysses? I didn't see any. [Silly bit deleted here.] But I think the problem is deeper really. If you have to make an argument about why the humanities have value beyond pure entertainment (which is really what "why you should read Ulysses" boils down to), you've already lost the war, so why bother fighting the battle? I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I think that our civilization has taken a major wrong turn in believing only in the technical and eschewing the great shared traditions. Other times I remember that the percentage of humanity who cared about this stuff was always very small. But let's hear from people who've read Ulysses. For those of us who haven't: why should we?
同类还值得读
乔治·奥威尔1940年对《我的奋斗》的书评
George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf
这是奥威尔 1940 年对《我的奋斗》的书评，他没有简单谴责，而是认真分析希特勒的宣传手法为何奏效、又暴露了哪些思维特征。
小说与文学2022 · 499 分 · 545 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我们都是极客：尼尔·斯蒂芬森的文学作品
We are all nerds: The literary works of Neal Stephenson
这是一篇讨论 Neal Stephenson 科幻小说的文章，评论区读者围绕《Anathem》《钻石年代》《Snow Crash》等作品，聊世界构建、结尾处理和写作风格的变化。
小说与文学2022 · 307 分 · 220 评4 条写作要点编辑精选又一部我不会再去写的小说
Yet another novel I will no longer write
科幻作家 Charles Stross 讲述自己为何放弃一部已经构思好的小说：COVID-19 疫情让他的病毒灾难设定显得多余，现实给所有人上了一堂生动的疫情应对课。
小说与文学2020 · 304 分 · 169 评4 条写作要点编辑精选用图画写作：理查德·斯卡里与儿童文学的艺术
Writing in Pictures: Richard Scarry and the art of children's literature
这是《耶鲁评论》上漫画家 Chris Ware 写的文章，分析童书作家 Richard Scarry 如何用图画而不是文字来讲故事。
小说与文学2024 · 297 分 · 131 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写一部小说
How to Write a Novel
这篇来自 The Millions 的文章讨论写小说的两种路径——“计划派”（planners）与“即兴派”（pantsers，即“跟着感觉走、边写边编”）。
小说与文学2016 · 238 分 · 112 评4 条写作要点编辑精选