This collection of twenty-nine essays devoted to exploring the reception of James Joyce in different territories of Europe is compiled in two volumes accordingly subtitled "Germany, Northern and East Central Europe" and "France, Ireland and Mediterranean Europe." Elinor Shaffer, the series editor, explains in the preface that the collection is the result of a larger research project published by Continuum Books which aims to study the reception of British authors in Europe inspired by the noble—yet questionable—idea of "considering the history and culture of Europe as a whole, rather than as isolated national histories with a narrow national perspective" (viii). As we move on into the twenty-first century and the European constitution is rejected by the citizens of the founding members of the European Union, its geographic frontiers disputed and its cultural identity contested, the idea of a homogeneous Europe presents itself as highly problematic.
Since it could not be otherwise, therefore, the essays contained in the study demonstrate that the reception of Joyce in the diverse cultures of Europe and his subsequent influence on the various literary scenes followed strikingly divergent paths. In this respect—and even if each individual chapter is created following different conceptions of structure and style—the work stands as a gripping analysis of the kaleidoscopic responses to Joyce throughout Europe's communities across numerous historical and political periods.
Although Shaffer claims that each volume "necessarily" adopts a different selection of regions depending on the given author (x), one is tempted to think that, in the case of this particular study on Joyce, there may have been other reasons to devote an individual chapter, for example, to Joyce in Catalonia, whereas references to other linguistic communities of the Iberian Peninsula, where Joyce has traditionally been regarded as a literary role model, are simply incorporated within the two general chapters on Joyce in Spain. Equally disappointing [End Page 139] is the absence of Portugal, where Ulysses was first introduced through a Brazilian translation,1 or Hungary, where the history of Joyce's reception illustrates the ideological transformations underlying the country's cultural politics. It is certainly understandable, although polemical when considering Europe's most recent history, to find that the chapter on Joyce in Russia also assimilates other territories of the former Soviet Union. However, the most debatable question regarding national identity lies in the very fact of having a volume devoted to Joyce in a series on "British Authors" (3-13). The introduction by Geert Lernout (3-13), Director of the Centre for James Joyce Studies at the University of Antwerp, addresses precisely this thorny controversy and is mainly devoted to justifying Joyce's "Britishness." Lernout reminds us that the study of Joyce's work has always been divided between the defenders of an essentially Irish Joyce and a fundamentally cosmopolitan one (although he appropriately points out that in some cases the division is purely artificial, as it simply mimics the tendencies of different critical schools and institutions—3). Lernout explains that "he never acquired an Irish passport" and "declined to become a member of the Irish Academy of Letters," finally concluding that "Joyce did not want to be seen as an Irish writer" (8, 11). Although the controversy could seem closed with the categorical declaration that "James Joyce may have been born in Dublin, but until the end of his life he considered himself a British subject" (13), the Belgian scholar does not fail to acknowledge the ultimate paradox about Joyce when he ironically describes him through a riddle of undoubtedly Joycean echoes as "the first British writer who was not only very Irish but thoroughly European too" (13).
The first volume, which is considerably larger than the second, opens with a section devoted to the German reception divided into three chapters dealing with the early stage in German-speaking countries; the institutionalization of Joyce in West Germany, Austria, and Switzerland from 1945 to the present; and, finally, the reception in East Germany. Robert Weninger, who is responsible for the first two, discusses the years between 1919 and 1945, focusing his attention on Joyce's impact not only on the critics but also on representative writers who were his contemporaries. Weninger emphasizes that the publication of Georg Goyert's translation of Ulysses in 1927 was well orchestrated and entailed a crucial turning point in Joyce's reception by the German-speaking world.2 Detailed information concerning the history of the publication and immediate reception of Ulysses is appropriately documented through the inclusion of numerous letters, extracts from reviews, and advertisements. Yet Weninger's study goes beyond a mere compilation of data, as shown by his sharp analysis of the interaction of culture and politics after Adolf Hitler's rise to power and the final discussion of the German Marxist appropriation [End Page 140] of Joyce in the context of the Expressionism debate. Through a careful selection of significant information, Weninger explains the idiosyncrasy of the cultural scene after 1933, when Joyce was listed as one of the "'enemy authors,'" although Ulysses was not banned outright until 1942, a paradox that "underscores" the "'commercial cynicism'" of the Nazis (36, 37). The chapter closes with a thorough exploration of the contradictions of German Marxism. Weninger analyzes Bertolt Brecht's opposition to Georg Lukács's endorsement of realism and concludes that the Marxist dramatist recognized the value of Joyce's experimentation as he developed his own aesthetic project (46).3
In the second chapter, we learn that Joyce's fame in German-speaking countries has always been connected with the reception of Ulysses. Therefore, Weninger devotes the first part of his study on the "Institutionalization of 'Joyce'" (sic) to providing a list of writers and works showing a creative appropriation of Joycean experimental techniques. Whether there are significant national differences that could have colored Joyce's reception in the three countries mentioned in the title remains a mystery since we find here a surprisingly homogeneous literary and cultural map of "the German-speaking regions of Europe" (51). As is to be expected, the name of Fritz Senn, head of the Zurich James Joyce Foundation, is repeatedly invoked in the section dealing with the scholarly reception. If the edition of Joyce's complete works in German (except Finnegans Wake) by Klaus Reichert and Senn in 1969 marked an early high point in the postwar years,4 the 1975 translation of Ulysses by Hans Wollschläger (with the assistance of the two leading German-language Joyceans) was hailed as "one of the most remarkable translation achievements of recent history" (64).5 Even though Weninger remarks that the complete translation of Finnegans Wake, published in 1993,6 remains a curious artifact of mere academic interest, he includes pieces of three existing German versions of the "untranslatable" work, by Harald Beck, Friedhelm Rathjen, and Dieter H. Stündel, with the intention of giving readers an example of their flavor (67-68). It is a pity that, since no linguistic comments are provided, his laudable aim remains unaccomplished, particularly for a non-German speaking readership.
In the chapter on Joyce in East Germany, Wolfgang Wicht, the author of "the most substantial contribution in the process of Joyce's revaluation in the GDR" (84), explores the disintegration of Stalinist cultural dogmatism. His exhaustive analysis of the history of Stalinist antimodernism exposes how the one-sided ideologization of the arts that condemned nonrealist forms of representation as degeneration found in Joyce its principal target, particularly between the 1930s, with the introduction of social realism, and the 1950s, when dogmatism became the official doctrine in East Germany. At the same time, in order to discuss the inconsistencies that betrayed the "disintegration [End Page 141] of a delusory socialist culture" (70), the study documents the gradual undermining of the Lukácsean paradigm initiated by Brecht's own disapproval of the campaign against formalism. It then pursues these developments later in the 1970s and 1980s through the revision of the realism-modernism antagonism undertaken by critics like Wicht himself. As the chapter concludes, the author celebrates the way in which Joyce helped liberate readers from former cultural impositions after modernism was finally rehabilitated in the last decade of the G.D.R.'s existence.
In those chapters devoted to the reception of Joyce in the countries of the former Eastern Bloc, the essays become engaged testimonies that speak not only of the political submission affecting a particular period of literary history but also illustrate the troublesome historical trajectory of each of those countries throughout the twentieth century. For Emily Tall, the author of "The Reception of James Joyce in Russia," the topic effectively illustrates the arc of Soviet cultural politics since "[i]t shows how culture was suppressed, but also how it grew in the interstices, cultivated by courageous individuals, until it was finally allowed to flower and come into full bloom with the publication of U at the very end of Soviet rule" (244). Thus, she emphatically discusses the work of the scholar Yekaterina Genieva, "a fearless woman who played a major role in changing Soviet views on Joyce and bringing his works into the open" (252), who defended the first dissertation on Joyce in the Soviet Union in 1971 and then helped translate and publish portions of Ulysses in 1989.7 In her strong opposition to the official antimodernist dogma, Genieva invoked the earlier appraisal of the film director Sergei Eisenstein, "who had pronounced U 'a brilliant work' that had much to teach Soviet writers about 'the mastery of the art of writing'" (247).8
Joyce was never banned in Croatia, where the first complete translation of Ulysses was published in 1957.9 Because of the lack of impact of the English language and literature in general, however, on the one hand, and the rejection of experimentation during the years of post-war Communism, on the other, the direct influence of Joyce on Croatian literature is virtually nonexistent. Similarly, in the case of Slovenia, we learn that, although Joyce was recognized as one of the initiators of modern fiction and his works were translated between the 1950s and 1960s,10 his influence on Slovenian literature has been minimal. In the chapter devoted to Bulgaria, a country where the reception of European modernism was very limited—as shown by the fact that Ulysses is still in search of a translation—Kalina Filipova discusses A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, which she refers to as "one of the best achievements in recent Bulgarian translation history" (240).11
In his chapter on Joyce in Romania, the writer Adrian Oţoiu, whose [End Page 142] knowledge and appreciation of Joyce's style are brilliantly manifested in his insightful comments on the Romanian translations of Joyce's works,12 explains the role of the journal Secolul 20 in establishing Joyce as a major figure of modernism.13 It was more than a merely literary accomplishment that stood for the defense of humanism and thus became an act of "audacity" and "defiance" (198). Nevertheless, it is in Czech and Slovak literatures that the reception of Joyce's works manifestly mirrors social and political developments. Writers were already interested in him in the 1920s, when his fame in France contributed to his welcome among Czech avant-garde circles. If the 1930s saw the translation of Ulysses, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, and Dubliners into the Czech language,14 in the 1950s a prescriptive norm condemning subjectivism and formalism was institutionalized, which resulted in a tight control of foreign literature. The political thaw in the second half of the 1960s allowed the introduction of modernist writers, and thus a selection of Joyce's fiction, essays, and letters was published for the first time in Slovakian.15 In his conclusion, Bohuslav Mánek explains that translations of Joyce's books have been reprinted since 1989 because "literary worlds in both countries have gradually been recovering" (196) and expresses his hope for the continuation of "creative contacts" between Czech and Slovak literatures and Joyce's oeuvre (197).
The two chapters devoted to Poland coincide in stressing the early interest in Joyce shown by writers, critics, and translators. Even in the 1930s, modernist authors such as Witold Gombrowicz, whose "comments about Joyce throughout his life provide clear evidence of his critical fascination with the work of his fellow exile" (233), were being directly influenced by the techniques and themes of Ulysses. If the country's literary scene was virtually eradicated in the 1940s, the publication of the Polish translation of Ulysses in 1969, after the lifting of censorship restrictions, inaugurated a positive momentum which continued well into the 1970s and is still flourishing, as shown by the large number of critical essays and translations of renowned scholarly works published since the 1980s.16
The reception of Joyce in Scandinavia is dealt with in four chapters discussing the Icelandic, Norwegian, Danish, and, finally, Finnish and Swedish contexts. Astradur Eysteinsson devotes most of his study to explaining the circumstances of Joyce's late arrival in Iceland (Ulysses was only translated beginning in 199217 ) through pertinent theoretical considerations concerning the role of translation, criticism, and literary studies in the establishment of national canons. Unlike other contributions, we do not find here long paragraphs saturated with names and dates. Instead, Eysteinsson undertakes the task of elucidating what lies behind the eloquent silence with which Joyce was received in Iceland, despite, the critic claims, the favorable view [End Page 143] of Ireland among Icelanders; Joyce was perceived there, even into the mid-twentieth century, as a "monumental but distant writer" (92).
In "The Reception of James Joyce in Norway," Bjørn Tysdahl, the author of Joyce and Ibsen,18 also claims that the "lateness of Norwegian translations, compared with Denmark and Sweden, begs questions," and he enigmatically blames it on "the superstructures represented by general economic developments and dominant ideologies" (109).19 The first Norwegian translation of Ulysses appeared as late as 1993, and, as Tysdahl explains, Norway became aware of Joyce only in the first years of World War II; yet he claims that, thanks both to his own work and to his colleague Kristian Smidt's earlier Joyce and the Cultic Use of Fiction,20 "[n]o other Nordic country, with the possible exception of Finland, had a correspondingly strong and early research interest in Joyce" (103). Jacob Greve and Steen Klitgård Povlsen explain that Joyce was marginalized in Denmark because he was an avant-garde and modernist writer, "two categories that continue to exist in the margins of Danish literary traditions" (128). Despite its tendency to repetition and an occasional awkwardness of expression and style, the essay remains an interesting and informative contribution, particularly from a comparatist perspective, as illustrated by the longer section, "Creative Appropriations of Joyce." Intertextual references and appropriations on the level of technique, form, and content are analyzed in depth with special attention to the poets Peter Laugesen and Per Højholt, whose works are described as metapoetic texts emulating Joyce's radical experimentation with language in Finnegans Wake.21
H. K. Riikonen's contribution offers a detailed account of the circumstances surrounding the first Swedish and Finnish translations of Ulysses as well as an exhaustive examination of the history of critical responses, especially in Finland. Interestingly enough, we learn that the two translations of Ulysses, published in 1946 and 1964 respectively, were the work of two reputed poets, the Finland-Swedish Thomas Warburton and the Finnish Pentti Saarikoski.22 Furthermore, we discover that Joyce's musicality seems to have appealed to Scandinavians, and thus echoes of his experimental fiction were not restricted to the literary context, since as Riikonen explains, Einojuhani Rautavaara (the best-known Finnish composer after Jean Sibelius) developed artistic principles deeply influenced by his reading of Ulysses and Finnegans Wake (134).
Although Onno Kosters and Ron Hoffman claim that "much has remained restful on the Joycean front" (140) in reference to Joyce's relative impact on Dutch literature and criticism, we discover that the writer's presence has been the subject of heated disputes in the area of translation. The discrepancies between the two existing translations of Ulysses in the Dutch language, the first by John Vandenbergh [End Page 144] and the second by Paul Claes and Mon Nys, created an unresolved controversy, which the authors see as part of a larger conflict between scholars and translators in general.23 The 1994 Dutch Ulysses, the work of the Flemish Claes and Nys, is described as a "successful tour de force" in Geert Buelens's study on Joyce in Flemish literature (160). Buelens, whose work offers a thorough review of Joyce's impact on the literary scene of Flanders from the 1920s to the present, claims that Claes's own "mannerist-postmodern poetics" appropriately illustrates his non-standard strategies as a translator of Joyce (160).
The second volume of The Reception of James Joyce in Europe opens with three chapters on Italy. Whereas the third one discusses in detail Joyce's impact on Italian culture—moving from an analysis of the responses of early commentators and translators such as Ezra Pound, Carlo Linati, or Cesare Pavese to Joyce's influence on neo-avant-garde writers24 —in the first two, Eric Bulson and John McCourt explore the writer's involvement in shaping his own reception during the Trieste years. Bulson plumbs Joyce's biography to document and discuss what he refers to as the writer's "calculated moves to orchestrate the interpretation and discussion of his life and work" (311). Thus, both Joyce's and Stanislaus's relationships with publishers, translators, journalists, biographers, and writers (Italo Svevo, in particular) are scrutinized in order to reveal the intricacies of "Joyce's carefully monitored self-reception" (319). In a similar vein, McCourt, the co-founder and director of the Trieste Joyce School and author of The Years of Bloom: James Joyce in Trieste,25 revises the portrait of the Triestine Joyce as it has emerged in the work of critics and biographers after Stanislaus's death in 1959 "signalled the end of attempts to manoeuvre friendly critics" (320). Whereas the scholar accuses Richard Ellmann of a "limited and limiting" view of Trieste (320-21), he celebrates the fact that the new research has allowed a fuller version of Joyce's life in "a cosmopolitan place which genuinely inspired and fascinated the Irish writer" (325).
Patrick O'Neill explains that, as was the case in Italy, Joyce participated actively in monitoring the reception of his work in France after his arrival in Paris in 1920, where he was enthusiastically admired by an influential group of supporters including the writer Valery Larbaud, Sylvia Beach, and Adrienne Monnier. Larbaud's engagement with the French literary scene of the 1920s facilitated Joyce's acceptance by prestigious journals like Nouvelle Revue Française and Commerce, where the earliest translated excerpts of Ulysses appeared in 1924.26 Five years later, the complete translation of Ulysses appeared in Paris as an "'unabridged translation by Auguste Morel, with the assistance of Stuart Gilbert, completely reviewed by Valery Larbaud with the collaboration of the author'" (415).27 For O'Neill, the complex genesis of the French Ulysses, subsequently echoed in the [End Page 145] first version of Work in Progress in 1931, emphasizes the importance of Joyce's work for French literature.
The topic of the critical, theoretical, and literary responses to Joyce in France is explored in depth in the two essays by Sam Slote. First, Slote discusses early critical responses, beginning with Larbaud's "efforts to 'domesticate' Joyce" (373) in the years prior to the translation of Ulysses; he then moves on to a detailed exploration of the affiliation between Joyce and Eugene Jolas's avant-garde journal transition.28 Finally he analyzes the period of the 1960s and 1970s, when some of the most influential criticism on Joyce was being produced in academic circles; Slote provides enlightening discussions of the approaches introduced by prominent scholars such as Jacques Aubert, Hélène Cixous, and Jean-Michel Rabaté, among others.29 Among the topics he considers are the following: the influence of Joyce on the nouveaux romanciers as well as on writers like Raymond Queneau;30 the role played by Tel Quel (which propagated the idea of Joyce's revolution of the word and of the world) in placing Joyce into French avant-garde thinking of the 1960s and 1970s;31 and the relation between Joyce and the "two Jacques" (Jacques Derrida and Jacques Lacan—402), whose works, Slote claims, "challenge the status of Joyce as an 'English' writer by emphasizing the 'damage' Joyce wreaks on the English language" (408).32
The section on Joyce in Spain includes a chapter on the varied and fruitful influence of Joycean aesthetics on Spanish literature and a study of the local critical response. Alberto Lázaro discusses the circumstances surrounding the evolution of Joyce criticism in Spain from early interest manifested in the intellectual and literary circles of the 1920s to the enthusiastic academic response emerging after the 1970s and reaching maturity in the 1990s, as shown by Francisco García Tortosa's translations of Anna Livia Plurabelle and Ulysses.33 This exhaustively documented essay offers many sensitive insights into the ideological and theoretical shifts that have shaped the image of Joyce in the Iberian Peninsula. Particularly interesting is Lázaro's account of the obstacles that Joyce's translations encountered under Francisco Franco's censorship, and even more revealing is his contextualization of the "officialist" cultural discourse during the years of the dictatorship when Joyce's modernism was perceived as a "'stigma of abnormality'" (429). The chapter devoted to Joyce in Catalonia, where the first translation of Ulysses into Peninsular Spanish saw the light,34 reveals that interest in Joyce had already arisen in the 1920s when emblematic writers proposed the adoption of foreign models "capable of opening new aesthetic ways on the other side of the Pyrenees" (452). More recently, in 1980, the long-awaited Catalan translation of Ulysses by the Joycean scholar and translator Joaquim Mallafré became a bestseller,35 an accomplishment that reveals the [End Page 146] dynamism and prestige of the contemporary Catalan cultural scene.
According to Miltos Pechlivanos and Jina Politi, the discontinuous history of Joyce's reception in Greece mirrors the country's historical and political ruptures in the twentieth century. They explain, however, that "[i]n spite of this discontinuity, Joyce's writings seemed to have opened up new vistas for modern Greek literature" (456). Their study, which focuses on exploring the ideological frameworks shaping various periods, notes that different Joyces existed for different generations of Greek readers: "the leader of contemporary literary trends" (458); a modernist model for "representative novelists of the 1930s" (459); an example of "Christianity in decay" (462); "a mythological Joyce" (463); and "a bourgeois decadent, as the Greek left adopted the spirit of the 1934 Congress of Soviet Writers" (464). The essay concludes with a discussion of the new horizons of Joyce's Greek reception, widened since 1965 with the translations of all his works except Finnegans Wake.36
After such a long journey through continental Europe, the "British" writer is symbolically restored to the Irish nation with a closing chapter on Joyce's influence on writers in Ireland. Frank Sewell analyzes the central position of Joyce in twentieth-century Irish writing through a detailed discussion of authors such as Liam O'Flaherty, Seán Ó Ríordáin, Padraig Standún, and Mícheál Ó Conghaile. Sewell argues that, for these writers, "the struggle for individuation, for full personal development and true expression (in whatever language) not dictated by empires, Church or State, are concerns which have remained just as important after Joyce as they were to him in his own time" (470). Through a discussion of intertextual references, stylistic echoes, and common motifs and themes, Sewell demonstrates that Joyce "has become . . . the 'old father'" and the "'old artificer' who helps Irish literature . . . to . . . make its many homeward and other voyages" (481).
Despite some minor mistakes, such as the omission of the initials G.J. from the list of abbreviations in both volumes or the arbitrary choices shaping the ambitious yet occasionally misleading timeline, The Reception of James Joyce in Europe offers a remarkable collection of scintillating essays providing rigorous information and scholarly illumination. The work makes a major contribution to Joyce studies, enriching the field with new perspectives from reception studies, comparative literature, and translation studies. Ultimately, The Reception of James Joyce in Europe undermines those attitudes and critical tendencies that have turned Joyce into the patrimony of an exclusive Anglo-American club. This is a highly recommended book for scholars willing to experience a (European) epiphany. [End Page 147]
M. Teresa Caneda Cabrera is Associate Professor of English at the University of Vigo in Galicia, Spain, where she teaches twentieth-century literature in English, contemporary Irish literature and culture, and literary translation. She is the author of La estética modernista como práctica de resistencia en “A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.” Her publications include translations from the work of English modernists into the Galician language and studies on translation and reception, as well as book chapters and articles on the work of James Joyce and several other modernist writers. She is currently working on a book about the relationship between modernism and translation.
1. James Joyce, Ulisses, trans. Antônio Houaiss (Rio de Janeiro: Editôra Civilização Brasileira, 1966).
2. Joyce, Ulysses, trans. Georg Goyert (Zurich: Rhein-Verlag, 1927).
3. Bertolt Brecht, “Praktisches zur Expressionismusdebatte,” Die Expressionismusdebatte: Materialien zu einer marxistischen Realismuskonzeption, ed. Hans-Jürgen Schmitt (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1973), pp. 304-07, and Lukács, “Es geht um den Realismus,” Das Wort, reprinted in Die Expressionismusdebatte: Materialien zu einer marxistischen Realismuskonzeption (pp. 192-230).
4. Joyce, James Joyce: Werke, 9 vols., ed. Klaus Reichert and Fritz Senn (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1969-1981).
5. Joyce, Ulysses, trans. Hans Wollschläger (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1975).
6. Joyce, Finnegans Wehg: Kainnäh ÜbelSätzZung des Wehrkeß fun Schämes Scheuß, trans. Dieter H. Stündel (Darmstadt: Jügen Häussser, 1993).
7. See Yekaterina Genieva, “Khudozhestvennaia proza Dzheimsa Dzhoisa” (doctoral thesis, Moscow State University, 1972), and Joyce, Uliss, trans. Viktor Khinkis and Sergei Khoruzhii, with commentary by Genieva (Moscow: Inostrannaia literatura, 1989).
8. Sergei Eisenstein, lecture notes transcript, State Institute of Cinematography Archives, Moscow.
9. Joyce, Uliks, trans. Zlatko Gorjan (Rijeka: Otokar Keršovani, 1957).
10. Joyce, Ljudje iz Dublina, trans. Herbert Grün (Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije, 1955); Uliks, 2 vols., trans. Gorjan (Rijeka: Otokar Keršovani, 1957); and Umetnikov mladostni portret, trans. Jože Udovič (Ljubljana: Cankarjeva založba, 1966).
11. See Dzheims Dzhois, “Däblinchani”: “Portret na hudozhnika kato mlad,” trans. Asen Hristoforov and ed. and trans. Nikolai B. Popov (Sofia: Narodna Kultura, 1981). It should be noted that this work includes some translations from Dubliners by Hristoforov, which were edited by Popov, followed by the latter’s translation of A Portrait.
12. Joyce, Oemeni din Dublin, trans. Frida Papadache (Bucharest: EPL, 1966); “Giacomo Joyce,” trans. C. G. Săndulescu, Secolul 20, 6 (1968), 3-14; Portret al artistului în tinereţe, trans. Papadache (Bucharest: EPL, 1969); “Exilaţii,” trans. Papadache, Secolul 20, 11-12 (1974), 95-118; and Ulise, trans. Mircea Ivănescu (Bucharest: Univers, 1984).
13. Secolul 20 (Bucharest: Uniunea Scriitorilor din R.P.R., 1961).
14. Joyce, Odysseus, trans. vols. 1 and 3, Ladislav Vymĕtal, vol. 2, Jarmila Fastrová (Prague: Václav Petr., 1930); Portret mladého umĕlce, trans. Staša Jílovská (Prague: Václav Petr., 1930); and Dubliňané, trans. Josef Hrůša (Prague: J. R. Vilímek, 1933).
15. Joyce, Portrét mladého umelca, trans. Jozef Kot (Bratislava: Tatran, 1971); Dublinčania, trans. Božica Vilikovská (Bratislava: Slovenský spisovatel, 1980); “Z korešpondencie E. Pound – J. Joyce (1913-1918),” trans. Vilikovská, Revue svetovej literatúry, 19 (1983), 68-73; and Ulysses, trans. Kot (Bratislava: Slovenský spisovatel, 1993).
16. Joyce, Ulisses, trans. Maciej Słomczyński (Warsaw: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1969), and see Jerzy Paszek, Sztuka aluzji literackiej: Żeromski, [End Page 148] Berent, Joyce (Katowice: Uniwersytet Sląski, 1984), and Czeslaw Dziekanowski, “Tułaczka nieświadomych pragnień Joyce’a’,” Estetyka pragnień, ed. Jolanta Brach (Lublin: Wydawnictwo Lubelskie, 1988), pp. 111-32.
17. Joyce, Ódysseifur, 2 vols., trans. Sigurður A. Magnússon (Reykjavik: Mál og menning, 1992-1993).
18. Bjørn Tysdahl, Joyce and Ibsen: A Study in Literary Influence (Oslo: Norwegian Universities Press, 1968).
19. See, for instance, Joyce, Ulysses, trans. Olav Angell (Oslo: Cappelen, 1993); Ulysses, trans. Mogens Boisen (Copenhagen: Martins Forlag, 1949); and Odysseus, trans. Thomas Warburton (Helsingfors: Holger Schildt, 1946).
20. Kristian Smidt, James Joyce and the Cultic Use of Fiction (Oslo: Akademisk Forlag, 1955).
21. See Peter Laugesen, Kunsthistorier (Copenhagen: Borgen, 1991), and Når Engle Bøvser Jazz (Copenhagen: Borgen, 1998), and Per Højholt, Poetens Hoved (Copenhagen: Schønberg, 1963), and Punkter (Copenhagen: Schønberg, 1971).
22. Joyce, Odysseus, trans. Pentti Saarikoski (Helsinki: Tammi, 1964), and Warburton, cited in endnote 19.
23. Joyce, “Ulysses,” met Aantekeningen bij James Joyce’s “Ulysses,” trans. John Vandenbergh (Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 1969), and Ulysses, trans. Paul Claes and Mon Nys (Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 1994).
24. See, for instance, Ezra Pound, “Storicamente Joyce (e censura),” L’indice, 1 (1930), reprinted as “‘Storicamente Joyce’: Ezra Pound’s First Italian Essay,” Triquarterly, ed. Forrest Read, 15 (1930), 100-10; Carlo Linati, “James Joyce,” Il Corriere della Sera (20 August 1925), 3; and Joyce, Dedalus, trans. Cesare Pavese (Turín: Frassinelli, 1933).
25. John McCourt, The Years of Bloom: James Joyce in Trieste, 1904-1920 (Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 2000).
26. Joyce, “Protée,” trans. Auguste Morel and Stuart Gilbert, with revisions by Valery Larbaud, La Nouvelle Revue Française (1 August 1928), 204-26, and “Ulysse: Fragments,” trans. Larbaud and Morel, Commerce, 1 (1924), 123-58.
27. Joyce, Ulysse, trans. Morel, with Gilbert (Paris: La Maison des Amis des Livres, 1929).
28. See transition (Paris: Transition Press, 1927).
29. See Jacques Aubert, Introduction à l’esthétique de James Joyce (Paris: Didier, 1973); Hélène Cixous, L’Exil de James Joyce ou l’art de remplacement (Paris: Grasset, 1968); and Jean-Michel Rabaté, Joyce, portrait de l’auteur en autre lecteur (Petit-Rœulx: Cistre-Essais, 1984).
30. See, for instance, Raymond Queneau, Le Chiendent (Paris: Gallimard, 1933), and Gueule de pierre (Paris: Gallimard, 1934).
31. Tel Quel (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1960).
32. See, for example, Jacques Derrida, La Carte postale (Paris: Flammarion, 1980), “Two Words for Joyce,” trans. Geoff Bennington, Post-Structuralist Joyce: Essays from the French, ed. Derek Attridge and Daniel Ferrer (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984), pp. 145-59, and Ulysse gramophone (Paris: Galilée, 1987), and Jacques Lacan, “Joyce le symptôme I,” and “Joyce le symptôme II,” Joyce avec Lacan, ed. Aubert (Paris: Navarin, 1987), pp. 21-29, 31-36.
33. Joyce, Anna Livia Plurabelle (Finnegans Wake 1.viii), trans. Francisco García Tortosa (Madrid: Cátedra, 1992), and Ulisses, trans. García Tortosa (Madrid: Cátedra, 1999). [End Page 149]
34. Joyce, Ulises, trans. José María Valverde (Barcelona: Lumen, 1976).
35. Joyce, Ulisses, trans. Joaquim Mallafré (Barcelona: Leteradura, 1981).
36. See Joyce, Douvlinezoi, trans. Stella Vourdoumba, Sotiris Bernitsas, and Stavros Antoniou (Athens: Ekdoseis Pairidi, 1971); To portraito tou kallitechni, trans. Mairi Sarasiotou (Athens: Galaxias, 1965); Odysseas, 9 vols., trans. Leonidas Nikolouzos and Giannis Thomopoulos (Athens: Ekdoseis Pairidi, 1969-1976); Giacomo Joyce, trans. Manto Aravantinou (Athens: Ekdoseis Chatzinikoli, 1977); and Ta poiimata, trans. Evangellos K. Valsamidis (Athens: Odos Panos, 2000). [End Page 150]