Shit matters. It's because of the scatological Chaucer and Shakespeare and Swift--and others of course--that it has been increasingly ...

Shit matters.

8:53 AM Editor 0 Comments

Shit matters.

It's because of the scatological Chaucer and Shakespeare and Swift--and others of course--that it has been increasingly possible for some literary critics in the West to speak of "fecopoetics" and even "shiterature" today!

And I can't help mentioning Peter J. Smith's 2012 book _Between Two Stools: Scatology and its Representation in English Literature, Chaucer to Swift_, one which is fecopoetically engaged with the shiterary. But what about James Joyce, not to mention our own Gopal Bha(n)r from Bengal?

Apart from those letters of Joyce to his wife Nora that have been variously called "dirty" and "pornographic" and "erotically charged" (and of course that are hypermasculinist and effortlessly scatological), Joyce's own literary oeuvre, by and large, almost stubbornly evinces his almost-Swiftian interest in the scatological as such. Also, as Gordon Bowker's admirable new biography reveals, Joyce's imagination was fired just as much by scatology and soiled bloomers as it was by Ibsen, Homer, and Skeat's Etymological Dictionary.

0 comments:

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.