Ashplant

Gordon, John. "Getting Past No in ‘Scylla and Charybdis.’" James Joyce Quarterly 1, no. 3 (2007): 501–22.

Related topics:

Questions and Answers
Yes and No

Link to citation page: https://www.worldcat.org/title/getting-past-no-in-scylla-and-charybdis/oclc/424628407&referer=brief_results

Link to full text:

Much of "Scylla and Charybdis" (U 9) revolves around Stephen's Shakespeare theory. In the final moments of his explanation, Stephen is asked whether or not he believes in his theory and "promptly" says "[n]o" (U 9.166). This article focuses on Stephen's no and argues that Stephen's answer does not indicate definitive negation, but rather, a sort of "not yet" (502). This moment highlights central tensions throughout the novel between belief and unbelief, knowable and unknowable biographical details, and the words "yes" and "no" themselves.

The first part of Gordon's article focuses mainly on "Scylla and Charybdis," contextualizing the critical conversation surrounding Shakespeare in 1904. He asserts that Stephen's theory is knowingly incomplete, with the library conversation serving as an audition of his act-in-progress. To support this notion, Gordon provides nineteen instances where Stephen borrows language for the purpose of his own rhetorical production (504).

In later sections, the article shifts to examine the biographic details of Stephen's Shakespeare theory. Gordon considers Shakespeare's supposed obsession over his wife's possible infidelity, and juxtaposes these claims with Joyce's real-life correspondence with Nora Barnacle.

Gordon also examines the relationship between yes and no. He posits a "call-response" theory (516), comparing Stephen's "[n]o" (U 9.166) and Molly's "Mn" (U 4.57) in the "Calypso" episode with the numerous sightings of "yes" in "Penelope" (U 18). Gordon goes on to consider the concept of gendered no/yes responses, ultimately problematizing the generic understanding of no as the masculine response and yes as the feminine response.

Citations and Related Sources