Joyce's sole extant play is not held in high regard, and now I have a better understanding of the reasons behind it.

It is practically an Ibsen pastiche, with Joycean obsessions over infidelity lying at its very core.

After delving into other recent works related to Joyce, I can't help but have the feeling that Joyce was titillated by the idea of being cuckolded, just as one of the characters in this play seems to be.

The emotions portrayed are all very complex, but unfortunately, it doesn't make for a terribly interesting piece.

Perhaps if the play had explored these themes in a more unique or engaging way, it might have received a different reception.

As it stands, it remains a somewhat overlooked and underappreciated work in Joyce's oeuvre.

However, it still offers valuable insights into Joyce's mind and his preoccupations, even if it doesn't quite measure up to his other literary achievements.

Thought I'd fill in a Joyce gap since I should be rereading chunks soon.

This is a funny little piece - his only play. It's, well, not brilliant. I wouldn't quite call it regressive but I don't think it could ever be described as forward-thinking. The genius that we so often associate with Joyce simply doesn't shine here as it ought to.

At one point, I was halfway convinced it was going to go all Design for Living. It's incredibly generous in feeding fuel to queer readings, so there's that entertaining avenue there. In its own way, it is entertaining and the dialogue isn't cumbersome, so Exiles could absolutely be a less pleasant experience.

However, it's kind of dramatically impotent. I felt a little that the conclusion only taught us that Richard has a difficult life. It seems to be a work that is more for the Joyceans, those die-hard fans who are eager to explore every aspect of his oeuvre, but perhaps not one that will have a wider appeal. It lacks that certain something that would make it a truly great and memorable piece of drama.

Overall, while it has its moments, it doesn't quite measure up to the high standards set by Joyce in his other works.

I don't know if this is the only play by James Joyce ever translated or performed in Finland. It is rather unusual for a Joyce work as its theme is love. After all, Joyce only writes about it in one of the Dubliners' short stories and in several of his poems (if there are several pieces from such a meager output). This play is somewhat like chamber music, there are few people and hardly any events, and even more tensions. It feels as if Eeva-Liisa Manner has read this very carefully and her play somehow came to mind from this, especially May Snow. Manner has also written a wonderful essay on this, "Chamber Music" (in the collection Annoying Writers, 1994), which, despite its name, only takes off from Joyce's poetry collections Chamber Music and Poemes Pennyeach and then focuses on the play Exiles. The play is not really a triangle drama as it first seems, because there are four key people. There is the emotional writer Richard who wants to bathe his feet without being baptized, his earthy wife Bertha who loves her husband but is susceptible to the blandishments of the smooth-talking Robert, and Beatrice Justice who just is. Richard is jealous of his faithful wife who is jealous of Richard's work. Jealousy doesn't need reasons, it makes them up and makes everything unhappy.

This play seems to offer a complex exploration of human relationships and emotions. The characters are all flawed and their interactions create a web of tensions and conflicts. It is interesting to see how Manner has interpreted Joyce's work and brought it to life in her own way. The reference to chamber music adds an interesting layer to the play, perhaps suggesting a sense of intimacy and complexity in the relationships.

Overall, this play seems to be a thought-provoking and engaging work that offers a unique perspective on love and jealousy. It would be interesting to see how it is received by audiences in Finland and whether it will gain wider recognition.

I read the play in an old edition I had of "The Essential James Joyce," edited by Harry Levin, which I purchased in Britain nearly 55 years ago. I doubt this edition was ever made available in the States. It is indeed tattered and dog-eared, yet it has endured remarkably well. However, this is the first time I have delved into the play.

As a pre-WW1 reworking of Ibsen in English, this play may not be overly captivating. But as a surprisingly approachable aspect of James Joyce's creative journey, it proves to be a worthwhile read. I found it extremely challenging not to view the love story of Richard and Bertha as a parallel to that of James and Nora. I'm uncertain if the other characters are as closely modeled on real life, but that isn't truly crucial.

Since autobiographical inclinations influenced a significant portion of Joyce's work, this story becomes valuable in comprehending a wide array of his important works, from "The Dead" to "Ulysses." The unmarried and unwavering honesty that Richard demands does seem to resonate with the rest of Joyce's oeuvre. Honesty being far more significant than fidelity.

And then there is the fear that such a demand can impose on humans. When Robert queries Richard about his fear, Richard replies, "that I will reproach myself then for having taken all for myself because I would not suffer her to give to another what was hers and not mine to give, because I accepted from her her loyalty and made her life poorer in love. That is my fear. That I stand between her and any moment of life that should be hers..." This appears to be an extraordinary moment of self-awareness in Joyce, someone we typically envision as being completely immersed in his own genius.

A confused play that is supposedly based on Joyce's fear and expectation of what would occur if he returned to Ireland after spending years living abroad. However, this play fails to engage the audience and is not worth your precious time. The story seems to lack a clear direction, with the plot meandering aimlessly. The characters are not well-developed, making it difficult for the viewers to form any emotional connection with them. The dialogue is often平淡无奇, lacking the spark and vitality that one would expect from a play inspired by such a complex and interesting subject. Overall, it is a disappointment and a waste of time for those who were hoping for a thought-provoking and engaging theatrical experience.

I have inflicted a wound upon my soul for you, a profound and unhealable wound of doubt.

I can never truly know, not in this world. I have no wish to know or to believe. It simply doesn't matter to me.

It is not within the darkness of belief that I long for you. Instead, it is in the restless existence filled with wounding doubt.

To hold you without any constraints, not even those of love, to be joined with you in body and soul in absolute nakedness - this is what I desired.

And now, Bertha, I am weary for a time. My wound has exhausted me.

I find myself drained and in need of rest.

The weight of this doubt has become too much to bear.

But perhaps, in this weariness, there is a glimmer of something new.

Maybe a chance for healing, for a different kind of understanding.

Only time will tell.

‘Exiles’ is the solitary play that Joyce brought forth.

Upon its release, it was scornfully derided as filth and spurned by theatres both at home and abroad. Esteemed literary and theatre luminaries such as George Bernard Shaw and WB Yeats also rejected it.

Previously, Joyce was known mainly through his collection of stories, ‘The Dubliners’. ‘Exiles’ represented a departure, and unfortunately, a disappointing one.

The protagonist is evidently a self-projection of Joyce, and the exile of him and his wife to Rome clearly mirrors Joyce’s own departure for Trieste with Nora Barnacle, in response to an increasingly parochial Ireland.

Nevertheless, the semi-autobiographical elements fail to render this piece any more engaging. The dialogue alternates between being didactic and mechanized to the point of tedium.

Perhaps I am lacking the dramatist-like acumen required to envision how this would translate beautifully onto the stage. However, I struggle to see how prose as monotonous as this could ever assume any sort of captivating form.

It was an enormous surprise to "discover" this piece by James Joyce as I was unaware that the author had written plays

No one understands like Joyce does.

Joyce has a unique ability to truly comprehend the feelings and experiences of others. She listens attentively, never interrupting, and shows genuine empathy.

Whether it's a friend sharing their deepest secrets or a stranger in need of a listening ear, Joyce is always there.

Her understanding nature allows her to offer valuable advice and support.

People are drawn to her because they know she will not judge them.

Joyce's kindness and compassion make her a truly special person.

In a world where many people are quick to criticize and slow to understand, Joyce stands out as a shining example of what it means to be a true friend and confidant.

We could all learn a thing or two from her.

A must read if you’re interested in the progression of Joyce.

I started reading this on Bloomsday 2018 sitting on a beach in Lanzarote facing the Atlantic. I write these words on a sun lounger at the Lanzarote Paradise as the sun scorches my already burnt to a crisp fatty back even more. Perhaps it’s just me but Lanzarote Paradise sounds a tad unnerving, a bit Hotel California. On this same cheap ten day trip to the Canary Islands I also turned the pages of The Old Man And The Sea which was written about, or so they say, a fisherman from Lanzarote. A bit of a peculiar coincidence as I had no idea beforehand.

Anyhow. Back to this. Exiles is alike nothing else I have read of Joyce - the only thing I haven’t read being Finnegan’s Wake (one day). Some say Joyce was merely copying Ibsen and the themes are the same but for me Joyce’s interests are clearly evident in this short play. And Joyce does not just copy anyone. There are many themes, and very specific themes at that, which feature in this play and were clearly a gargantuan part of Joyce’s makeup. Richard, the character the play seems to linger on most (and my favourite Joyce character before Bloom) is Joyce without a doubt. He is a writer back in Dublin after spending time away on the continent. He is haunted by his mother’s death. He is also haunted by thoughts of adultery, of infidelity, of breaking love, and knowing of Joyce’s escapades in Europe these are clearly his own thoughts and fears and doubts at the time of writing. Another huge theme is Ireland - of course. Of the Irishman that leaves his country before coming home - though Joyce himself referred to himself as a Dubliner more than an Irishman. Of patriotism, of history, of being an Exile.

But for me the most interesting thing is the progression of Joyce’s writing. His brain is clearly all over the place. Written just after Portrait but fascinatingly at the same time as Joyce wrote those first three literature changing chapters of Ulysses. As Dedalus ponders the ineluctable modality of the visible. The limits of the diaphane. I will see if I can see on Sandymount Strand. As Buck Mulligan talks to the milk woman and Haines goes for a dip in the sea off Sandycove. But before Bloom. Written at the same time as this deceptively simple play. Well that just blew my mind. It shows how Joyce was constantly evolving and experimenting with his writing, exploring different themes and styles simultaneously. It makes me eager to explore more of his works and see how his ideas developed over time.

What a simple and delightful story by James. The themes, characters, conflicts—all quintessential Joyce.

What is most unusual perhaps is that the form, a three-act play, seems so ordinary for a work by Joyce. It's quite unexpected to see him using such a traditional format.

The play’s story arc does not quite manage to embrace the fullness of conflict within and between the characters. There are moments when the conflicts seem to be just scratching the surface, not fully explored or developed.

Thus, the notion of the work felt more like an abruptly ended short story than a robust and resolved novel, even though it is, in fact, a short play. The lack of a more comprehensive resolution leaves the reader or viewer with a sense of incompleteness.

As a play, I enjoyed what would be seen today as rather modern notions of friendship interjected into dating and courtship. It adds an interesting layer to the traditional narrative, making it more relevant and engaging for contemporary audiences.

Overall, while the play may have its flaws, it still manages to capture the essence of Joyce's unique style and vision.

Not my favorite Joyce.

James Joyce is a highly regarded and influential writer, but this particular work of his fails to resonate with me on a deep level.

The story seems to lack the vividness and emotional impact that I have come to expect from his other writings.

The characters, although perhaps complex in their own right, do not engage me in the way that Joyce's more memorable creations do.

The plot, too, feels somewhat convoluted and difficult to follow at times.

While I appreciate the literary merit and the innovative techniques that Joyce employs, this particular piece simply does not capture my imagination.

It may be that my personal tastes and preferences do not align with this particular work, but regardless, it remains one that I do not hold in as high regard as some of his other masterpieces.

Nonetheless, I continue to respect and admire Joyce's contributions to the world of literature and look forward to exploring more of his works in the future.